0
alpha

Patience with my neighbours, Mr Bush

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

I politely disagree with you. I thought it was a very apt metaphor for the situation as it is TODAY. Now, if President Bush comes clean and tells us the real reason for all this, or shows some credible evidence, that will be different.



Your neighbor doesn't want to kill you with VX gas. You neighbor hasn't murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people.



It is a metaphor, it doesn't have to be literally accurate, any more than the "desktop" on my PC has to be made of wood. Besides, I have seen no evidence that anyone wants to murder me with VX gas. I haven't even bought a roll of duct tape.:S As for murdering his own people - well, so have hundreds of other despots that we ignore (and sometimes support, remember Pinochet in Chile, the Shah in Iran, Galtieri in Argentina...).
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a metaphor, it doesn't have to be literally accurate, any more than the "desktop" on my PC has to be made of wood. Besides, I have seen no evidence that anyone wants to murder me with VX gas. I haven't even bought a roll of duct tape.:S As for murdering his own people - well, so have hundreds of other despots that we ignore (and sometimes support, remember Pinochet in Chile, the Shah in Iran, Galtieri in Argentina...).



Agreed that we have supported "Allies" of dubious character, so what do you suggest? That we offer no aid or interaction till we see eye to eye with them on all issues? We have supported, and nurtured societies around the globe...some noble, some not so. Again the flavor of American intervention has for the most part been one of sharing, not stealing. Yes, again I admit we have ruffled feathers, and sometimes grown bullies. Those were unfortunate, and we usually sought to undo the mess. And although some see self interest in every action, I believe there is no wrong in helping a society to grow in a way that is win-win. But then, I still have more trust in my own country and her intentions than any other. I suspect that is why you and I seem to be on opposite side of this discussion.

And if the propoganda er.. story doesn't imitate the current situation (it doesn't, there is evidence of Iraq's intention to harm, despite your claims to the contrary), then it is nothing more than a cheap lie to tarnish the administration. If you think the evidence is inadequate or not sufficient to act on, say so. That is a difference of opinion that should rightly be debated, but in is not truthful to say there is no evidence. Not even our valiant French allies make that claim.

Russ

Generally, it is your choice; will your life serve as an example... or a warning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ya know, you would think that one who hasn't even been a member for 1 MONTH would choose to discuss skydiving issues to start with. But no, all you have brought up is political issues since you joined this website's forums. I do not understand your kind of logic and approach for such a greenie.

It is also polite to at least completely fill out your profile so we have a better understanding of who you are and where you are coming from. Are you even a skydiver? How many jumps do you have? What do you fly?

I assume that you get the feeling that most that responded DO NOT agree with you, and MOST don't even think that your parody is in any way an accurate (in the least) description of what is going on in our world.

I hope that you can show better judgement on how you respond to others (considering that you just arrived at this site).

I for one, think that the only thing beautiful here is your ignorance in the matter on which you (pathetically) debate. The fact that you believe that the parody is in any way comparable to the UN/IRAQ dilemma only proves my point further.

P.S. Just a quick question.....why the hell are you here?

EDIT:
I have just read your other posts since you have joined here. All I can say is wow, you have the amazing ability to cut and paste. Congratulations.

And as far as your "joke" on the fact that there will probably be friendly fire casualties, and I quote
"Yeah half a dozen warplanes lost to malfunctions, a couple dozen soldiers (preferably canadians or brits :)) lost to friendly fire… we don’t have much to loose." makes me sick. How the FUCK IS THAT FUNNY MR. HAPPY FACE?

Jesus Christ, you are really a piece of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Agreed that we have supported "Allies" of dubious character, so what do you suggest?


How about stop getting new ones?

This is a bit besides the topic of the thread... but anyway... based of past conflicts this is what I think is going to happen.

1. In order to save the life of its soldiers and make victory faster/easier/possible, america ally themselves with various groups, ethnical minorities, fundametalist tribes etc... in fact anyone who has the common enemy.

2. Victory. Civilians greet US/NATO/coalition soldiers as heroes. New regime installed. US military rent land for bases for 99 years. The russian mafia already has its brothels in place and can't wait to profit from the peace(keeping).

3. The "allies" are unhappy with peace. What they really wanted was victory over their enemies. They continue to smuggle drugs and blow up stuff, this time with american weapons and training, causing embarrassment for everyone involved.

Move to 1
---
PCSS #10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is a bit besides the topic of the thread... but anyway...



I'll compete with you on that!

That is one cranky kitty!!! (avatar)

Ok. Sorry, please continue *suz sits back and quietly sips her coffee, reading posts*


Don't bother me, I'm living happily ever after

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Now we're talking... So you are saying that the article makes logical sense except that logic does not apply to countries.



I didn't say that. What I said was that comparing a neighborhood's socialogical environment to foreign affairs is not a valid comparison. It's like comparing a potato to a coconut. The rest of your post isn't a level comparison either.
So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patience with Mr. Hussein
Michele Lesser
Sunday, February 16, 2003
(Based on "Patience with my neighbours, Mr Bush"
Terry Jones
Sunday January 26, 2003
The Observer)

I'm really excited by Saddam Hussein's latest coup, the U2 overflights? You know, those pesky little airplanes which he keeps looking at through the radar? I believe he's running out of patience with the UN. He is making sure that there is no way the flights can work.

For some time now I've been really concerned with Mr Hussein. He rules a country that has, for years, killed those he disagrees with. He gives them queer looks, you know. If it's him. I hear he has a lot of body doubles. So maybe they're all giving each other queer looks. I'm sure Mr. Hussein is planning something nasty to his neighbor, Mr. Israel. I mean, just a little while ago, Mr. Hussein lobbed lots of missiles into Mr. Israel's backyard, and killed a lot of them. And that Mr. Aziz guy? You know, Mr. Hussein's best friend? They always hang out together? Yeah, him. Mr. Aziz recently gave a jewish correspondent the boot - ignored his question during kindergarten's show and tell after a tour of the Vatican. And gave the correspondent a queer look, too. I think something's wrong. I'm sure they've got something really nasty planned for Israel. But I don't know.

As for Mr. Hussein, don't ask me how I know. I am a sheeple, I guess. I don't listen and watch and learn from diverse sources. No-one has "shown me the money" just yet...but I know. I guess I'm psychic or something. But I do know this: Mr. Hussein has poison gas. Like that XV stuff. Or was it VX? And I know that he pays - yes, pays!!!- people to blow themselves up. Or at least that's what I've heard. From good sources. Of course, those sources are dead now, having blown themselves up, so I really don't know. I'm guessing, I guess. While I resort to leafletting the neighborhood, Mr. Hussein just bombs it and gases it. That way, there's no-one alive to read my diplomatic attempts at helping them.

Some of my friends came over to dinner the other day. We got to talking. 16 of them liked what I had to say, but three of them thought I was wonky. They say that yes, they know that Mr. Hussein has this gas, and that he's killed many hundreds of thousands of people. But they want to see the money, honey, before they'll play. They need to see more evidence before they'll think about taking action to save lives. I dunno. These same guys were at my house 4 months ago, and agreed - Mr. Hussein was dangerous. But now they're telling a different tale. I guess I need more patience, because I am fast running out of it.

These friends of mine come up with endless rambling about the horridness of war, and don't listen when I speak of the horridness of mass murder from VX gas. They decry the loss of their security, and prevent me from taking any action which will allow me security. I mean, if Mr. Hussein is gonna throw bombs at his neighbor Mr. Israel, what's to stop him from throwing some at me? Or at my other neighbors? I guess I should build a higher fence or something. After all, I can only protect myself. Right? Oh, hey, wait a minute. I could maybe hug him, and tell him it's o.k., we all lie now and again, I forgive you. Now go and hide your toys before we come looking for them. Yeah, I can do that.

And let's face it - Mr. Hussein's carefully crafted shellgame is a good one. It means he can keep winning. I remember when I was a little tyke on the streets of New York, and this really fast talking man kept playing this game with me. He had this velvet covered table and there were these cute yellow cups on it. Under one of those cups was a cotton ball - like the kind clowns have on their shirts? Bright blue. I'd put down a quarter, and he'd talk really fast and move his hands around, and even though I knew I'd watched the right one, even though I knew which cup the blue ball was under, when he lifted it up, there was no ball. I put down quarter after quarter, twelve times I did this. Each time I knew I'd gotten it this time...each time, I knew! And each time I was wrong. 12 times! Even as a child I knew I was being toyed with, played with. I learned. And now, I suspect Mr. Hussein is doing a big shell game. And even though I watch - carefully, quietly, focussed and concentrated, I still haven't found the ball. But I know it's there. And so does he. So does he.

Mr. Hussein makes it clear that all he needs to do is to tell everyone he's really a nice guy, and that he has no weapons of mass destruction. After all, no-one can prove that he has them, so he can't have them, right? Oh wait, will he get in trouble for lying, or is it one of his body doubles saying that? I'm not sure. But I guess I should believe him. After all, he only bombed his neighbors, invaded his other neighbors, and killed his own people. I guess I should trust him. After all, he hasn't done anything really mean to me yet, has he? No-one else matters, only me.

Mr. Hussein's long term aim is to make the middle east a safer, kinder, gentler place, isn't it? He plans on doing this magically, I guess, and then, looking like a sterner version of Mr. Rogers, he will sit on his front porch, in a hand knitted sweater and rock the days away, knowing he did right by the world, knowing he is loved and admired by all the neighbors of those people he killed. After all, they needed killing, right? Hey, I should get out my knitting needles and start it right away - peace is sure to break out immediately, and I couldn't bear to think of him sitting on the porch sweaterless. He's such a nice man, after all.

Perhaps Mr Hussein's goal is to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Christian fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Christians might convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Christians? But what about the Jews? He and Mr. Israel have had an on-going feud for a while now. Or maybe he should look to the Kurds? And you can't forget those traitorous Turks, either. And lord-a-mercy, he can't forget the Americans and Brits, especially those rednecked kinds. I should write a list for him so he won't forget anybody. That way, he can have everything he wants, and I can feel good because I've done a small part in helping him murder millions. There are millions of other people in the world who he doesn't like and who - quite frankly - look at him in odd ways. No one will be really safe until he's wiped them all out. Really. This way, I can be a help rather than a hindrance. I can give him everything he wants, so he can keep being happy and murder whomever he chooses. After all, no-one else matters, right?

Right?


~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems like you totally missed the point Mr Jose. It was supposed to be sarcastic/ironic not funny! Do I have to explain why? The reason why we are not thinking too much about this war is because we don't have much to loose. Combine overwhelming military superiority with an enemy that's been softened up plenty with years of sanctions. Compare that to N. Korea that is probably sitting on nukes. As far as the forum goes.. it is TalkBack... and we are all adults who can hold our own here so chill out. Or go back investigate some more! Here is some help... should keep you busy(29/skydiver/2137/stiletto120/LEFT;)).

As for Mr Russ's argument. I'd say bravo with a few exceptions. True Im not old enough to have any personal experience with nam but I do have plenty first hand experiences and not the kind you get watching desert storm on CNN. 911 was uncalled for and we did not deserve it. But the people that brought it on us were in past funded by us. We poured billions into their cause for our national interest in 80's. And once we achieved the ends we left. The horrible terrorist, environmental rapist, WMD possessing regime was still the same when we supported and funded them against the Iranis. In any case, they are no bigger a threat than N Korans right now. And the religious point you took is very dangerous. There is no such thing in Islam... so whatever someone told you is quoted out of context. Some cave dwelling moronic psychopaths narrow interpretation of religion not withstanding. KKK isn't exactly a representative of Christianity neither is nazism. Saddam and binLaden were an unintended consequence of our actions. What worries me are the unintended consequences of what we have set ourselves to do now.

In the end... I hope nobody took anything personally here. Didn't mean any disrespect to anyone. Peace!

--signoff--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
***What part of MASS MURDERER of his own people don't you believe? (Germany and France seem to believe it)... What part of SUPPORTER OF TERRORISM (rewarding suicide bomber families) don't you believe? IF you're a supporter of "green" views, what part of ENVIRONMENTAL RAPIST (Desecration via burning of Kuwait oil fields) don't you believe? What part of BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS POSSESSION (Germany and France believe Iraq DID possess them) ***

"They" (the left) never want to talk facts, just feelings. Iraq has had enouph time. I say it's time to liberate Iraq and take away the what they should have destroyed years ago. For the French and Germans it is about oil and money. And maybe while we're at it time to rethink our membership in Nato and the UN. We gain nothing by being a member that I can see. Also perhaps it's time to rethink our aid to the thankless governments that get and use our hard earned tax money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote




And if the propoganda er.. story doesn't imitate the current situation (it doesn't, there is evidence of Iraq's intention to harm, despite your claims to the contrary), then it is nothing more than a cheap lie to tarnish the administration. If you think the evidence is inadequate or not sufficient to act on, say so. That is a difference of opinion that should rightly be debated, but in is not truthful to say there is no evidence. Not even our valiant French allies make that claim.



I have not seen any evidence presented (or claimed to be presented) that Iraq intends to make an unprovoked attack the US with VX nerve gas. Maybe I missed it, if so, please direct me to a credible source.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

911 was uncalled for and we did not deserve it. But the people that brought it on us were in past funded by us. We poured billions into their cause for our national interest in 80's.



Better get your facts straight...



So, did I understand this the wrong way or are you actually saying the US did not fund the mujahideen and their leader, Osama bin Laden (who was in that time called a freedom fighter), in their battle against the Soviet army?
I do agree that someone needs to get their facts straight:S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And the religious point you took is very dangerous. There is no such thing in Islam... so whatever someone told you is quoted out of context. Some cave dwelling moronic psychopaths narrow interpretation of religion not withstanding.

--signoff--



If you are going to argue the fact, I suggest you first read the Koran! The Koran specifcally instructs followers of Islam to kill all who will not turn to ISLAM! I didn't say it, Mohammed did. It is in the Koran, so are you saying the Koran is not what Islam is based on? The fact that our leaders say Islam is a religion of peace is certainly one of the things I DO Not believe. Islam is anything but a religion of peace!

That doesn't mean many Muslims are not peace loving, but it doesn't change what the founder of Islam wrote! And it certainly doesn't appear that middle east Muslims are at odds with my interpretations. If you wish to understand your enemies, study their beliefs and motivations. As Mohammeds political power increased, his message changed. When he started, he clearly was wooing early Christians and even Jews, as indicated in 2 Serah (chapter). By 5 Serah, he was advocating violence against all other religions, to the point of saying Allah demanded it!

I told you not to take my word for it, but to read it yourself. ...sigh

Russ

Generally, it is your choice; will your life serve as an example... or a warning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ross; I looked through my copy of the Kuran, but couldn't find what you describe. There are verses in which Allah is telling Moses to attack and claim the Holy land and there are numerous mentions of the suffering that awaits 'nonbelievers' in the afterlife, but explicit instructions for killing non-muslims are nowhere to be found. Can you tell me which verse of Surah 5 did you find them in, so I can look again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So, did I understand this the wrong way or are you actually saying the US did not fund the mujahideen and their leader, Osama bin Laden (who was in that time called a freedom fighter), in their battle against the Soviet army?
I do agree that someone needs to get their facts straight



The US once paid Timothy McVeigh a bi-monthly paycheck from your tax dollars. At the time, under those circumstances it was the right thing to do. Remember that..

Rhino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

911 was uncalled for and we did not deserve it. But the people that brought it on us were in past funded by us. We poured billions into their cause for our national interest in 80's.



Better get your facts straight...



So, did I understand this the wrong way or are you actually saying the US did not fund the mujahideen and their leader, Osama bin Laden (who was in that time called a freedom fighter), in their battle against the Soviet army?
I do agree that someone needs to get their facts straight:S



UBL was not their so-called leader. Who was? Was there one specific individual? You mention the 80's. The United States and the Soviet Union were adversaries. And being close to the action, you should be well aware of the old Azeri phrase, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." I think that holds true today as the United States and many, if not all of the former Soviet states are allies, so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What this redneck leading us does right now will come back and effect us in big ways later.
-alphadog



I hate to get into these but I must say, it will come back, but not because of him.
Quote



Why are politicians and people are hot to trash Bush.

Too bad the Congressional Committee investigating what went wrong before
9/11/01 isn't dealing with the following:

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured
1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted
down and punished.

After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military
personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and
injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible
would be hunted down ! and punished.

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and
injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down
and punished.

After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.

Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 2,800 people in New York
and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.

AN INTERESTING QUESTION:

This question was raised on a Philly radio call-in show. Without casting
stones, it is a legitimate question. There are two men, both extremely
wealthy. One develops relatively cheap software and gives billions of
dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism. That being the case, why
was it that the Clinton Administration spent more money chasing down Bill
Gates over eight years than Osama bin Laden?



Remember:
The Alamo
Pearl Harbor
9-11-01
The Clinton Years
All Truly American Disasters!!!




So is he really an ignorant Redneck or just a good old boy who now has to clean up someone else's mess

I'm not afriad of dying, I'm afraid of never really living- Erin Engle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

What this redneck leading us does right now will come back and effect us in big ways later.
-alphadog



I hate to get into these but I must say, it will come back, but not because of him. ***

Why are politicians and people are hot to trash Bush.

Too bad the Congressional Committee investigating what went wrong before
9/11/01 isn't dealing with the following:

snip



Probably because at the appropriate time, Congressional committees were far too busy investigating Whitewater, spending $50M on the investigation, and coming up with nothing.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Now can someone explain why did it seem so lame to them? Was it too
> hard to understand?

Well, no, but you're applying neighborhood logic to an international situation.

Let's take another scenario. Your neighbor is building bombs. He's blown up a few trees on his property. He talks about blowing up the local catholic church because "they're all a bunch of pedophiles." Your house is twenty feet from his; he's storing all his explosives in a shed essentially next to your house.

What are your options?

1. Do nothing; it's none of your business.
1a. Confront him on it. Accept whatever he says.
2. Confront him; if he doesn't at least remove the explosives call the cops.
3. Call the cops anyway.
4. Get some friends with guns and walk into his back yard. Open his shed and remove all the explosives and cart them away. If he pulls a gun on you, shoot him.
4. Kill his family, and him if you can get him in your sights.

I don't think 5 is a good option, but then, neither is 1. In terms of Iraq, 1 isn't a good option either. I personally don't think 5 is a great option. 2 and 3 work if you believe there are international cops available, which is questionable.

In the above neighborhood scenario, which one would you choose? Which would you choose if there were no cops?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you are going to argue the fact, I suggest you first read the Koran! The Koran specifcally instructs followers of Islam to kill all who will not turn to ISLAM! I didn't say it, Mohammed did. It is in the Koran, so are you saying the Koran is not what Islam is based on? The fact that our leaders say Islam is a religion of peace is certainly one of the things I DO Not believe. Islam is anything but a religion of peace!



Have you even read the Koran. From what you are writing, you have less than no idea what you are talking about.
It is just so easy to say islamist fundamentalists have everything to do with Islam, because the media embraces that thought. But in fact apart from the name, they have less in common than apples and cows.
I am a fluent arabic speaker, so unlike you, I am able to read the Koran and not a translated interpretation. So if you care for any facts on any given parts of it, I'd be glad to clarify.
BTW Islam is derivated from the word Salam which means peace. The word Islam itself means something to the sort of peaceful giving in, I don't think there is an English word for it.
Islam is honestly the most beautiful of religions I have studied, though that may seem hard to believe after the western media's portrayal of it. A lot of things that modern society is built on actually originate from Islam. It is a very logical and easy religion to follow.
Also by the way, what you are talking about would be a soura/soureh, serah is something entirely different.
And souras were not Mohammed's word. The Ahadeeth were.
As far as converting someone goes, it is a sort of sin to force your will upon someone in that matter in Islam.

Quote


That doesn't mean many Muslims are not peace loving, but it doesn't change what the founder of Islam wrote! And it certainly doesn't appear that middle east Muslims are at odds with my interpretations. If you wish to understand your enemies, study their beliefs and motivations.


And so you have no place to talk about this, since your understanding presumably stems from a bad gossip paper.
For the average US citizen, the Middle East is such a far away place, which is a good basis for misconceptions.


Quote


As Mohammeds political power increased, his message changed. When he started, he clearly was wooing early Christians and even Jews, as indicated in 2 Serah (chapter). By 5 Serah, he was advocating violence against all other religions, to the point of saying Allah demanded it!


That I have heard of another religion (Judaism), but deffinitely not Islam. If anyone cares to clarify this (unfortunately, I cannot read Hebrew, so I can only read interpretations). I was inclined to believe this after statements made by Charon, but then I though there are too many normal Jews, and no one in their right mind would follow a racist religion in those days.

Islamist fundamentalists are not the only terrorists, though. Only the American bred terrorists hurting their own country are forgotten easier. And also the US is not the only country to suffer terrorist attacks, some Middle East countries suffered islamic fundamentalism as well.

As for the actual topic, in the end I do hope Bush is blowing smoke. And if he is not, honestly I am at the point where I really don't care anymore as long as it's over fast (as unPC as that may be). But I am glad to be living in a country that is not involved, and that is less likely to suffer consequences should a fundamentalist group decide to hit the countries that are sticking their noses there yet again..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> But the people that brought it on us were in past funded by us. We
> poured billions into their cause for our national interest in 80's.

>Better get your facts straight...

We poured billions into the Mujahideen in the 80's so they would kill off USSR soldiers. Al Quaeda was a faction of the Mujahideen, and they (most likely) pulled off 9/11. Sounds pretty straight to me. That doesn't make us evil or anything, but we should perhaps think twice about doing that in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John, you're right, whitewater was a farce, the same as Lewinski gate, but now ina strange turn of events. Hillary getting $8 million for her forth coming memoir. Bill looks to be getting $12 million for his memoir yet to be written. This from two people who have spent the past 8 years being unable to recall anything about past events while under oath!

just a thought, should we really use the sitting president as a whipping boy, when we are really paying for someone else's sins?

I'm not afriad of dying, I'm afraid of never really living- Erin Engle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0