Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

490 | 491 | 492

 ... 495

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

BKWill

BKWill

Telluride, CO
October 2002

JAN 30, 2003 04:03 PM

Hello, I'm Will and I'm from brooklyn, today I was watching CNN to check in on what's up. Well the president said today that Sudam has weeks not months. Most of the EU threw their chips in today. We have eight countries on our side and people are placing their bets on HUGE american victory and piece of that oil pie.

Germany and Itally said no, and all of England except Tony Blair are screeming no. Italy, Denmark, Spain, Poland, Hungry, and three other countires are in it to win. Do we need more to go to war or is their a chance none of this will go down? Either way looks bad to me. What do you think? mad

Butterfly2

Butterfly2

San Francisco, CA
December 2002

JAN 30, 2003 04:45 PM

When does war look good anyways? (I'm not discussing revolution) Well lately, within the past few years, at least.

But this is coming from a pacifist. *shrugs*

MAKE love NOT WAR! kiss

BKWill

BKWill

Telluride, CO
October 2002

JAN 30, 2003 05:23 PM

I agree. I say this as a strong opponent to war. I used to be in the NAVY for four years, and had to leave because of it crossed to many lines of my beliefs. Knowing the thought process of the government and the military it's hard for to imagine more people are not vocal about this.

FIRE3ORMETEO

FIRE3ORMETEO

Winter Park, FL
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 05:57 PM

all i have to say is this. we better not piss england off.















































































:: laughs ::

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 06:14 PM

FIRE3ORMETEO said:
all i have to say is this. we better not piss england off.

:: laughs ::



UGH. for a start we're the UK. NOT England. And secondly what exatly is your point?!

Whoever it is that joins in in this war EVERYONE will lose people. If this actually happens THOUSANDS of people are going to die. Not just those in Iraq, but our own western soldiers.

I don't know what any government is doing by sending in their people to fight a fight that isn't there's and wasn't even there's to begin with.

But then this has been happening foreever since the WW2. Especially with factions like Nato. mad

I say Germany and Italy seem to have been the only countries to have learnt ANYTHING from ww2.


whatever

Cherry xx

xoox



[Edited on Jan 30, 2003 by Cherry]

Nikolai

Nikolai

United Kingdom
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 06:34 PM

Not our war? Maybe not. Why are we going to war? The wrong reasons...

But As said in other coloumns, if we';re all so worried baout human rights, then we should be going in ot thelp the Iraqi people, especially the Kurds. I hate war, it's a terrible thing. For so mnay live,s most of them young and some my age, to go out in a blink of an eye for no real reason is terrible.

However, sometimes, we just have to draw the line and say 'No More'. Saddam has the chance to avert disaster. It's his choice. If he was inncoent, he would....

And yeah, we ARE the United Kingdom, not just England. Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England, a Union of countries and not of states. And Tony Blair isn't the only one who is for this war, there are others too...

And you're right, you'd better not piss 'England' off. Otherwise we'll send some football fans over to sort you guys out!!!!!!!!

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 06:38 PM

Nikolai said:
And you're right, you'd better not piss 'England' off. Otherwise we'll send some football fans over to sort you guys out!!!!!!!!



Don't even joke. I'd be so embarassed + disown my country.

I'm going to go live on the Moon confused

Cherry xx

xoox

Beowulf

beowulf

I'm lost
October 2002

JAN 30, 2003 09:52 PM

bkfreak said:

Germany and Itally said no, and all of England except Tony Blair are screeming no. Italy, Denmark, Spain, Poland, Hungry, and three other countires are in it to win. Do we need more to go to war or is their a chance none of this will go down? Either way looks bad to me. What do you think? mad



Who "we"?

"They" are most certainly going to attack Iraq. Eventually the bad cop steps in and smacks the poor fucker. Which in this case is the people of Iraq -- hundreds of thousands dead from sanctions, already.

The prize, of course, makes it all worth-while. The costs of the war are public costs -- taxes, dead ordinary americans. The benefits of the war will be privatized, in the form of oil.

Iraq will look little different after the war. Kuwait looks little different ten years later -- Afghanistan likewise, a year later. But those "problems" are solved, i.e. the U.S. is in control. So we won't hear about it.

Peace,
-- Beow



Mulhollanddrive

Mulhollanddrive

Austin, TX
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 10:00 PM

i don't want to come off like some war monger, but everyone seems to forget something: everyone who would go to fight is A CAREER SOLDIER!!! what do soldiers do? among many things, they fight wars. no one is enacting the draft. everyone who joins the military knows that there is a possibility that they will have to go to war. no one wants to see our troops harmed. unfortunately, casualties are a biproduct of war. i'm not taking sides here, just stating a fact.

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 10:06 PM

mulhollanddrive said:
i don't want to come off like some war monger, but everyone seems to forget something: everyone who would go to fight is A CAREER SOLDIER!!! what do soldiers do? among many things, they fight wars. no one is enacting the draft. everyone who joins the military knows that there is a possibility that they will have to go to war. no one wants to see our troops harmed. unfortunately, casualties are a biproduct of war. i'm not taking sides here, just stating a fact.



Yes, but again OUTSIDE OF AMERICA a lot of European countries have a national service. Where as a man you have to enlist and 'serve' your country for a certain amount of time.

For heavens sake people, we're not just talking about the effect on the US here. We're talking about the effect worldwide.

Besides no one really knows how much firepower Iraq has. How do we know they don't have a nuclear war head ready to obliterate every single small country that joins in with the US?!

While this may be extremist, it's still a real possibilty.

Cherry xx

xoox

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 10:13 PM

Anyway, I've just had a thought...

Aren't armies of nations supposed to be there for the main reason of 'keeping the peace'? i.e. only to be used when 100% necessary? So therefore career soldiers are really only enlisting to keep the peace. Not to create a huge war. Which they will.

I'm not dismissing the tradgedy of spet. 11th. But on the scale of war type things and the size of the US I don't believe it is cause enough to actually go and almost wipe out an entire country because they won't abide by your rules, in their country. And there certainly haven't been any serious attacks since then (almost a year and a half ago).

All I'm saying is, if Sept. 11th can be treated as such a tragedy then why are the US government so ready to go and cause thousands of other deaths, to the citizens of the countries they will be fighting, their soldiers, the soldiers of their allied countries AND the possibilty of deaths to their own citizens and citizens of their allies.

Cherry xx

xoox

Mulhollanddrive

Mulhollanddrive

Austin, TX
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 10:16 PM

i apologize for not aknowledging the military service requirements of our european allies. you brought up a very interesting subject: the question of iraq's weapons arsenal. THAT"S how this whole thing started! if they ever get long range capabilities, you can bet on they will bomb the u.s. and europe. i would hate to see a repeat of 9/11 (or worse) in the u.s., europe, israel, ANYWHERE!

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 10:21 PM

mulhollanddrive said:
i apologize for not aknowledging the military service requirements of our european allies. you brought up a very interesting subject: the question of iraq's weapons arsenal. THAT"S how this whole thing started! if they ever get long range capabilities, you can bet on they will bomb the u.s. and europe. i would hate to see a repeat of 9/11 (or worse) in the u.s., europe, israel, ANYWHERE!



Indeed wink

Cherry xx

xoox

Mulhollanddrive

Mulhollanddrive

Austin, TX
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 10:29 PM

i don't think anyone WANTS a war. i keep hoping there will be a coup from within iraq, but saddam keeps a VERY tight inner circle. i just don't think it can happen. the iraqi people have been through enough by the hands of their own leader. however, if hussein is left alone, he WILL rebuild his arsenal (if he hasn't already), and he WILL kill many more people. it has to be nipped in the bud before it turns catastrophic. the u.n. has given him more than enough chances, none of which he has come clean on. he has repeatedly violated the surrender agreement from the war in '91. if we keep giving him one more chance, it's gonna be too late. i don't want that for me, you, or any of our allies.

Sean

Sean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

JAN 30, 2003 10:37 PM

Cherry said:
I say Germany and Italy seem to have been the only countries to have learnt ANYTHING from ww2.



I think some other countries are going to learn the same lesson we taught germany and italy in world war two.

[Edited on Jan 30, 2003 by Spooky]

FIRE3ORMETEO

FIRE3ORMETEO

Winter Park, FL
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 10:41 PM

aww! i didn't know you were from england, cherry. that's rad. my little brother did the summer program at cambridge last summer and i stayed with him for a few weeks. england is a fun place. you know what? your food gets a bad rap. it looks pretty gross, but it's DELICIOUS. haha that's all i got =P

[Edited on Jan 30, 2003 by FIRE3ORMETEO]

Mulhollanddrive

Mulhollanddrive

Austin, TX
January 2003

JAN 30, 2003 10:43 PM

let's also remember the lessons the axis powers (germany, italy and japan) taught the world in wwii. i think that one of the main responsibilities of the u.n. is to prevent that from ever happening again. i look at the situations in iraq and north korea, and i see alot of scary similarities.

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 30, 2003 10:56 PM

Spooky said:


I think some other countries are going to learn the same lesson we taught germany and italy in world war two.

eeek

Spooky, you scare me sometimes tongue

Cherry xx

xoox

montagro

montagro

Santa Cruz, CA
October 2002

JAN 30, 2003 11:44 PM

I think Colin Powell has tried to make it quite clear that the U.S. will go to war if it deems it appropriate, even without the support of other countries.

Denk

Denk

Germany
OLD SKOOL

JAN 31, 2003 12:52 AM

Spooky said:

Cherry said:
I say Germany and Italy seem to have been the only countries to have learnt ANYTHING from ww2.



I think some other countries are going to learn the same lesson we taught germany and italy in world war two.

[Edited on Jan 30, 2003 by Spooky]



Hey, girls and boys, it's not Italy and Germany, it's FRANCE and Germany who are against war. France had to learn nothing in WW2 (hell, they would give you a kick in the ass if they hear you saying that they've learned form the US wink ) and I doubt that Italy had ever learned anything ... Italy has always been Italy, but you can only love it. (Hehe, did you know that they had more different govenments since WW2 than there are years?)
Besides, If there was a lesson, it was not taught in WW2, but after WW2. It's hard to teach with war.

[Edited on Jan 31, 2003 by Denkedran]

Cherry

Cherry

SUICIDEGIRL

British Columbia, Canada

JAN 31, 2003 12:54 AM

Denkedran said:

Hey, girls and boys, it's not Italy and Germany, it's FRANCE and Germany who are against war. France had to learn nothing in WW2 (hell, they would give you a kick in the ass if they hear you saying that they've learned form the US wink ) and I doubt that Italy had ever learned anything ... Italy has always been Italy, but you can only love it. (Hehe, did you know that they had more different govenments since WW2 than there are years?)



Trust you to be on top of it and put the record straight kiss

Cherry xx

Smatt

smatt

United Kingdom
November 2002

JAN 31, 2003 05:32 AM

An interesting point made a couple of days ago by my Middle Eastern Studies lecturer: The reason France are not supporting war is because they have not been offered a large enough portion of Iraqi oil. When they are guaranteed a satisfactory share of the spoils, they will support war.
I am unsure of this view. However, it's not the view of some anonymous message board user; the man is a former diplomat who has spent his life studying Middle Eastern affairs.


My own view on the war is ambiguous. On the one hand, it appears to be a war about Western power and oil. On the other, Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator who should be overthrown. As I have said regarding other subjects, I don't think anyone here has sufficient information to say whether the coming war is morally right or wrong. Only time will tell, and we may never know the truth.

superfly4343

superfly4343

Canada
December 2002

JAN 31, 2003 05:58 AM

Spooky said:

Cherry said:
I say Germany and Italy seem to have been the only countries to have learnt ANYTHING from ww2.



I think some other countries are going to learn the same lesson we taught germany and italy in world war two.

[Edited on Jan 30, 2003 by Spooky]



Actually, let's keep this straight.

Italy is in. France is not.

And the minute anyone (Canada included) starts taking the lead of France and Germany in international affairs, we may as well just give it up.

France only gets involved in old colonies or blowing up Greenpeace boats.

Germany, well Germany makes good cars.



superfly4343

superfly4343

Canada
December 2002

JAN 31, 2003 06:00 AM

smatt said:
An interesting point made a couple of days ago by my Middle Eastern Studies lecturer: The reason France are not supporting war is because they have not been offered a large enough portion of Iraqi oil. When they are guaranteed a satisfactory share of the spoils, they will support war.
I am unsure of this view. However, it's not the view of some anonymous message board user; the man is a former diplomat who has spent his life studying Middle Eastern affairs.



My own view on the war is ambiguous. On the one hand, it appears to be a war about Western power and oil. On the other, Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator who should be overthrown. As I have said regarding other subjects, I don't think anyone here has sufficient information to say whether the coming war is morally right or wrong. Only time will tell, and we may never know the truth.



For France, it is all about Iraqi oil. Ooops, wasn't that the US? France? US? France? Vive la repulique!!!!! (just pick one)

Helter

Helter

Chester, PA
OLD SKOOL

JAN 31, 2003 06:40 AM

superfly said:

Germany, well Germany makes good cars.



Good guns too. I bet Germany starts backing us in war when we start fielding more HK's.


Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next