Upcomming War In Iraq

Vecdran · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (mindtrick @ Jan 9 2003, 05:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Vecdran @ Jan 9 2003, 04:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Oh the children! Think of all the children the Americans have bombed!!!

Waaaah.

</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
You managed nicely to dodge my point.

If you think I was trying to get cheap points by crying for children in wars, think again.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
not you, zergling

Sirus · January 2003

1st. There is very little actual knowledge of politics in this topic, with the exception of the Moderators.
2nd. Congress decides if we go to war. DON'T BLAME BUSH!!!!
3rd. The US Government is the world's Police, and most of the time, for good reason!
4th. Saddam is an evil person, he deserves to lose all dictorial power.
5th. Socialism is a sort of shared economic system where there's shared ownership of property among the citizen/government, there was about 3-4 (correct?) socialist colonies in the US during some time period which slips my mind at the moment, all failed.
6th. Those who are US citizens SHOULD ALWAYS support their country in times of war, support the soldiers who are fighting, support the president, it's sad to think that people with a 4 years olds knowledge of politics are critizing the president and the war, if you don't believe in war BELIEVE THIS , Soldiers are dying so that a select few of people can live a better life, if you can't support the government/president/soldiers during war you deserve to be kicked out of the country.

Communism is more of religious dictatorship correct? More like "For the country type of belief". Communism needs both a dictator + large following of people driven to work for the good of the country. At least that's always been my analysis of the situation.

+! Bush is a good man, most of you say he's "stupid", "unqualified" and etc. , because
A.) Your parents don't like him (Because of B or C)
B.) Refuse to like anyone conservative, AKA Far left winger.
C.) Been influenced my the media bias (not saying everything is false, but about 80% of it all is bias, trying to undermine the person's , Personal background, Ethics or political Competency.)

Bush is not stupid, and won the popular vote in florida through numerous recounts ( Here's a bomb for you who dont really know the government well, not democracy US is republic, and the presidency is not won by popular votes, only by electoral, even if Gore won the majority of the popular vote in Florida he would have lost anyways!!!)

--edit-- Bush obtained a degree from Harvard (doesn't matter how he got in, money etc. , It's not easy to get the degree). Most of Bush's "stutters" are mainly because of the trouble in remembering the scripts and everything his dopey political advisors give him, it would be difficult to answer a question if you had to remember about a page of notes that your advisor gave you in areas to avoid because of Hard left wingers.

I am not actually biased towards Republicans, Not all liberals are bad, not all Republicans are good, but Bush doesn't deserve to be bashed because of the stupid media who "no matter what" will always stand by the network manager's opinion. (most of the time, they're liberal. CNN, ABC, are both liberal, with the addition of about 75% of all celebrities, if not more.)

Blind faith to a political party is stupid. Don't pick because you see red or blue next to their name, judge them upon what you believe to be the truth. IGNORE ADS, THEY ARE THERE TO INFLUENCE STUPID PEOPLE!!
Make educated decisions in at least politics if you cant apply that theory to your life

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1st. There is very little actual knowledge of politics in this topic, with the exception of the Moderators.
2nd. Congress decides if we go to war. DON'T BLAME BUSH!!!!
3rd. The US Government is the world's Police, and most of the time, for good reason!
4th. Saddam is an evil person, he deserves to lose all dictorial power.
5th. Socialism is a sort of shared economic system where there's shared ownership of property among the citizen/government, there was about 3-4 (correct?) socialist colonies in the US during some time period which slips my mind at the moment, all failed.
6th. Those who are US citizens SHOULD ALWAYS support their country in times of war, support the soldiers who are fighting, support the president, it's sad to think that people with a 4 years olds knowledge of politics are critizing the president and the war, if you don't believe in war BELIEVE THIS , Soldiers are dying so that a select few of people can live a better life, if you can't support the government/president/soldiers during war you deserve to be kicked out of the country.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
That is, singlehandedly, the funniest thing I have ever read. You should go into comedy man. For real.
1st. Who are you to say that?
2nd. congress decides if we go to "war" not if we use our troops. Whether we are in a state of war or not, we're still gonna bomb people, because that's what W wants to do.
3rd. Who gave the US that right? Just because we're richer than everyone else? Because we're all Chrisitian? Because we're always "right"? WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO MESS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES UNPROVOKED! it's as simple as that.
4th. I say GW deserves to lose all of HIS power. I have stated my reasons, and most of them are the same reasons why everyone thinks Saddam is so bad.
5th. Go tell that to the Capitalists, see what kind of response you get. I think it'll sound a little like this: "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"
6th. Since when does some GI going into a country half a world away, throwing smart bombs at a faceless enemy, then dieing in a helicopter crash help me have a better life? IT DOESN'T! If you believe in the cause, go fight it. See if I care. But I think I know some people who do. They're the innocent civilians that you will most likely target as you sit miles away from the battlefeild salluting some old fart in a uniform.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Communism is more of religious dictatorship correct? More like "For the country type of belief". Communism needs both a dictator + large following of people driven to work for the good of the country. At least that's always been my analysis of the situation.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
NO NO NO NO NO! That is just plain false. COMMUNISM DOES NOT NEED A DICTATOR! All Communist Gov.s so far have had a dictator because they have not been true Communism to begin with. Communism must have a revolution to start. Specifically a POPULAR revolution. Sadly, in all the countries where these revolutions have happened, they have not been "Popular" the people are not reasy to revolt. They will when the time comes, but it hasn't happened yet.
Yes, it does need a large group of people to work in order for it to work, but doesn't capitalism? And Socialism? And Fuedalism? And Tribalism? And Anarchism? THEY ALL DO!

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>+! Bush is a good man, most of you say he's "stupid", "unqualified" and etc. , because
A.) Your parents don't like him (Because of B or C)
B.) Refuse to like anyone conservative, AKA Far left winger.
C.) Been influenced my the media bias (not saying everything is false, but about 80% of it all is bias, trying to undermine the person's , Personal background, Ethics or political Competency.)
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Bush is not a "good man" neither was his dad, niether was Clinton, neither was any president since WW2.
A)My parents DO like him, well my Mom does. My Dad hates him, his pictures on gwbush.com, but since when do I hate someone because my Dad does? NEVER. I hate him by myself.
B)I didn't know conservitaves were left wingers.
C)AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[wipes tear from eye] every since 9/12/01 the media has been kissing GWs ****, and since when does the Capitalist media affect me. NEVER.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bush is not stupid, and won the popular vote in florida through numerous recounts ( Here's a bomb for you who dont really know the government well, not democracy US is republic, and the presidency is not won by popular votes, only by electoral, even if Gore won the majority of the popular vote in Florida he would have lost anyways!!!)</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
BUSH IS STUPID. And he did not win the popular vote. He only one the electoral votes in Florida because
1)because of creative numbers-making that kicked out a very large number of votes because an outside firm was hired by Jeb to figure out who was a Felon, and actually kicked out anyone with a similar Birthday, SS number, or name to that of a known Felon. In fact, the head of the Florida State Voting commision was told that because she was a felon(she wasn't) she could not vote.
and 2)because a good deal of the adsentee(AKA military) votes were let in when they shouldn't have been(they were not dated right, not sealed right, lacked proper witnises, etc)
And by the way, GORE WOULD HAVE WON IF HE GOT FLORIDA! IDIOT!

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>--edit-- Bush obtained a degree from Harvard (doesn't matter how he got in, money etc. , It's not easy to get the degree). Most of Bush's "stutters" are mainly because of the trouble in remembering the scripts and everything his dopey political advisors give him, it would be difficult to answer a question if you had to remember about a page of notes that your advisor gave you in areas to avoid because of Hard left wingers.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
It does matter how he got in, and he didn't pass well. He got Cs and Ds. And if your father has enough money, even you can get those grades.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I am not actually biased towards Republicans, Not all liberals are bad, not all Republicans are good, but Bush doesn't deserve to be bashed because of the stupid media who "no matter what" will always stand by the network manager's opinion. (most of the time, they're liberal. CNN, ABC, are both liberal, with the addition of about 75% of all celebrities, if not more.)</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The "liberal" media is only as liberal as the fact that they are all capitalist institutions can allow.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>America in the grip of socialism? ROFL, that's a gone one. Heh. Still laughing.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
keep laughing brother, then, go down to your local library, and pick up a history book, then read on a little area of US history called "The Great Despressio" then read about "The New Deal" then read about "Price Controls". ok? ok. Get back to me on that one.

Speed_2_Dave · January 2003

The reason why people don't like "not so bright" people in office is because W reflects ALL Americans. If you've been to Europe in the last few years they love W. They love him because that proves their point that all americans are idiots. They love to make fun of him, and he makes it really easy to make fun of him (faux pas, bad quotes, horribly thought out ideas... axis of EVIL?)

on a side-note, I remember reading online about Jeb Bush telling Gore he wouldn't win in Florida.. He <u>told</u> Gore that he wouldn't win in Florida.. That sounds kinda shady.

I guess I'm kinda miffed that he used his father & the "good old boy system" to get to where he is, but I'm happy to have a "President of the people." The last one I remember reading about was Andrew Jackson, and that really made many people angry, too.

Well, gotta go play some volleyball, I'll be back later.

Marik_Steele · January 2003

The pro-Bush/anti-Bush debate may or may not come to a conclusion, but I don't clearly see whether coming to a conclusion on such a subject will even be productive.

I for one think it'd be better to share ideas of what the heck we plan to do if/when war breaks out. Join/dodge the reserves/draft? Be more supportive of your favorite political party? Be in the protests? The riots? Build a fallout shelter? Apply for dual citizenship to make it easier to leave the country in case of the worst? Go on with your normal life?

What do <i>you</i> plan on doing?

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

Hopefully by that time the country will be ready for full-on revolution, and I plan to do that. But, that's what the previous generation said, so it ain't gonna happen. If they bring teh draft back I'll just gain 50 pounds and/or claim to be ****. Problem solved, and I never have to go to Canada!

Zergling · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Immacolata @ Jan 9 2003, 05:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>No I am NOT referrring to socialism. I detest socialism, because that is what the US and most of Europe is in the grip in now, and has been in since the great depression, although the 80s did see a resurgence of capitalism in America.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

America in the grip of socialism? ROFL, that's a gone one. Heh. Still laughing.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
ROTFL? I don't think it's funny at all that Allyourhive doesn't know what socialism is. It pisses me off!

OKay so on the whole Iraq-war thing,

It's an established fact that underneath Iraq is 24% of all the world's oil reserves currently discovered. It is also a fact that since WWII, The United States has been desperately trying to expand it's influence in the middle and near east. They have exploited the hell out of south america and parts of asia and need new markets. One of the laws that Marx discovered about capitalism is it's constant need for growth, and an expansion of markets, otherwise the economy collapses in a crisis of overproduction (which is the most absurd thing anyone could think of!) So the imperialists go to war, to expand thier influence, or risk the social turmoil of an economic depression. This is not a new phenomenon or anything...

OKay, so now I'm going to respond to the other posts:

All of the comment's about Hussien being comparable to Hitler are completely devoid of meaning and absurd. I liked someone's characterization of Hussein as an armed thug, which is much closer to the truth.

Vecdran writes about bombing military targets. Approximately 250,000 sorties were flown over Iraq in the last decade, (no joke!) The bombings completely destroyed the country's infrastructure causing mass starvation (a true genocide). Many people don't know that iraq was the leading arab nation next to iran before the war. Now it has been reduced to a mass graveyard and junkheap.

Also, I'm sick of hearing how everyone hates Bush. Who gives a rat's ****? The democrats, republicans and greens are all agents of the bourgeiosie. It doesn't matter who is in office, the office is there to keep the working class from rising up against their masters.

On all the comments about communism/socialism/etc. I encourage you to to visit <a href='http://www.marxists.org' target='_blank'>the Marxist Internet Archive</a>. Check out Lenin's State and Revolution, and Marx and Engel's Communist Mannifesto and you should understand the basics. As a communist (not in name but in deeds), it is important to see that this upcoming war is not only targeted at Iraq, but also Germany and Japan, the two other imperialist powers. Ever since the fall of the USSR, the international situation is looking more and more like pre-WWI, with the build up of inter-imperialist rivalries, and the desire to redivide the world.

"You have nothing to lose but your chains; workers of the world unite!" - Karl Marx

Sirus · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> 1st. There is very little actual knowledge of politics in this topic, with the exception of the Moderators.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT!

And to debate what you said

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1st. Who are you to say that?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Subjective comments based on feelings toward war/bush/capitalism/and other things, rather than actual politics involving war. Apparently im right too.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>2nd. congress decides if we go to "war" not if we use our troops. Whether we are in a state of war or not, we're still gonna bomb people, because that's what W wants to do.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Bush is not a military strategist , the secretary of war takes care of that along with the cabinet, he makes suggestions and makes his input, It is the military strategist who pretty much control what happens.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>3rd. Who gave the US that right? Just because we're richer than everyone else? Because we're all Chrisitian? Because we're always "right"? WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO MESS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES UNPROVOKED! it's as simple as that.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

What happens in this world is the responsibility of all who live in it. If I draw a line within your home and call it "myland" and kill some people in there does it not matter to you? Your basing your opinion on distance between Iraq and the US. Unlike Gravity morales do not weaken over distance, but apparently we can make an exception for you.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>4th. I say GW deserves to lose all of HIS power. I have stated my reasons, and most of them are the same reasons why everyone thinks Saddam is so bad.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Why? He was elected by the electoral college. You have made no actual points to why he should "lose all power" , I sincerely doubt that you have followed the news around Bush, the only hotspots for Bush right now is his position on the death penalty and the war. I'm sure CNN or Fox News would love to hear your reasoning.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>5th. Go tell that to the Capitalists, see what kind of response you get. I think it'll sound a little like this: "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I don't think you even read point 5.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>6th. Since when does some GI going into a country half a world away, throwing smart bombs at a faceless enemy, then dieing in a helicopter crash help me have a better life? IT DOESN'T! If you believe in the cause, go fight it. See if I care. But I think I know some people who do. They're the innocent civilians that you will most likely target as you sit miles away from the battlefeild salluting some old fart in a uniform.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

First, I didn't say he'd make a better life for you. How bout you give your life to liberate a country while a laugh at you for your sacrifice. There are more important things then you and what you feel. God knows that they have more honor and morals then some person playing a video game who somehow has no shame and accuses them of dying needlessly.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>NO NO NO NO NO! That is just plain false. COMMUNISM DOES NOT NEED A DICTATOR! All Communist Gov.s so far have had a dictator because they have not been true Communism to begin with. Communism must have a revolution to start. Specifically a POPULAR revolution. Sadly, in all the countries where these revolutions have happened, they have not been "Popular" the people are not reasy to revolt. They will when the time comes, but it hasn't happened yet.
Yes, it does need a large group of people to work in order for it to work, but doesn't capitalism? And Socialism? And Fuedalism? And Tribalism? And Anarchism? THEY ALL DO!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Communism has never survived without a dictator, it cannot happen. Someone said it earlier, man is inherently greedy ( along with selfish and evil. ) Also, I'd like to see your history degree, Communism doesn't need a revolution to start, that's false. Communism needs to be religiously followed with blind faith because it doesn't work, I'm sorry you didnt understand me, only those who has faith for the "cause" will ever believe in communism , because it doesn't work, and never will.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bush is not a "good man" neither was his dad, niether was Clinton, neither was any president since WW2.
A)My parents DO like him, well my Mom does. My Dad hates him, his pictures on gwbush.com, but since when do I hate someone because my Dad does? NEVER. I hate him by myself.
B)I didn't know conservitaves were left wingers.
C)AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[wipes tear from eye] every since 9/12/01 the media has been kissing GWs ****, and since when does the Capitalist media affect me. NEVER.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I'm sure you have alot to base this hatred on. Once again, what do you have against the presidents post-WW2?

Conservatives = Republicans , Liberal = Democrats. People who do not like republicans simply because they're conservative can be considered Far Left Wingers.

What else are they supposed to do? Blame him, no , that would make americans angry at CNN, therefore bad ratings...they wait 6-9 months then continue as usual.

Capitalist Media? Capitalism is not an entity. So please don't blame Capitalism in anyway. Blame the Media, not capitalist media. PBS can also be bias, and they strive on donations, your points don't stand.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>BUSH IS STUPID. And he did not win the popular vote. He only one the electoral votes in Florida because
1)because of creative numbers-making that kicked out a very large number of votes because an outside firm was hired by Jeb to figure out who was a Felon, and actually kicked out anyone with a similar Birthday, SS number, or name to that of a known Felon. In fact, the head of the Florida State Voting commision was told that because she was a felon(she wasn't) she could not vote.
and 2)because a good deal of the adsentee(AKA military) votes were let in when they shouldn't have been(they were not dated right, not sealed right, lacked proper witnises, etc)
And by the way, GORE WOULD HAVE WON IF HE GOT FLORIDA! IDIOT!

</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Bush is not stupid. He's sure as hell smarter than you. You also do not have proof, however, i have a book on my nightstand with plenty of info on Bush and a variety of other things so please don't bring up faulty arguments based on faulty facts.

And check the facts, it was the liberals who trying to discount most votes, which were conservatives, the military votes were argued not applicable because of the democrats, once again, get your facts right.
The liberals were discounting votes not the conservatives. And "idiot" Gore would not have won with the popular vote anyways, a president is elected by the electoral college, not the popular vote, either way if Gore carried the popular vote in Florida he would have still lost. The electoral votes could not be disputed, so Bush won either way.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It does matter how he got in, and he didn't pass well. He got Cs and Ds. And if your father has enough money, even you can get those grades.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Proof please? Your record is pretty bad.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The "liberal" media is only as liberal as the fact that they are all capitalist institutions can allow.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Explain, and once again no need for blaming capitalism, blame men. Also, people think that republicans are rich, its quite the opposite, Democrats are either rich or on welfare or seeking for government aid. You wont see many liberal middle-class families. (they like to keep the money they earn rather than give it away to liberal welfare programs for people who need actual help, not money, most are drug addicts, or are unwilling to work.)

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The last one I remember reading about was Andrew Jackson, and that really made many people angry, too.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Like most early presidents he was a military leader. He had earned the name "Old Hickory". And led a period called the Jacksonian Democracy. Some people were angry with the fact that he ignored John Marshall on his stance with the indians in Florida. Can't remember more than that right now, I'd have to look it up.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Also, I'm sick of hearing how everyone hates Bush. Who gives a rat's ****? The democrats, republicans and greens are all agents of the bourgeiosie. It doesn't matter who is in office, the office is there to keep the working class from rising up against their masters.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Most politicians are the ones who are controlled by the bourgeoisie ( middle class, for those who dont know)
Not, from keeping the from rising up, but in order to solve societies problems, they may not always be good at it, but thats why theyre there.

Also, do those who are supporting communism and such, it brings nothing but pain, if you want to "make the world a better place" how bout actually doing something instead of critizing your leaders? Do you really think YOU know more than everyone else. Don't be naive, you know NOTHING. There is no wisdom in communism. If people really wanted something like a "perfect society" they would get up off the computer and help a neighbor, build homes for the homeless, build a park for children who have nothing, send toys to less fortunate children, give food to the hungry. Communism is FOOLISHNESS. Don't be influenced to believe that it takes leaders, or a government to perfect society. All problems root from the behavior of men, AND ALWAYS HAD SINCE THE FALL OF ADAM! Stop looking at the leaders and look for solutions, look into yourself.

Communism is ignorance. A better society begins with giving up your needs.

Salty · January 2003

allurhivearebelongtous You ever been to cuba? Nobody does anything. If there is a leak in your roof you dont fix it. Nobody fixes anything nobody grows anything. Why? The goverment can take it away in a heart beat and give it to somebody "more deserving." And if a form of goverment cant work in friggin paradise something is wrong. You cant have communism without a central goverment. You will be unorganized and any other country can easily invade. Nobody will know how much of what to make in manufacturing. One of the large reason communism dosent work is the price of information. Its hard to tell if a factory should make x amout of shoes. Somebody high up has to figure it out and set the quotas.

Hussien isnt just a thug hes actually smarter then you think. Hes played presidental amenistrations for years.

Sirus · January 2003

Well, I never called him stupid, i figure he's pretty damn smart, but he is evil, you cant argue that. Anyone with malice can be considered evil.

Nemesis_Zero · January 2003

I'll comment on the posts by Sirus & co later, when I'm back from school (5 hour test, juck). Just a quick clarification on 'Socialism' and 'Communism' in the marxian sense:

First, to Marx, who I'm by the way not agreeing with, there is no difference between economy and politic - the social class owning the means of production creates a government that they see fit to their interests, i.e. to preserve their ownership and to keep the other classes from rising.
In the industrialization, Marx saw a polarisation of the whole society in the class of the proletarians, the workers, and the burgeoises, the few that owned the means of production.
Marx postulated that sooner or later, the workers would not accept the fact that they had sell their own working power to the burgeois anymore and would begin with the Revolution.
In Marx sense, the Revolution was a) international and b) violent, up till now, only one of the two qualifiers was ever met.
During this Revolution, the ownership of the means of production, and thus also the political power, would go into the hands of the proletarians, just like they got into the hands of the burgeoises during the democratic revolutions in the 18th century. This state is called 'Socialism'.
Instead of creating a new system of two classes, the proletarians would however start making the means of production common to all, thus giving the political power to the whole of the people and dissolving all classdifference as well as the need for a ruling power. This quasi-evolutionary step into a new 'communistic paradise' was in Marx opinion to be achieved during the 19th century.

Sirus · January 2003

Ahh...there's the explanation i was looking for. My memory is terrible and i forgot almost all of the Marxist Theories and such. Seriously NZ, thanks for clarifying.

Unfortuneatly, as stated before, it only works in theory, and has not been accomplished because for the most part, its not that rich are evil, they just have more ability and power, which pretty much amplifies their corruptness. As a whole, society is evil, and no one can argue that. And that's the only reason communism doesn't work. And there will never be a solution to that, because men are inherently evil from the day theyre born and care only for themselves.

--edit--BTW, NZ, a 5 hour test! terrible! Where do you live its 10 at night where i am. Im guessing your somewhere in europe. Or australia?

Dezmodium · January 2003

<a href='http://www.takebackthemedia.com/bushnonazi.html' target='_blank'>unrelated to my comments here but interesting</a>

To everybody who thinks that attacking any country will stop terorrist attacks or help to prevent them. You are absurd and so is that Idea. No war

NOBODY WINS A NUCLEAR WAR!

No war. No war. I strongly stand behind that. We go to war, we put money in bad peoples pockets at our expense. We occupy another countries lands, we incite that countries citizens to hate us. It has happened again and again. It incites more hate. We go to war, we kill.

IT IS TOO EASY TO WATCH DEATH FROM A DISTANCE!

Don't think about going to war with IRAQ. Think of going to war against soldiers who are forced by their government to fight. Imagine that every person who dies is dead by your own hand. Imagine that you had to murder each person with a short blade and look them in the eyes as their soul escaped their body. Imagine thousands dying in this war.

IF THIS DOESN'T MAKE YOU SICK THEN SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH YOU. (fact read "On Killing" GREAT BOOK)

It is so easy to say that "I support the war" when you are not the one doing the killing. My father was forced to kill in vietnam. He hated every moment of it and veiwed his foe with the utmost respect. He hated both the leaders who forced these men to kill each other. They didnt want to die. They didnt want to kill. I don't want to do either and I won't have to (physical disability). But more importantly, I don't want to see anybody here have to be put into a war situation.

IT IS A TERRIBLE THING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH.

My father killed many a Vietcong behind an M16 and M60. He often describes to me the rate of which enemies fell under his fire in some situations. And how in one instance he was in a situation where he had to fight a VC with his bare hands and shoved his thumbs into the poors guys eye sockets in the hopes of killing him. Lets just say that it didnt work and he had to watch this 16-18 year old kid bleed to death screeming in front of his eyes. He has killed many poeple in combat situations with a knife. He is permanently affected by this. And listening to these stories I can see the dismay in his eyes. Personally, I would rather not have these sort of first hand experiences under my belt and i would hope that you wouldnt either.

you say that todays war is fought from planes and from a distance. how convenient. That sure does make it very easy to kill. oh and if we bomb a hospital by accident, OOH WELL! its not the same as accidentally gunning down a woman who flees out of a house that was just the refuge of VC's seeking cover from US fire. Its a LOT harder to look into that dying womans eyes and say "I'm sorry".

I'm not trying to play the sympathy card but when it comes to war, thats what we have to think about.

I wish you could look into my fathers eyes as he tells you these stories. It is VERY disturbing. Go to a local VFW and talk to some vets that were in the **** about war. I bet you would be opposed.
<a href='http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_inganamort_010703_conspiracy.html' target='_blank'>Relaed to my comments promoting the idea of government corruption</a>

Sirus · January 2003

...I don't even know what to say to that...it's such crap...i hope they know they're being hypocritical by saying "take back the media" and junk while feeding biased information. So many stupid examples of comparing bush family is like hitler. the both have dogs? Blaming Bush for the stance on 9/11? hitler and bush next to children? they can do better than that.

-edit- I too would like not to have war, but its a necessary evil , as much as i hate it.

Dubers · January 2003

The Iraq Quiz

I ask you a question. Who gave Saddam Hussein the means to build his so called weapons of mass destruction in the first place?

I ask you another. Who supplied Saddam Hussein (other than the soviet union) whith all his millitary hardware?

Third question is. Who was Saddam Hussein an ally of less than 20 years ago?

Fourth question. Who abandoned the the local resistance forces after the gulf war ended which resulted in a lot of their deaths?

The answere to all these questions are coming up right after this message.

IT WAS US!!!!

The brits along with other euro countries and the yanks created this problem and the truth of the matter is our goverments couldnt give a flying **** if we all die in the firey flames of the apocalypse. All they are interesed in is keeping Mr Iraq away from Kuwait (their primary oil intrest in the middle east). Cos remeber what Mr Iraq did when he was **** about losing the war? He set fire to all the oil fields. Firey oil fields = no oil which = Mr Bushes fat wallet becomes thin.

The really sad thing about this war on terror is that it's taken the trade towers to be blown up for the states to pay attention to whats going on and now they are abusing it. Using it as an excuse to secure profit and intrests.

Somthing that REALLY pisses me off about the american goverment is the fact they have been letting american organisations and comapanies fund the IRA for decades. The IRA have been killing bittish citizens for 30 years but did we invade ireland? I think not! What i can't grasp is why america was allowed to go in to afganistan after the taliban had already agreed to hand over osama bin laden if sufficient evidence was produced to prove his guilt. I mean who the **** do they think they are!!! And the UN did nothing!!! They have reduced afganistan to near anarchy by launching a completely unessesary attack on what is effectively one of the poorest nations in the world. Did they find bin laden? No! Have they gotten rid of the terrorist camps? No! They jus moved elsewhere.

By invadin Iraq we are only perpetuating the hatred toward our countries! And we are in for some serious **** because these people really hate us and if it gets any worse it is not going to be pretty.

I'm going to stop now becasu i'ts jus gonna make me angryer and i'll end up typing for days so goodnight!

Dezmodium · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Jan 9 2003, 07:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>...I don't even know what to say to that...it's such crap...i hope they know they're being hypocritical by saying "take back the media" and junk while feeding biased information. So many stupid examples of comparing bush family is like hitler. the both have dogs? Blaming Bush for the stance on 9/11? hitler and bush next to children? they can do better than that.

-edit- I too would like not to have war, but its a necessary evil , as much as i hate it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
you failed to acknoledge the fact that in WW2 and, AND Desert storm and chances are veitnam the bush family made lots of money. they will make money the new war on iraq. just as they are making money from 9/11.

FlatlineUTD · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dezmodium @ Jan 9 2003, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Jan 9 2003, 07:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>...I don't even know what to say to that...it's such crap...i hope they know they're being hypocritical by saying "take back the media" and junk while feeding biased information. So many stupid examples of comparing bush family is like hitler. the both have dogs? Blaming Bush for the stance on 9/11? hitler and bush next to children? they can do better than that.

-edit- I too would like not to have war, but its a necessary evil , as much as i hate it.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
you failed to acknoledge the fact that in WW2 and, AND Desert storm and chances are veitnam the bush family made lots of money. they will make money the new war on iraq. just as they are making money from 9/11.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
How are they making money off of 9/11?

I'm not being sarcastic or mean to stir up a hornet's nest or anything, I just can't see how that's possible, from what I've read. You've got my attention.

Zergling · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jan 9 2003, 11:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>During this Revolution, the ownership of the means of production, and thus also the political power, would go into the hands of the proletarians, just like they got into the hands of the burgeoises during the democratic revolutions in the 18th century. This state is called 'Socialism'.
Instead of creating a new system of two classes, the proletarians would however start making the means of production common to all, thus giving the political power to the whole of the people and dissolving all classdifference as well as the need for a ruling power. This quasi-evolutionary step into a new 'communistic paradise' was in Marx opinion to be achieved during the 19th century.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
So this will probably be my last post in this thread, judging from the course of the discussion...

I wanted to endorse NZ's explanation of socialism as accurate for the most part, and am posting a correction. The expropriation of the bourgeiosie (nationalizing the means of production) does not necessarily mean that the society will be socialistic. In fact, socialism (not to mention communism) has never existed on the face of the earth! Trotsky fully explains this in <u>The Revolution Betrayed</u>, how although the October Revolution was a proletarian revolution, historical circumstances (failure of 1923 revolution in germany, imperialist invasion and civil war, the rise of fascism and WWII, the death of Lenin and the coup by the triumvate) led the USSR down a blind alley into bureaucratic deformation and eventual capitalist restoration. He understood the character of the soviet state to be of a contradictory nature, half-way between capitalism and socialism; either the workers would overthrow the bureacracy, or the bureacracy would overthrow the workers state. This was a response to a series of "new class" theories developed in the confusion of the pre-WWII period. The two major theories being Max Shactman's "bureacratic collectivism" and Tony Cliff's "state capitalism". Both of these were proved wrong by the unfourtunate collapse of the soviet system...

I just realized this is quite irrelevant to the level of discussion in thsi thread. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'>

MayIPostNow · January 2003

Well, I find it strange that a whole bunch of people that put on virtual boots don't seem to see things from a soldiers perspective. I can't blame you, you are civilians, after all. Going to war is scary, you have to leave your loved ones behind, often with many problems, mainly financial, since we are really well paid. Chances are, Saddam will try to kill as many as possible, because he is cornered, and will lose his power. Many of our presidents would do the same in that situation. The President can send 50,000 troops anywhere, anytime for any reason, without it ever being declared a war.

How does the Bush family profit from 9-11? Simple, they get to attack Iraq. So far we have been 40% of the income of Iraq(after the war). And the Iraqis are almost up to thier pre-war production capabilities. If we beat Iraq, we get to put in a puppet government of elected democratic officials for the good of humanity. The Bush family could only profit from that noble effort.

As for you keyboard and mouse commies. There is only one functional communist society on the entire planet, and that utopia is the United States Army. To each his own, to each according to his ability. A truck driver makes as much a Nuclear Weapons Specialist. Every listens to what they should do, they keep in shape, the "elders" listen to the youth and quide them. Crime is minimal. There is no mafia, no drugs*, no rascism*, no rape*, no real objective social problems. The only real problems, poverty and the fact that we will be called upon to murder, are outside influences beyond our control. There are even examples of non-ownership, which is considered to be the highest form of communism. Example- When a soldier is issued something, he is responsible for it, but it does not belong to him. Sure, people will say "It belongs to the government, stupid", however, the government will *never* come and take that machinegun for any reason. No man in a coat will come to reposses it. What he is doing is an example of what is called "Stewardship", the act of accepting responsibility for an object and it's use, but not having the freedom to use the object as recklessly or usefully as you please. Sure, you can buy a gun, then you can stick it in cement for fun. We can't.

For those of you who think war is all push-button, you can't be farther from the truth. While a jet-pilot will drop bombs on targets, it's the Army and Marines who have to hold the ground. Fights in cities or bunkered areas are usually fought man to man, with the assistance of vehicles. A great many soldiers have been desensitized to death and killing, not because of some brainwashing program the Army came up with, but rather, that wonderful media you watch every day. You've probably witnessed 20-30,000 deaths (not including gaming) 10,000 rapes (these are stats i got from high school in 96) and countless other acts of violence, drug abuse, and alcoholism. Your brain will start to think that this is socially normal, or somewhat ok, which it is not. We are also not the robots you make us out to be, Individuality is highly encouraged, as long as it does not interfere with operations. A column of robots is easily killed. I've rambled long enough, and I can't wait to be flamed.

In short, I'm proud to be a communist fighting for your wealthy capalists, because in the end it does technically help America. sorry if this has not been eloquent, I'm really tired.

*These do occur, but only at fractions of the percentages with civilians, after all, most soldiers used to be civilians, so how can we all be perfect?

Gargamel · January 2003

Interesting replies Guys <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wow.gif'>

Well, I dont care if it is Bush or Gore or Clinton or whatever. Nowadays it doesnt matter much... they are all puppets. And Jesus Christ was a Communist. A REAL one, not like the worlds "Communist" States.

The problem is the War has started already, the Media bomb us with sh*t and a lots of innocent people will pay for it. Not Saddam, not Bush, but those poor people who aint more different than us.

It is bad to say someone supports a war. Wars are made for money. And money is made from oil or whatever resources. Uzbekistan for example has Natural Gas from the Kaspian Sea.

The US must stop saying "If you re not with us you re against us" and "My Enemys Enemy is my Friend".
First you help(no you dont help, u USE him) Osama to fight your Enemy Russia, then you bomb him.
First you help(no you dont help, u USE him) Saddam to fight your Enemy Iran, then you turn against him.
That is called BETRAYAL.
Look at Afganistan now. Has it ended up good? No. Only Kabul is "secured", everything else in Chaos over the Warlords like how-much years ago.
Look at Iraq in the future. Will it be the land of democracy, free people and with the values of "Freedom"?
I dont think so.
And as the Northern Aliance was used as Cannonfodder against the Taliban, now, the Kurdish people will be used as Cannonfodder against Saddam, as Saddam was used as Cannonfodder against Iran,...
Well, its the old wise practice: TURN EVERYONE AGAINST EACHOTHER. THEN YOU CAN RULE OVER THEM.
The US doesnt wanna see thousands of plasticbags head home like in Vietnam. So what they re going to do is BOMB everything. Why risk your fellow Marines go conduct Urban Warfare and have Casualties? Just release the bombs, collateral damage IS accidental, but well, if it happens (maybe most of the time) it wont be Americans that get ripped apart anyway!
And after all, its all for a good cause! We will get that oil we western Countries need so bad. And even you and me will have to pay 50cent less when we fill up our Cars! And Mobil, Exxon and whatever Company will be profitable in the millions. They have already discussed who will eat which part of the cake. I dont think anyone will win from a War and the Wars to come other than those dishonoured companies that produce "Energy" and weapons. Its all about the economy.

And so, we agree the War is good. So , how to start one? I mean, the oil is there, but we need a sensible excuse for the masses of thinking people. Hmm... this will be interesting in the next few weeks... (war will officialy start near february, if not some God intervenes, we already got stuck till now, we wanted to start november last year).
Well UN resolutions! I love UN Resolutions! Those for example who say about a Palestinian State, ehm, or the one who says no more nuclear powers except the already nuclear ones... well pakistan, our ally, or Israel, our ally, or Saddam... hey wait hes not a friend anymore. Hmm, ok thats it!
WoMD! Yeah, ok Korea, later Korea, we need oil first.
The most amusing thing to cry about is what will be this excuse to go to war with Iraq.
No proof from inspections. So someones gotta think one!

I hate all this <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'>
And whatever you say, remember, other than us simple civilians, NOONE GIVES A SH*T <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='confused.gif'>

God help us all...

<a href='http://www.markfiore.com' target='_blank'>Cool political Cartoons if you know more please tell me!</a>

littlewild · January 2003

It is all about oil.

MayIPostNow · January 2003

It's all about power.

AllUrHiveRblong2us · January 2003

I am homestly mystified by some of the reactions here. How can any sensible person think these things.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Subjective comments based on feelings toward war/bush/capitalism/and other things, rather than actual politics involving war. Apparently im right too.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
That's wonderfully creative, but doesn't answer my uestion.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bush is not a military strategist , the secretary of war takes care of that along with the cabinet, he makes suggestions and makes his input, It is the military strategist who pretty much control what happens. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
And this cabinet you speak of, they are a non-partisan body freely elected by the general populus, and would therefore have no reason to do what he said, right? NO! Bush appointed them, they work for him. They do what he wants them to.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What happens in this world is the responsibility of all who live in it. If I draw a line within your home and call it "myland" and kill some people in there does it not matter to you? Your basing your opinion on distance between Iraq and the US. Unlike Gravity morales do not weaken over distance, but apparently we can make an exception for you.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Well that's a might pretty lookin speach, but it don't work. Apparently at this point our friend here has forgoton about a little thing called "Governments" which are run by "politics" and politics is meant to concern these little thing called "states", which are contained inside "boundaries". Am i ringing any bells?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why? He was elected by the electoral college. You have made no actual points to why he should "lose all power" , I sincerely doubt that you have followed the news around Bush, the only hotspots for Bush right now is his position on the death penalty and the war. I'm sure CNN or Fox News would love to hear your reasoning.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
He was elected by the electoral college, that fact is not in dispute, but should he have been? NO! He stole this friggin election! That is fact. I got the math to back it up. You wanna see it? Well I'm to lazy to write it, so to bad.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I don't think you even read point 5.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
O, but I did. And I've also read the saying of this little guy called "Marx" and his buddy "Engles". They talked about socialism a lot, and their ideas on what it is are accepted even by capitalists. And they often talked about this thing called "Bourgeoisie Soclialism" Which is what most of teh Western World is inside of right now. Except for a breif period in the 40s when a lot of Europe was taken along for a ride with German Socialism, it's been this way since the friggin 30s, once again, I'm gonna ask if the New Deal rings anyone's bells. C'mon? Anyone?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>First, I didn't say he'd make a better life for you. How bout you give your life to liberate a country while a laugh at you for your sacrifice. There are more important things then you and what you feel. God knows that they have more honor and morals then some person playing a video game who somehow has no shame and accuses them of dying needlessly.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
O BOY! Now comes the "God likes me more". I love it when people have to revert to this kind of argument. Hi-frikkin-larious. God knows they have more honor huh? Wait a minute, I seem to remeber god saying something about that somewhere...O YEAH! "THOU SHALT NOT KILL"! Am I getting through on that end? And even if god is taken out of the equation, how does a military man have more honor than me? The average infantryman is no longer in any risk, and kills his enemies from afar! We don't fight our battles anymore. We get the locals to do all the grunt work, and we help out with a few well-placed missile strikes. War is no longer the self-sacrifice business. Its now the business of pressing a button. How is that honorable?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Communism has never survived without a dictator, it cannot happen. Someone said it earlier, man is inherently greedy ( along with selfish and evil. ) Also, I'd like to see your history degree, Communism doesn't need a revolution to start, that's false. Communism needs to be religiously followed with blind faith because it doesn't work, I'm sorry you didnt understand me, only those who has faith for the "cause" will ever believe in communism , because it doesn't work, and never will.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Communism has never survived at all! It has never even hapened yet! O wait, looks like someone else already explained this.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I'm sure you have alot to base this hatred on. Once again, what do you have against the presidents post-WW2?

Conservatives = Republicans , Liberal = Democrats. People who do not like republicans simply because they're conservative can be considered Far Left Wingers.

What else are they supposed to do? Blame him, no , that would make americans angry at CNN, therefore bad ratings...they wait 6-9 months then continue as usual.

Capitalist Media? Capitalism is not an entity. So please don't blame Capitalism in anyway. Blame the Media, not capitalist media. PBS can also be bias, and they strive on donations, your points don't stand.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Democrats=Liberals? Excuse me while I urinate myself laughing. Democrats havn't been Liberal for a long time. And Clinton was the god of these "Republocrats". Democrats don't vote liberal, don't act liberal, and lie whenever they say liberal things. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Exactly! They have to go with public opinion, because they are a capitalist institution, and are in teh biz to make money! No one has ever thought to himself "I think I'll go and make a news network just for the sake of destroying the political carreers of the conservatives" because you can't make any money doing that.
Capitalism is not an entity, but capitalists are.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Bush is not stupid. He's sure as hell smarter than you. You also do not have proof, however, i have a book on my nightstand with plenty of info on Bush and a variety of other things so please don't bring up faulty arguments based on faulty facts.

And check the facts, it was the liberals who trying to discount most votes, which were conservatives, the military votes were argued not applicable because of the democrats, once again, get your facts right.
The liberals were discounting votes not the conservatives. And "idiot" Gore would not have won with the popular vote anyways, a president is elected by the electoral college, not the popular vote, either way if Gore carried the popular vote in Florida he would have still lost. The electoral votes could not be disputed, so Bush won either way.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I say he's stupid, whatcha gonna do about it? I'll beet him in a game of Boggle anyday! (and by the way, anyone who thinks they can go up against the people's misconseptions of the Clinton administration and win[I never said I could win] is an idiot, that is, of course, refering to the whole "Arsenic" phiasco.)
I DID CHECK MY FACTS!!!! Why don't you check yours, cuz I would certsainly like to know where you "found out" that the liberals tried to discount more votes in that election. Which votes? O yeah, the Absentees that were elegall anyway. Like I said before, I will whip out the math! just try me!

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Proof please? Your record is pretty bad.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I didn't know common knowledge needed proof these days.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>allurhivearebelongtous You ever been to cuba? Nobody does anything. If there is a leak in your roof you dont fix it. Nobody fixes anything nobody grows anything. Why? The goverment can take it away in a heart beat and give it to somebody "more deserving." And if a form of goverment cant work in friggin paradise something is wrong. You cant have communism without a central goverment. You will be unorganized and any other country can easily invade. Nobody will know how much of what to make in manufacturing. One of the large reason communism dosent work is the price of information. Its hard to tell if a factory should make x amout of shoes. Somebody high up has to figure it out and set the quotas.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If nobody does anything, then why is the nation a producer again? Because it certainly wasn't before Castro took power. It was a big Ganster shelter back in those days.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In fact, socialism (not to mention communism) has never existed on the face of the earth!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Then what, praytell, do you call Germany in the 30s/40s?(You should be calling it "German Socialism", just so you know)

This Sirus kid keeps saying that people are inherantly evil, and that's why Communism doesn't work. No! That's why dictatorships don't work. A true communistic gov. would be run by a very larg amount of people, all of them elected. This turns selfishness into a good thing! Now, you elect the person who you think can make you/your country richer, and that person has to make decisions to plees you, or else he wont get elected again. Thus, the will of the people is enforced, and the will of "the people" is that "the people" get richer! Everyone wins.

Spooge · January 2003

This is great! I'm sure Nem was waiting for me to jump in here and WHAM! A big hit from the OTHER side. hehe

I'm staying out of this for now since Conservatism has had little involvment here and my thoughts have been posted in the past.

I'll have fun on the sidelines <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Nemesis_Zero · January 2003

...
This isn't one discussion, this is three and a half discussions at the same time. Needless to say that I'll tell everyone who's too tired to run my opinion about all of them.

<b>Zergling:</b>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The expropriation of the bourgeiosie (nationalizing the means of production) does not necessarily mean that the society will be socialistic. In fact, socialism (not to mention communism) has never existed on the face of the earth!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I agree that the <i>nationalization</i> of the means of production is not to be equalled with socialism. As I said before, Marx believed the Revolution to be a strictly international process, taking place at all nations at the same time and leading to that evolutionary leap that he believed to be communism.
Later, Lenin stated that it was possible for the Revolution to start in a single country (which he believed happened in Russia) and then spread.
I have not yet read Trotzki, but would have to disagree with the notion that the October Revolution was a proletarian revolution in the classical sense - it was clearly staged by Lenin and the Bolschewiki, and thus not a spontaneous rising of the working class as Marx would've expected it.
I know that Lenin intruduced the concept of 'professional revolutionaries' but have to say that this bears the seed of the bureaucratic downfall in it.

<b>AllUrHives:</b>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Then what, praytell, do you call Germany in the 30s/40s?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Fascist.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>This Sirus kid keeps saying that people are inherantly evil, and that's why Communism doesn't work.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

First, I'd really prefer not to edit posts in a political discussion, but if you're going to flame people, I will.

Second, I'm sorry, but if you say you're following Marx' ideals, you <i>are</i> acknowledging that he assumed all humanity to be inherently good, and that he believed anything bad came from the concept of personal property.

Also, and I'm still sorry, but you have to admit that many of your points, of some I agree with, are not proved in the post, which makes discussions rather difficult.

<b>Dez:</b>

While I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said in your posts, I strongly resent the first link you posted.
Nazi comparisions just hurt your own arguments.

<b>Sirus:</b>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>1st. There is very little actual knowledge of politics in this topic</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Please re-read what I said about flames in polictical discussions.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>2nd. Congress decides if we go to war. DON'T BLAME BUSH!!!!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

While it is formally true tat the Congress has the last word, I blame Bush for bringing a war on the debate schedules.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>3rd. The US Government is the world's Police, and most of the time, for good reason!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I feel that I don't have the space to properly answer to this remark.
I do believe that there are worse applicants for the job of the 'world police', but to be honest, I don't believe that the position can be filled by <i>any</i> state.
A police force has to be independent in so far that it doesn't have personal involvment in the affairs it's got to solve - that's why a womans husband will never lead the research on her murder.
As a country with its own economical, political, social, and religious interests, the US can never be uninvolved. Even if Bush started out with completely just reasons, and I highly have to doubt that, sooner or later, he'd <i>have</i> to take an interest in the Iraqs oil, if he didn't, he wouldn't pay attention to the US economys needs. By this, however, he stops being a neutral force and starts acting in his own interests, and thus can't really fill the position of a 'policeman' anymore.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>4th. Saddam is an evil person, he deserves to lose all dictorial power.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Nobody in here doubts that Saddam is the bad boy. What we ask is whether Bush is the good guy.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>5th.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Already answered.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>6th. Those who are US citizens SHOULD ALWAYS support their country in times of war, support the soldiers who are fighting, support the president, it's sad to think that people with a 4 years olds knowledge of politics are critizing the president and the war, if you don't believe in war BELIEVE THIS , Soldiers are dying so that a select few of people can live a better life, if you can't support the government/president/soldiers during war you deserve to be kicked out of the country.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

While reading my reply, keep in mind that I <i>do not</i> intend to equal Bush with Hitler, it's just the example I know the best:
During World War 2, some people in Germany stood up against that war, because they believed it to be wrong. I know that I wouldn't have been one of them - because I know that the believes I would've been brought up with would've forced me to believe in just what you believe: That there is a greater whole that's your country, your people, and that standing up against this greater whole in times of utter despair is nothing short of betrayal.
I wasn't brought up with that believe. I was brought up with the believe that unless you can be absolutely, 100%, doubtlessly sure you are right, and face it, none of us can say that of himself, you should accept differing opinions, as long as they don't aim to harm you or others directely. If you stand up against a war, you're following one of the oldest and proudest traditions the United States call their own - freedom of speech.

Now, for the whole Bush discussion.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Here's a bomb for you who dont really know the government well, not democracy US is republic</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Then ask yourself whether you are the right ones to bring democracy to the world. The matter of fact is, and you can't change anything about it, that roughly 52% of the voters decided for Gore, and that there were some <i>very</i> fishy things happening on election night (I'm thinking of blacks being openly harassed on their way to the voting booth). Democratically, he <i>won</i>. That doesn't mean I believe he'd have been the right president - in my opinion, Gore is a hypercapitalist jerk.

The whole Bush being intelligent/stupid discussion is pointless.
Smart, dumb, he's the guy at the red switch.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>--edit--BTW, NZ, a 5 hour test! terrible! Where do you live its 10 at night where i am. Im guessing your somewhere in europe. Or australia?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I'm living in Germany, and that's what that test was about - Berlin Alexanderplatz by Alfred Döblin. The funny thing is, I could've written for two more hours <img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'>

<b>MayIPostNow:</b>

I really don't know what to say. While I can't share your feelings towards the army, I accept and respect your opinion. Good luck.

<b>QueddyBabs:</b>

I agree that both Göring and Himmler deserve a special place in hell, but they were nonetheless not the ones creating a paradigm that declared hate as holy principle of the world. They did the most horrible deeds, but they were only capable of that because Hitler gave them the possibilities.

Also, if you want to be nitpicky, the first concentration camps were the original indian reservations because they were the first areas that had been designated to bring death to a whole culture (the 'only a dead Indian is a good Indian' cliché was taken literally at that time), but only the KZs (note that I'm using the German abbreviation) managed to industrialize that process.

There are many more interesting points in this topic, but quite honestly, my fingers are getting numb.

MayIPostNow · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>AllUrHiveRBelong2Us
QUOTE
First, I didn't say he'd make a better life for you. How bout you give your life to liberate a country while a laugh at you for your sacrifice. There are more important things then you and what you feel. God knows that they have more honor and morals then some person playing a video game who somehow has no shame and accuses them of dying needlessly.

O BOY! Now comes the "God likes me more". I love it when people have to revert to this kind of argument. Hi-frikkin-larious. God knows they have more honor huh? Wait a minute, I seem to remeber god saying something about that somewhere...O YEAH! "THOU SHALT NOT KILL"! Am I getting through on that end? And even if god is taken out of the equation, how does a military man have more honor than me? The average infantryman is no longer in any risk, and kills his enemies from afar! We don't fight our battles anymore. We get the locals to do all the grunt work, and we help out with a few well-placed missile strikes. War is no longer the self-sacrifice business. Its now the business of pressing a button. How is that honorable?
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

It seems you failed to read my post. Infantry that press buttons? War is no video game. You pull triggers, you kill, you die. The only reason that we took so few casulties in Desert Storm is because Saddam Hussein is a tactical and strategic idiot. He forced ill equipped draftees to go fight a monster, and if those people retreated, he had monsters of his own that would kill cowards on sight. Most of the Iraqi army found out that if they just surrendered, they'd actually get shelter and food! So the Iraqis surrendered in droves to the Americans, where their lives were actually better. No honor? This is not the Vietnam military filled with grunts doped up on God-knows-what. We are highly trained, we have morals, we have Honor. What you fail to realize, is that a servicemember is a true second class citizen. We do not have freedom of speech, we do not have the right to assemble, we do not have the right to speak out against the government, we do not have the right to quit, hell, if we are single servicemembers living on base, we dont have the right to bear arms. So the next time you crawl up on the honor pony, make sure you know how good you have it, and why you do. And yet we press on and serve, not for money, not for honor, but for the thankful and thankless alike in hopes that their freedom of choice is preserved, and with luck, our lives.

It is not the poet who gave freedom of speech, it is the soldier.

Mercior · January 2003

Right well I could write you a 10 page essay on this subject but I'm going to keep it short.

Firstly, America is not going to start conscripting civilians into the army to fight iraq - America has an army of sufficient size to deal with them, which kind of ruins your whole "killing is horrible" point because you don't join the army expecting not to kill somebody.

As for Iraq, anybody with even the most basic knowledge of history can see that Iraq have almost <b>exactly</b> followed the same path germany followed before world war 2 broke out. What America is doing, is using previous knowledge of what happens in these situations and putting a stop to it before it does break out into a world war. Its one of the most intelligent political descisions I've seen in a long time and its just a shame that such a brilliant descision is getting so much public rejection just because the majority of people who are protesting against the war are plain stupid and do not understand the reasons behind america declaring a war.

The fact is, these eastern countries hate the western world with a passion because they have been brought up to hate us - we aren't going to change that, but what we can do is not let them get powerful enough do actually do anything about their hatred. At the end of the day, fighting a fairly easy war against Iraq and removing Saddam from power is going to be a lot better than letting him grow more powerful, letting him obtain more powerful weapons, letting him find more psychopathic eastern nutcases and then launching a full on attack against the western world which he has made quite clear he would do.

MayIPostNow · January 2003

Thank you, Mercior. I completely forgot that Saddam's goal was to create a "United Arabia". Sort of how Hitler wanted all German descended territories to belong to Germany. He too, has an eye for killing the jews..

Nemesis_Zero · January 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mercior @ Jan 10 2003, 03:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>As for Iraq, anybody with even the most basic knowledge of history can see that Iraq have almost <b>exactly</b> followed the same path germany followed before world war 2 broke out. What America is doing, is using previous knowledge of what happens in these situations and putting a stop to it before it does break out into a world war. Its one of the most intelligent political descisions I've seen in a long time and its just a shame that such a brilliant descision is getting so much public rejection just because the majority of people who are protesting against the war are plain stupid and do not understand the reasons behind america declaring a war.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Hussein did <i>not</i> acquire any land during the last ten years - other than Hitler, who managed to bargain over Austria and big parts of the Czech Republic, not to mention the parts of Poland with Sudet majorities.

Hussein did <i>not</i> increase his military over the extents allowed to him, there are <i>no</i> acceptable proves for him acquiring weaponry he isn't allowed to acquire - ask Mr.Blix for further details. Hitler managed to increase his armies size contrary to the Contract of Versailles.

Hussein has <i>not</i> the financial backing to start a war - Hitler had.

Hussein <i>didn't</i> do aggressive war propaganda for the last ten years. Hitler did.

As said before, trying to compare Hussein to the Nazis is somewhat ridiculous.

As for your remark about 'the eastern world' hating 'the western world', please read my first post in this thread.

[edit]Also, Husseins antisemitism is rather 'mild' compared to the deep hate Hitler herded. I've got the impression that Saddam uses the antisemitism as a means of binding the fundamentalist movements of his country - which are potentially his biggest threat - at him.[/edit]

Mercior · January 2003

Germany was given the treaty of versailles, Iraq was given a treaty (The name of which I cannot recall). Iraq has now broken <i>every single term</i> that was on the treaty and refused for over a month to let weapon inspectors into the country. Is this not a bit suspicious?

What is your explanation for Iraq refusing to have a weapons inspection, then when realising that they were about to have their country flattened, did allow some inspectors in but blatantly delayed them for over a month & failed to grant them access to several of the places which they most wanted to inspect?

I really dont get why people stand up for this nation who hate the western world with a passion, are lead by a psychopath, and are clearly hiding weapons from us?! If they wanted to get along with us then they would have abided to the terms of their treaty & would act in a friendly manner towards us. The fact is, they don't and they clearly are intending to cause trouble.

Use some common sense and realise that stopping them early is infact, a fantastic idea.

Upcomming War In Iraq

Comments