Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eaglecz on March 18, 2003, 02:43:12 PM
-
in Iraq ?
that country consist of people
even if you ganna remove 10% of them, the same people will remain and build something new.. similary
do not forget, that about 67% are muslims and they will not start to eat burgers or watch sitcoms, just because you remove sadam
that thead about afhanistan is nice example
-
Hmm, well, MORE OIL! Can't wait to take MORE OIL and drive down gas prices!
Hmm, women who appreciate a good GI visiting a foreign nation, God knows those Iraqi women need a man that can please them, only a U.S. GI can do that! God knows the Russkies could never please them when they visited!
Oh! Pita bread! We'll need more of that too.
-
what the hell is GI ? :D
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
what the hell is GI ? :D
If you don't know what a GI is, then I doubt anyone will take the time to reply to your thread. ;)
-
We expect to disarm Iraq in accordance with numerous UN SC resolutions.
We expect to remove SH as leader of Iraq.
We expect those two things for certain.
Further, we expect to be able to help the Iraqi people to form a new much more representative government.
We'll see how we do.
What do you and those like you expect to change in Iraq by continuing to turn a blind eye to Hussein's violation of the UN SC resolutions?
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
that country consist of people
even if you ganna remove 10% of them, the same people will remain and build something new.. similary
He's right. People will just build something new. Nothing ever changes, the US is still a set of Merchantile Colonies, England is ruled by the crown, and the Czars hold sway over the vast ice fields.
-Sik
-
Sikboy: Nothing ever changes, the US is still a set of Merchantile Colonies, England is ruled by the crown, and the Czars hold sway over the vast ice fields.
Good example. US was liberated by french troops commanded by Lafayette, the British and Russians... Er...
Is see why many americans may be so sure that freedom can only come from outside and be granted while others believe in internal progress and self-determination.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Sikboy: Nothing ever changes, the US is still a set of Merchantile Colonies, England is ruled by the crown, and the Czars hold sway over the vast ice fields.
Good example. US was liberated by french troops commanded by Lafayette, the British and Russians... Er...
Is see why many americans may be so sure that freedom can only come from outside and be granted while others believe in internal progress and self-determination.
miko
]
My bad.
The Nazi's still run Germany, and Tojo is in control of a vast Japanese empire.
Feel better?
-Sik
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Is see why many americans may be so sure that freedom can only come from outside and be granted while others believe in internal progress and self-determination.
By the way: nice false dilemma there Spock
-Sik
-
well guys im from country where Komunist fallen 14 years ago.... and guess what ?? do you belive that they are gone ?? do you realy belive that they lost power, influence ? Do you belive that they have to hide ??
i just wanted to say .. be carefully what you do expect from Iraq
and dont forget what US have done to shiit muslims in 90`s
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
]
My bad.
The Nazi's still run Germany, and Tojo is in control of a vast Japanese empire.
Feel better?
-Sik
yes your bad.... Nacionalist still run in german and look at the Austria my dear
any other stupid comments ?
-
you're right in one aspect Eaglecz..
we won't be influencing the world in any way.. unless it's negative..
but we may protect ourselves.
question is: will it be worth it in the long run ?
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
yes your bad.... Nacionalist still run in german and look at the Austria my dear
any other stupid comments ?
lol, nice try nancy. Go ahead, tell me that the Nazis bear a resemblence to the current government in Germany. Good Job!
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
question is: will it be worth it in the long run ?
thats good question
do you consern iraq as a biggest current thead ? if so, why ?
why are your leaders in that hurry ?
why does we hear only diddly you, when we try to speak with some of you ?
-
Iraq is not a threat, Saddam is.
He supports terrorism. That alone is reason enough for me.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
lol, nice try nancy. Go ahead, tell me that the Nazis bear a resemblence to the current government in Germany. Good Job!
-Sik
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/01/29/26069.html
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/updates/i98012.html
regard
Nancy
-
that country consist of people
even if you ganna remove 10% of them, the same people will remain and build something new.. similary
So you are a racist that believes "those people" are so imherently different and that the principles of liberal democracy are so alien to them that they will inevitably end up being ruled by another Dictator.
Folks thought that about the Germans and Japanese. There were folks in the west who wanted to reduce German to an agricultural state. No industry and just a limited capacity to feed themselves.
German and Japan were rebuilt and are stable both economically and politically.
Are you telling me Arabs, muslims and in particular Iraqis are incapable of governing themselves?
Why dont do a search on the people of Iraq. They have a cultured history.
Then do a search on the Baath party and you will see where Saddam model his state on Stalin.
-
.
-
why does we hear only diddly you, when we try to speak with some of you ?
By "we" I assume you.. and maybe Blitz.
In that case, it's because both of you are mental.
-SW
-
Did EagleCZ just use Pravda as a "source"??? LOL!
-
Originally posted by Batz
are so alien to them that they will inevitably end up being ruled by another Dictator.
where exactly did i say that ?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Did EagleCZ just use Pravda as a "source"??? LOL!
whats wrong with that?
at least they do write in english :D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Did EagleCZ just use Pravda as a "source"??? LOL!
It's not so much that he used Pravda as a source, but that he missed the target entirely. My conetention is not that Nazis no longer exist, but rather that the current government in Germany is not similar to the Nazi regime. He has yet, and will not, manage to sell any point to the contrary.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
whats wrong with that?
at least they do write in english :D
That's true lol. It would take me all day to read it in Russian :D
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Batz
Are you telling me Arabs, muslims and in particular Iraqis are incapable of governing themselves?
when did i told it ???
Im saying Iraq only need to remove sadam, not lovely americans army to stay nor americans money to rebuild
let them deside what to do ......
Btw.: what country do you concern as most possible biggest friend of Iraq in case that Sadam gonna be removed ?
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
It's not so much that he used Pravda as a source, but that he missed the target entirely. My conetention is not that Nazis no longer exist, but rather that the current government in Germany is not similar to the Nazi regime. He has yet, and will not, manage to sell any point to the contrary.
-Sik
aaaahhh you right no more Nazis.... only Nacionalist supported by some nazi boys...
ohhh
-
Right here......
that country consist of people
even if you ganna remove 10% of them, the same people will remain and build something new.. similary
do not forget, that about 67% are muslims and they will not start to eat burgers or watch sitcoms, just because you remove sadam
Thats the impression you left and that why my reply is in the form of a question. I dont have time to try and decipher what you are "really" trying to say.
But clearly you imply that Iraqis are not like us Amis therefore
the same people will remain and build something new.. similary
That seems to imply they will return to a Saddam type leader.
Germans are had to be de-nazified, the japanese society was transformed post war. Iraq will be de-Baathified.
or are you saying "you can take the terror away of the Iraqis but you cant take the terrorist out of the muslim"?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Iraq is not a threat, Saddam is.
He supports terrorism. That alone is reason enough for me.
thats may be true.... but if im not wrong US whinning about some WMD
ehhhh ?
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
thats may be true.... but if im not wrong US whinning about some WMD
ehhhh ?
The two are connected. WMD+Terrorists=larger threat.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
aaaahhh you right no more Nazis.... only Nacionalist supported by some nazi boys...
ohhh
[Ronald Reagan]
There you go again
[/Ronald Reagan]
Orel, I'm not saying that there are no Nazis. I've explicitly said that.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Batz
But clearly you imply that Iraqis are not like us Amis therefore
or are you saying "you can take the terror away of the Iraqis but you cant take the terrorist out of the muslim"?
yes basicaly ME countries doesnt like US`s way of life .. thats fact
yes you will never annihilate terror by this way... if you do not belive me, look at the palestinians and israel
somehow this way doesnt appear to be effective
and ofcourse look at the russia and checna
all im trying to say about those people is, that they do not like you much and they will not start to like you a bit later.... they may be dislike you more in moment, they gonna meet you more
they simply have a bit diferent point of view on life
are you ready to go home w/o small word "thanks" after this war ? I have small hesitations reading stuff about renewing Iraq
what the hell do you wanna renew, while you are about to remove few guys
eh ?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
The two are connected. WMD+Terrorists=larger threat.
and who told it to you ?
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
and who told it to you ?
Who told what to me?
That an enemy becomes more dangerous as his weapons become more destructive?
It's common sense.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Who told what to me?
That an enemy becomes more dangerous as his weapons become more destructive?
It's common sense.
geeeeezzz that Bush isnt that lame.... he is not that good as Hitler was, but he realy know how to....
actualy 90% of german people trough, that germany doing right thing in 1938->
you better read more sources instead of common sensing ;)
-
the arabs don't like american way of life, thats why so many of them move to the USA , because they hate it.
i know at least half doz arabs, they come here find job, save money , go back and bring their familys to US, they must do that because they hate the USA, right? ...BS, they love it here.
-
You too uninformed to argue with.
Israel is occupying and destroying palestinian homes and territory. They respond to rock throwing with machine gun fire. They bulldoze homes indiscriminately. The Chechens are fighting a war for independence.
None of that is applicable to the situation in Iraq. We are not going into Iraq to steal their land or their resources nor do when plan on forcing Iraq to be a part of the US. We certainly arent going into Iraq to to catch terrorist.
We are going in their to remove Saddam so that in the future should he aquire wmd he wont be in a position to provide those weapons to terrorist groups.
This is not a war against the Iraqi people.
Why dont you deal with facts and quit making bs up to suit your Euro mindset.
Nothing that post has any basis on reality.
How many Iraqi terrorist do you see attacking the US?
The attack on Iraq is a pre-emptive and preventative strike to prevent a possible future attack by terrorist using wmd provided to them by a rogue state.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
geeeeezzz that Bush isnt that lame.... he is not that good as Hitler was, but he realy know how to....
actualy 90% of german people trough, that germany doing right thing in 1938->
you better read more sources instead of common sensing ;)
I can't even respond to this. I have no idea what you said.
-
Originally posted by Batz
We certainly arent going into Iraq to to catch terrorist.
im may be odd, but 2 of them wasarested in Pakistan in past few days.... may be there are better places to go that Iraq... for that purpose ofcourse
well we will see what gonna happen in Iraq, and how long will americanos "hunt terrorists" all over the Iraq
if so, why do you expect that Iraq need your money for renewal process ?
-
Originally posted by Martlet
I can't even respond to this. I have no idea what you said.
I think he's saying that you have bought into the Bush administrations propaganda machine, which is not quite as effecient as that of the Nazis. And that you should use "facts" instead of "common Sense"
If I had to guess I think he's denying either the existence of WMD in Iraq, or that Sadam would give them to Terrorists, but I'm not sure which.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by john9001
the arabs don't like american way of life, thats why so many of them move to the USA , because they hate it.
i know at least half doz arabs, they come here find job, save money , go back and bring their familys to US, they must do that because they hate the USA, right? ...BS, they love it here.
may be less that US moved to SA or other countries....
actualy here live few americans, whitch comparing our country to US and they said, that american freedom is a police state with comparation to our....
bla bla bla ... if you realy belive that you are so super cool, im not about to convert you
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
I think he's saying that you have bought into the Bush administrations propaganda machine, which is not quite as effecient as that of the Nazis. And that you should use "facts" instead of "common Sense"
-Sik
exactly :D
where the hell are you from that you can translate my crappy english so exactly :D
and rest of my post was about... collect all facts and not only the facts, you can use, only to justify your steps
-
Iraq needs rebuild because we have and will blow stuff up.
Iraq is not Pakistan or Afghanistan.
We weent into to afghanistan to rout of terrorists we knew were there. Pakistan is aiding the US in capturing terrorist hiding in their country.
Iraq has a Dictator that has used wmd on his people and neighbors. A dictator who ordered his inteligence services to commit terror acts at the start of the last gulf war (they were caught) and a dictator who planned to assinate our President. (Bush Sr.; we stopped them to).
He has sought to to acquire more wmd and has stated that the biggest mistake he made by invading Kuwait was doing it before he had a nuclear weapon.
Completely different then the war on terror. Although the removing of Saddam certainly compliments the war on terror.
Try putting up a credible arguement based on reality. Not just the token US hating Euro bs.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
exactly :D
where the hell are you from that you can translate my crappy english so exactly :D
and rest of my post was about... collect all facts and not only the facts, you can use, only to justify your steps
Lol, my grandfather speaks a lot of Polish, and I spent 5 years as a Russian Linguist in the Navy. :D
-Sik
-
just went trough your home page .... WTG !
polish is very similary to out language :)
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
exactly :D
where the hell are you from that you can translate my crappy english so exactly :D
and rest of my post was about... collect all facts and not only the facts, you can use, only to justify your steps
It is a fact that Iraq has aided terrorists.
It is a fact that they have had WMD.
It is a fact that they have failed to be truthful in conforming to 687.
It is a fact that WMD make a nation more dangerous.
I feel there are enough facts to warrent the US taking action.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
any other stupid comments ?
Pretty sure the opening to this thread takes the stupid comment award.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
It is a fact that Iraq has aided terrorists.
It is a fact that they have had WMD.
It is a fact that they have failed to be truthful in conforming to 687.
It is a fact that WMD make a nation more dangerous.
I feel there are enough facts to warrent the US taking action.
1. not Iraq but SH
2. they had... if they hold them or not wasnt proved
3. 687 doesnt speek about vulching Iraq
4. is US(Israel) finaly about to disarm as well ?
5. i simply do not think, and those facts arent enought to say UN diddly off
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
1. not Iraq but SH
2. they had... if they hold them or not wasnt proved
3. 687 doesnt speek about vulching Iraq
4. is US(Israel) finaly about to disarm as well ?
5. i simply do not think, and those facts arent enought to say UN diddly off
1. correct. That is what I meant. My apologies.
2. Again, correct. However, it has been shown he declared to have no weapons in violation of 687, yet some were found.
3. Correct, it is a resolution on Iraq, not on other countries. It doesn't say you can't vulch Iraq, either. It says they will be granted a cease fire as long as they adhere to the resolution.
4. The US doesn't have a resolution requiring them to disarm. I can't speak for Israel, and won't research it since it isn't pertinent to this discussion.
5. The UN wasn't told to diddly off.
-
Eagle you ignorant slut.
Stopt trying to make exuse for iraq having WMD on account that the USA does.
You shouldnt be such an ignorant diddly.
-
nice post Martlet
well Grunhertz.... bla bla bla ... what a post
-
sadumbs shorts
-
chant: "Violence Solves Nothing"
counter-chant: "Violence Solved Hitler"
-
Originally posted by Rasker
counter-chant: "Violence Solved Hitler"
but Hitler taken Austria, France, Czech, Poland etc....
SH didnt take nothing, so this analogy is a bit off
-
So you are saying we cannot act until he does something really bad? You are saying that we cannot act until after he blows up new york or tel aviv?
That is like saying we should not have acted against the 911 terrorists until after they destroyed the WTC abd killed 3,000 americans.
Come to think of it that is, exactly, like saying nobody should have acted against Hitler until, and only until after he conquered: Austria, Chezkoslovakia and Poland.
How can you,supposedly a czech be so willing and welcoming of appeasement - the very same process by which cowardly euro leaders gave your homeland to adolf hitler of all people. How is this possible?
How can you be so short-sighted, so stupid?
-
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.
No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.
you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Come to think of it that is, exactly, like saying nobody should have acted against Hitler until, and only until after he conquered: Austria, Chezkoslovakia and Poland.
actualy and who did something agains that ????
edit.: ofcourse it was problem of German people until hitler took Austria, since that moment it become international problem
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.
No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.
you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol
Yea lets just ask him to leave without posing 250,000 troops and a threat of invasion within 48 hours. Or maybe we can pass a few more UN resolutions. Or better yet why not pass sanctions to cripple his regime.
How would you remove saddam hussesin without force?
Yes we do have the right to attack him, they are in vioation of the 1991 cease fire which called for him to disarm under threat of resumed mitary action.
As for Hitler.
He was in open violation of counteless rules of verailles treaty. In 1936 he remiliterized the rheinland in open defiance of the international community. They, the french, did nothing.
Are so madly oppsed to the USA policy that you excuse and justify the appeasement betrayal and conquest of your own country in 1938 order to argue against american policy today?
How can you be so blazingly foolish? Dont you realize how pathetic and esperate to bash the US policy this attitued makes you look?
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.
No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.
you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol
Saddam doesn't attack Israel, but he pays people to do it.
That's good enough for me.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
1 thing is to remove SH and second thing is to bomb Iraq.
No you have no right to bomb Iraq until Iraqi attack another nation.
Iraq never attemped to attack Tel Aviv nor NY. And if you disagree, just bring some facts. I may be only didnt note this fact.
Kuwait; Aug 1990, Tel Aviv; Winter 1991 were attacked by Iraq, and since the end of Gulf War hostilities then were contingent upon Iraq's behavior, so the case can be made that the 'right' to attack exists.
The agreement signed by representatives of Iraq provides for a complete accounting and a schedule for Iraq to cooperate and disarm to agreed upon levels. That time expired long ago.
you are about to remove goverment and we are talking about rebuilding country lol [/B]
When remodeling a house, often the first step is at least a partial demolition.
In order to rebuild Japan, the Tojo government needed to be unseated, then modern democracy was 'forced' upon them by outside, conquering forces, and the enlightened leadership of the US Army, personified by Douglas MacArthur.
-
EagleCZ I must admit I am shocked by your naive ignorance...