Change of attiude?
- Thread starter Ozz
- Start date
amadeus
Serenity now
My country right or wrong, despite the fact that the U.S. is, of course, right on Iraq.
At least he's admitting they could be wrong.
amadeus
Serenity now
This is kind of like Back To The Future Part II -- if we can't stop Biff (Hussein) from getting the Sports Almanac (bomb) -- then the alternate 1985 (2003) isn't going to look like if Marty (U.S) had stopped him (Hussein.)
Like I said before!!!
SADDAM DOESN'T HAVE A TIME MACHINE!!!
amadeus
Serenity now
Originally posted by CornMaster
Like I said before!!!
SADDAM DOESN'T HAVE A TIME MACHINE!!!
And neither do we, and once something happens, we can't go back and fix it.
I don't want to rebuild New York. I like it the way it is now...standing.
God
God
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Messages
- 1,354
Actually: This is kind of like Star Wars -- if we can stop Vader (Hussein)and the emperor (liberals) from building the Death Star (bomb) -- then the future wouldn't be filled the evil men (liberals, leftists, open-minded people in general) if Han (US) and his trusty sidekick Chewbakka (Britain) and [the guy who can't figure out if he likes Han or not], Luke (Saudi's) and the girl they're fighting over, Leila (Israel) hadn't stopped Vader (Hussein) and the emperor (democrats, communists, athiests, intelligent people in general 
)
)
amadeus
Serenity now
Luke isn't Saudi Arabia. Jabba the Hutt is.
He's a big bad blob that nobody likes, but isn't as bad as Vader.
He's a big bad blob that nobody likes, but isn't as bad as Vader.
Greadius
:yeah:
Dude. Don't insult Luke Skywalker.
Or democrats & athiests either
I'm still torn on the issue. On the one hand, I'm convinced Saddam is a bad man and deserves a thurough spanking that only the United States will have the gaul to deliver. On the other hand, I don't think it is as much our problem or responsibility enough to incur the costs (money & people) it would take to deliver said spanking.
Or democrats & athiests either
I'm still torn on the issue. On the one hand, I'm convinced Saddam is a bad man and deserves a thurough spanking that only the United States will have the gaul to deliver. On the other hand, I don't think it is as much our problem or responsibility enough to incur the costs (money & people) it would take to deliver said spanking.
Eowyn of Rohan
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 195
People make a big deal of all the treaties and resolutions that Saddam has been breaking. THOSE WERE WITH THE UNITED NATIONS. The political body that so far has the GREATEST case against Hussein is the United Nations. The United Nations has as much reason to invade Iraq today as it will ever have. Therefore, I hope the UN will have the guts to make the right decision.
The United States has almost no claim to war against Iraq... the link between Saddam and 9-11 is tenuous at best [Osama's a bad guy, Saddam's a bad guy, therefore we should attack Saddam?]. WMD is still an open issue. Even our own intelligence agencies [CIA etc] are not agreed on specifics, despite the blather Bush pours out daily... although everyone agrees that Saddam's rule needs to END, and as soon as possible. The question is one of jurisdiction: the UN has the most reasons to war against Saddam. Of course the war will be solely a vicarious one: the USA will as usual do most of the work. But it's important to have LEGITIMACY.
"My country right or wrong". This is the most dangerous propoganda any republic faces. Who is the country? Is it a figurehead monarch? Is it a bunch of people, the governmen, the Congress or Parliament? Is it the land we live on? Is it the money we make?
NO. It is the PEOPLE of this country. The government we elect is a TOOL to carry out our own wishes.
When you say "My country right or wrong", you are appealing to nationalist fervency - the same thing that drove Hitler's troops to war... instead of rational, logical thinking, which says that if I think my country is wrong, it is my RIGHT, it is my DUTY! to say so. When I believe the state is not representing me, it is a CRIMINAL ACT not to use my power as a part of the republic to try and change that.
When everyone speaks their mind openly and without regard for whatever the majority may think, truth cannot help but prevail.
When everyone gathers behind the shadow of a state, or the emotional illogical appeals to patriotism which have darkened this country lately, when a man would rather be a PATRIOT than a THINKER, when he feels that the fervency of nationalism is MORE IMPORTANT than being represented in government and allowed to state his own dissenting views, when SUDDENLY ONE'S COUNTRY BECOMES MORE IMPORTANT THAN BEING RIGHT OR WRONG, then democracy has truly failed.
I sincerely hope that the view Rmsharpe espouses is not that of the majority of Americans.
The United States has almost no claim to war against Iraq... the link between Saddam and 9-11 is tenuous at best [Osama's a bad guy, Saddam's a bad guy, therefore we should attack Saddam?]. WMD is still an open issue. Even our own intelligence agencies [CIA etc] are not agreed on specifics, despite the blather Bush pours out daily... although everyone agrees that Saddam's rule needs to END, and as soon as possible. The question is one of jurisdiction: the UN has the most reasons to war against Saddam. Of course the war will be solely a vicarious one: the USA will as usual do most of the work. But it's important to have LEGITIMACY.
"My country right or wrong". This is the most dangerous propoganda any republic faces. Who is the country? Is it a figurehead monarch? Is it a bunch of people, the governmen, the Congress or Parliament? Is it the land we live on? Is it the money we make?
NO. It is the PEOPLE of this country. The government we elect is a TOOL to carry out our own wishes.
When you say "My country right or wrong", you are appealing to nationalist fervency - the same thing that drove Hitler's troops to war... instead of rational, logical thinking, which says that if I think my country is wrong, it is my RIGHT, it is my DUTY! to say so. When I believe the state is not representing me, it is a CRIMINAL ACT not to use my power as a part of the republic to try and change that.
When everyone speaks their mind openly and without regard for whatever the majority may think, truth cannot help but prevail.
When everyone gathers behind the shadow of a state, or the emotional illogical appeals to patriotism which have darkened this country lately, when a man would rather be a PATRIOT than a THINKER, when he feels that the fervency of nationalism is MORE IMPORTANT than being represented in government and allowed to state his own dissenting views, when SUDDENLY ONE'S COUNTRY BECOMES MORE IMPORTANT THAN BEING RIGHT OR WRONG, then democracy has truly failed.
I sincerely hope that the view Rmsharpe espouses is not that of the majority of Americans.
Greadius
:yeah:
The UN had no jurisdiction, is not a governmental agency, and can not declare war.
Government is a tool, glad you see things that way. Its a policy differential from the attitude that government is the source of all evil (Reagan), or that government can solve all the worlds problems (One-world socialists).
I don't know anyone like him.
Which is why it never ceases to amaze me how much his Rush Limbaugh schtick is allowed to set the agenda of these discussions. The Euro-wheenies can't get enough of him.
Eowyn of Rohan
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 195
Oh, certainly, MISmanaged government IS truly the source of all evil... ironic that it was Reagan who said so, however, the man whose government almost tripled our deficit. 
newfangle
hates you.
Yeah, Reagan was history's greatest disaster. Americans don't realize that their economy would have been some 20% large without him (not to mention the fact that he was a nuke-mongering hick).
