Survival Of The Fittest And Vice Versa

[Almighty Colin]

(Reuters) - A first wave of mainly Western volunteers will leave London this weekend on a convoy bound for Iraq to act as "human shields" at key sites and populous areas in case of a U.S.-led war on Baghdad.

[Nickatilynx]

ahhhh lemmings.Perfect

[Winetalk.com]

"Read my lips,
no more volunteers"
;-)))

[Bestat]

A weeding out of the gene pool :P

[Mike AI]

Yeah I was just talking to Buff about that. I think we need to encourage all the people who have been protesting and members of these socialist groups who love to coddle evil dictators to act as human shields.

Hell I will pay for their one way ticket. But they must lay out in front of important targets. Such as anti-aircraft missle batteries, or scud missle launchers and such.

[spanno]

most people in europe don't want a war

[*KK*]

You know what tho Spanno? This isnt really about Europe. Had a 757 crashed into the Tower of London or the Eiffel Tower I have a feeling that Europeans would feel very differently about the situation.

Not being one to rub your noses in it, without the US in WW2 you'd all be speaking German and heiling Hitler you realize?

[spanno]

we have terrorists here but what have they got to do with Iraq ? I thought the problem with Iraq was weapons nuclear, chemical etc

[Opti]

Originally posted by Colin@Jan 22 2003, 08:22 AM
(Reuters) - A first wave of mainly Western volunteers will leave London this weekend on a convoy bound for Iraq to act as "human shields" at key sites and populous areas in case of a U.S.-led war on Baghdad.

"Read my lips,
no more volunteers"
;-)))

Ah let em go... if they stand in front of a military installation they are enemy... If they stay in residential areas they shouldn't be in any danger anyway!

[*KK*]

Originally posted by spanno@Jan 23 2003, 01:13 AM
we have terrorists here but what have they got to do with Iraq ? I thought the problem with Iraq was weapons nuclear, chemical etc

are you talking about the Irish? I dunno that's an example you Brits want to use as far as a war on terror

[spanno]

on I mean we have crazy muslims fuckers making ricin and stuff here too

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jan 21 2003, 05:52 PM
Yeah I was just talking to Buff about that. I think we need to encourage all the people who have been protesting and members of these socialist groups who love to coddle evil dictators to act as human shields.

Hell I will pay for their one way ticket. But they must lay out in front of important targets. Such as anti-aircraft missle batteries, or scud missle launchers and such.

Ah, here we go with the bullshit. New motto for the 21st Century - "Kill an a-rab fer kee-rist?"

No - I did not go out and protest the war this weekend, and have no plans to do so. I've got friends and family either there or on their way. I think Saddam needs to go - I've got serious questions about the timing.

But I'll tell you what - I can understand why people did so. Some of them are la-la leftists who couldn't find reality with a roadmap printed on recycled paper. The morons chanting "stop the imperialist war machine" don't have a clue, never have, never will.

Most of the people who went out there this weekend weren't like that. Most of them just aren't sure if this is the right thing to do. Most of them are disturbed by the unilateral nature of the action; most of them aren't convinced by the "trust me, there's a connection between Iraq and terrorism" coming out of the White House. They have the right to do that, you know, and they can do that and still be patriotic Americans.

I have no use for the morons who still think they are protesting the Vietnam war. At the same time, I don't think any more, or any less, of them than I do with the fools who believe they have a patent on patriotism. I have little sympathy and less respect for those who have minds so small as to need to label the people who disagree with them as some kind of enemy. I have NO respect for the pseudointellect of people who bandy about jingoistic jargon like "socialist groups" to label folks that have the audacity to express opinions that they disagree with.

So I'll tell you what, Mikey ... put your money where your mouth is, bro. Instead of funding a trip for a socialist pinko anti-war protester, why don't you and Buffy just go on over and lead the invasion? I'm sure they need all the help they can get; and if you can't actually do any fighting, you can run ahead and identify the missle batteries and scud launchers, dressed up in red, white and blue pro-war cheerleader outfits. Better use of your money ... more bang for your buck, you might say.

[cj]

Originally posted by *KK*@Jan 23 2003, 04:07 AM
You know what tho Spanno? This isnt really about Europe. Had a 757 crashed into the Tower of London or the Eiffel Tower I have a feeling that Europeans would feel very differently about the situation.

Not being one to rub your noses in it, without the US in WW2 you'd all be speaking German and heiling Hitler you realize?

and there's that american attitude we've all grown to know and .....


KK, if usa goes to war, the rest of the world is involved. your government saying shit like that is pissing off MORE countries than you can defend yourself against ...

many other countries will be affected (have been affected), international relations are fucked, trade/cost of products etc goes up and down, the SAME terrorists attacked a bali tourist area killing 100's (australians, english, etc) .....

so how does that make it only about america?

do we have to tally up numbers and chalk up 'war' credits or something?!

[*KK*]

cj, you know I love ya, but it's all about us...


;-}}}}

j/k really. I am still on the fence about the entire situation myself. Given the fact that we could have finished Iraq off years ago and didn't get the job done, it makes me wonder if we'll do it this time, should we end up going that route.

I am quite sure that given half the chance more than half the world would love to see the US bite off more than it can chew. And it's possible we might do that.

PD is right -- that's one good thing about being an American citizen, even if you don't like what your government is doing you can still say so and that's your right as an American citizen.

I think Bush is determined to do this, I just question his ability and the commitment of parties that he needs behind it to do it completely. It's kind of like getting into a really cold swimming pool. You dont just toe your way in since your ass will be so cold you'll never make it all the way in. You have to be prepared to just jump in and freeze.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by cj@Jan 23 2003, 05:10 AM
so how does that make it only about america?

It's not! Australians are in too. :-)

January 22, 2003

SYDNEY, Australia (CNN) -- Australian navy transport ship head off to the Middle East in preparation for a possible conflict with Iraq

[JR]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@Jan 21 2003, 12:26 PM
ahhhh lemmings.Perfect

hahah..
lemmings=good.
more lemmings=better

Saddam is alive today only because he was hiding under the Al Rashid hotel in a bunker where all foreign journalists were staying. people got pissed off when a cruise missile almost hit them that was targeting the bunker and plowed into the entrance to the hotel. but i dont think a film crew from CNN should be in a situation where they themselves are deciding the outcome of a war because people are afraid of harming people who should not be there to begin with.

my grand daddy used to tell me "if you dont want to get shot... dont go where people are shooting"

[cj]

Originally posted by *KK*@Jan 23 2003, 05:53 AM
cj, you know I love ya, but it's all about us...


;-}}}}

j/k really. I am still on the fence about the entire situation myself. Given the fact that we could have finished Iraq off years ago and didn't get the job done, it makes me wonder if we'll do it this time, should we end up going that route.

I am quite sure that given half the chance more than half the world would love to see the US bite off more than it can chew. And it's possible we might do that.

PD is right -- that's one good thing about being an American citizen, even if you don't like what your government is doing you can still say so and that's your right as an American citizen.

I think Bush is determined to do this, I just question his ability and the commitment of parties that he needs behind it to do it completely. It's kind of like getting into a really cold swimming pool. You dont just toe your way in since your ass will be so cold you'll never make it all the way in. You have to be prepared to just jump in and freeze.

we're behind you for fucks sake!! we have been since the day of 9/11
JUMP IN THE POOL!!!!

LOL

KK, did you see this that I posted the other day?

http://www.carlajayne.com/articles/gulf1990/

its clippings from aussie newspapers from 1990 & 1991 (lead up to kuwait/gulf war) ... the imagery is SCARY how similar it is to today ...
its a joke that saddam is still living

this one is perfect for this discussion ;-)))) ....

[JR]

Well CJ... they are related. you know what they say about genetics - "the turd never falls far from the cow"

[cj]

LOL

i actually thought it was the same dude running for president for a while ;-)))

i was thinking, isn't he a really old fucker by now?!?!

[*KK*]

Originally posted by cj@Jan 23 2003, 03:44 AM
LOL

i actually thought it was the same dude running for president for a while ;-)))

i was thinking, isn't he a really old fucker by now?!?!

Hahaha, it might as well be the same guy

[cj]

at least we all agree that your president is pathetic

:P

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by *KK*@Jan 23 2003, 05:53 AM
Given the fact that we could have finished Iraq off years ago and didn't get the job done, it makes me wonder if we'll do it this time, should we end up going that route.

A decade ago, the coalition had one goal and one goal only. Liberate Kuwait. Now it is well known that many thought Saddam would get ousted from power as a result and that he didn't. The goal however was NEVER to remove Saddam from power ourselves. If he happened to die in a bunker somewhere, BONUS! But the "job" as it was clearly defined at the time was done. I have to say Gulf War I was a 100% success. Objective defined. Objective completed. One may not have agreed with the objective but it was clearly defined and everyone understood what it was. The coalition didn't have a mandate to march on Baghdad and look for Saddam.

Assumably the objective this time will be a regime change. Oust Saddam from power. Not "Kill or capture Saddam" but remove him from power. I think that would be the exit strategy.



Last edited by Colin at Jan 23 2003, 06:53 AM

[Almighty Colin]

The Bush's must be incredibly skillful in order to have the political family clout they do. We haven't seen anything like it in America since the Kennedys. If you think of the Bush family as inept, ask yourself why they have held the office of president twice in so short a period of time. George Bush I has an absolutely amazing biograpy - an incredible number of political positions he held in his lifetime. This was not by accident.

Speaking of the Kennedys, JFK is an interesting case study in public opinion polls. JFK had medicore poll numbers and public support until the Cuban Missile Crisis. Remember there was a recession in 1962. His numbers went sky-high into the 70% range during the missile crisis but then decreased rapidly going into 1963 and were at 58% the week of his assassination. The 58% figure is just about the same as Bush's, In other words, most Americans felt roughly the same about Kennedy as Bush performance-wise at the time.

George Bush received an 89% rating in February 1991. Truman an 87% in 1945.

Big events polarize opinions and this is a universal effect.

Insulting the president is pretty normal. Lincoln and Washington really had it bad. "King George!" (of England) was the biggest insult you could throw at Mr. Washington. Carter was a "Peanut Farmer". Reagan was senile. Clinton aka Bubba was a cheater. I don't think any US president in history was free from such insults.

[spanno]

the impending war has more to do with making sure there fat americans can continue to drive to McDonalds in too big cars than terrorism if you can't see that you're a fucking retard

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by spanno@Jan 23 2003, 12:37 PM
the impending war has more to do with making sure there fat americans can continue to drive to McDonalds in too big cars than terrorism if you can't see that you're a fucking retard

Spanno, you'd make a PERFECT human shield....

we need more people like you

[JR]

Originally posted by spanno@Jan 23 2003, 09:37 AM
the impending war has more to do with making sure there fat americans can continue to drive to McDonalds in too big cars than terrorism if you can't see that you're a fucking retard

if you can be the first to explain this with clear factual information and provable facts - i will be VERY impressed. not with circumstantial evidence or bizarre, unprovable conspiracy theories... but with real facts.

it seems that the UN felt that Iraq was worth threatening with force again. so did the UN security council. <_<

[Mike AI]

Yeah Spanno would be a great human shield, I think we should do a fund raiser for him. I will donate Super sized McDonalds meals to the cause.

[JR]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano+Jan 23 2003, 09:43 AM-->