If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
sarettah, the answer to your question involves alot of things "political", such as CAFE regulations, the nature of transportation systems and their funding, etc. There is no intention in the slightest to bash american in particular, it is to bash all western people who use fuel in a wasteful manner and then are surprised that they are supporting tyranical leaders all over the world.
It isn't US bashing - it is stating facts and looking at more productive things to do than stop drinking evian... the amount of effort that would have to be put in to get france to say "go ahead and bomb them" would be better spent changing the economics of the whole situation...
No spin, no bullshit. Boycotting france is fun and all, but it is hardly going to change the oil economy, no?
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 02:40 PM No spin, no bullshit. Boycotting france is fun and all, but it is hardly going to change the oil economy, no?
But, the problem of the moment isn't the Oil....
The problem of the moment is Jacques ChIraq and his love affair with Saddam Hussein.......
Whether I am for or against invading Iraq doesn't even matter....
What matters is that when we, the western world, are at the U.N., that we present a United Front.... Leave the bickering and the grandstanding in the back room.
France does not want any part of that, Germany is not in support of the U.S. on it either, but they are not standing up in the U.N. and showboating about it...
sarettah, sorry, but France is just an itch... people are hoping to scratch it and make it go away... but like any itch, that could be an indication of a more serious problem.
Don't get lost in the details, don't lose site of the forest because of the trees... stand back a few paces, and see what this has to do in the overall situation. Try to find the reasons that France supported UN resolution 1441 but cannot support to current call for quick military action.
Most importantly, ask this simple question: Is Saddam any more of a problem than he was a month ago? Is he any more likely to use weapons of mass destruction today than he was in December? While inspections continue, that answer is no. Is Saddam building more weapons of mass destruction right now? I don't think he would do that while inspections are ongoing. So the question is: Why military action today instead of in a month, or 2 months, or 6 months?
All the boycotting of things french (and german, and russian, see : http://www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1430...623_1_A,00.html ) doesn't change the situation. Answer the question above honestly, without spin, without getting into "they have missles that go 5 miles further than they are suppose to, maybe, possibly perhaps" and try to figure out why there are a number of people and counties that are having a hard time with all of this...
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Yes littleC it is all about the oil. After all if you look back thru history of every war that USA has been a part of, it was all about plundering. We plundered the fuck out of Germany and Japan after the world wars for example. It's amazing there is even countries left there, we plundered them so badly.
Desert Storm 91, we plundered the hell out of Kuwait after we liberated it. The entire nation lives in poverty because we took everything from the entire nation. Vietnam, we plundered as much as possible on our way out. Korea, we took every last grain of rice. Somolia, it was all about plundering their ghettos. We plundered those ghettos good. Yugoslavia, fuck yeah we plundered it. Got every last damn yugoslavian basketball player and kidnapped them as our bounty there. We force them to play in the NBA now.
It's always about the "oil" or whatever, when the USA is going to war. Like I said, look back through history, everyone we have ever gone to war with, we have plundered and robbed them to the point of non-existance, and then refused to help rebuild or help them in any way.
PS: I hope you understand sarcasm.
Sword ::: Get a Porche 911 Turbo!
Wed Feb 26 16:07:57 2003 - 65.221.88.219 - message #210337
No Serge, I did not say "leave him alone"... please don't put words in my mouth... you make it sound like I would like nothing more than everyone to walk away and stop paying any attention to him. That is the fathest things from the truth. (and, I should note, once again, common debating technique of attempting to discredit the messenger, rather than discussing the message)
Serge, the weather will just as good for an attack 6 months from now as it is today... what's the difference?
Keep a close eye on him. Let the inspections continue. Keep a strong military option on the table... but the rush to war is just that... I don't see what is different today in the situation that wasn't there a week ago that says "today we blow him up"...
While that is going on, attempt to change the economics of the situation so that in the long run, it don't happen again. Otherwise it will be "replacement Saddam" that will fuck us all over again in the future.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Feb 26 2003, 04:37 PM yeah, but the idiots of the world are all the same...
human nature hasn't changed at all in the last 5000 years
Very true Serge.
__________________ I will talk shit about you if I think you wont find out.
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Feb 26 2003, 03:38 PM Yes littleC it is all about the oil. After all if you look back thru history of every war that USA has been a part of, it was all about plundering. We plundered the fuck out of Germany and Japan after the world wars for example. It's amazing there is even countries left there, we plundered them so badly.
Tee-hee, this is funny - I won't go far except to point out once again, common debating technique - don't discuss the message, rather discredit the person putting an opinion forward by mocking them and their values.
If you don't think it is about oil, then try to figure the difference between North Korea (nuclear armed, firing test missles actively, etc) vs Iraq (might have weapons, nothing found yet except for missles that might be able to go 15 miles further than the UN allows). There is ONE major difference, and it is what is under the ground in the two countries... one is poor and without the ability to feed it's people, and the other sits on the largest oil reserves in the world.
If you can't see the importance of oil in the discussion, then you mainlined the koolaid.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
forwarded from my "Ex-Marine" Father in law.. thought it was appropriate to share on this thread... Evil Chris should come tell us his alternate plan of diplomacy... ;-))
> > Dear Dad,
> >
> > A funny thing happened to me yesterday at Camp Bondsteel (Bosnia): A
> French
> > army officer walked up to me in the PX, and told me he thought we
> > (Americans) were a bunch of cowboys and were going to provoke a war in
> > Iraq.
> > He said if such a thing happens, we wouldn't be able to count on the
> > support
> > of France.
> >
> > I told him that it didn't surprise me. Since we had come to France's
> rescue
> > in World War I, World War II, Vietnam, and the Cold War, their
ingratitude
> > and jealousy was due to surface [again] at some point in the near future
> > anyway.
> >
> > I also told him that is why France is a third-rate military power with a
> > socialist economy and a bunch of pansies for soldiers. I additionally
told
> > him that America, being a nation of deeds and action, not words, would
do
> > whatever it had to do, and France's support, if it ever came, was only
for
> > show anyway.
> >
> > Just like in ALL NATO exercises, the US would shoulder 85% of the
burden,
> > and provide 85% of the support, as evidenced by the fact that this
French
> > officer was shopping in the American PX, and not the other way around.
> >
> > He began to get belligerent at that point, and I told him if he would
like
> > to, I would meet him outside in front of the Burger King and whip his
ass
> > in
> > front of the entire Multi-National Brigade East, thus demonstrating that
> > even the smallest American had more fight in him than the average
> > Frenchman.
> >
> > He called me a barbarian cowboy and walked away in a huff.
> >
> > With friends like these, who needs enemies?
> >
> > Dad, tell Mom I love her,
> >
> > Your loving daughter,
> >
> > Mary Beth Johnson LtCol., USMC
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 03:47 PM Tee-hee, this is funny - I won't go far except to point out once again, common debating technique - don't discuss the message, rather discredit the person putting an opinion forward by mocking them and their values.
WTF? Maybe you need to lay off the yayo or something if that is really what you think. I attempted to discredit a person? I mocked someone and their values??
That is perhaps the most asinine thing you have written in a while. I simply pointed out the absurdity of assuming it is all about oil, when throughout history USA has made a point of NOT plundering or robbing countries it has warred with. In fact quite the opposite, USA has gone far above what any other country has in history to rebuild and strengthen it's post-war opponents.
Nothing more than a look at history. You really went off the deep end trying to say it was an attempt to discredit and mock values.
No one else needs to "spin that" as you say. You're spinning in circles all by yourself.
Sword, you entire opinion starts from the assumption that someone said the US is going to plunder Iraq.
That isn't the point. The free flow of oil is... putting a friendly regime in charge of the largest oil reserves in the world is a very important part of this whole situation.
As soon as someone says "maybe it's not a good idea" and "all you want is the oil" you jump all the way over to "america plunders the world". That just isn't the case, and nobody suggests it. All you were doing is sarcastically belittling the other person for the opinion, not the opinion itself.
Don't think so? "Maybe you need to lay off the yayo or something" - suggesting my comments aren't important because I have taken something... that's sad - and as a result, you dismiss everything I say without an answer (except to repeat yourself that America is not a plunderer, which I never said it was...)
Try actually dicussing the place of oil in the whole situation, and why Iraq is different from North Korea... don't attack me, look at the idea put forward and come up with real reasons...
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Alex I wasn't trying to be down on you. Nor was I trying to be down to the other person in my post on Netpond. That's my way of saying what I feel. I think to examine how much importance the oil issue is, it was important to consider what happened at the end of other wars. My way of stating it with sarcasm, was just that, sarcasm for the sake of making a point. Not trying to discredit or mock anyone.
Sword, I think you misunderstood what Claudia was trying to get at:
It would be, IMHO, foolish to think that the US isn't going to Iraq for the oil.
Yes, they want to get control of the oil (and to get solid control over OPEC) by having a democratic government that is propped up by US dollars of support... to be indirectly in control of the largest reserves around.
No, they are not going to "plunder", but what is the difference between Iraq and North Korea (besides the obvious fact that NK is actually nuclear armed, and Saddam doesn't appear to be) - hint, it's under ground, and it ain't dirt.
What do you think about THIS?
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Can I make a suggestion to all our Canadian friends
Please concentrate on the things you do well - Brewing Excellent Beers , having Beautiful women and incredible Strip clubs , Curling, Cirque du Soleil, Hockey and getting paid in American Dollars for your work/porn efforts
and please stay out of US Politics - the US will get the job done and we'll all be better off for it!
__________________
Pssst Click the Button Above
I once wanted to be a Gynecologist
But I couldn't find an opening
Originally posted by Vick@Feb 26 2003, 04:40 PM Can I make a suggestion to all our Canadian friends
Please concentrate on the things you do well - Brewing Excellent Beers , having Beautiful women and incredible Strip clubs , Curling, Cirque du Soleil, Hockey and getting paid in American Dollars for your work/porn efforts
and please stay out of US Politics - the US will get the job done and we'll all be better off for it!
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by Vick@Feb 26 2003, 01:40 PM Can I make a suggestion to all our Canadian friends
Please concentrate on the things you do well - Brewing Excellent Beers , having Beautiful women and incredible Strip clubs , Curling, Cirque du Soleil, Hockey and getting paid in American Dollars for your work/porn efforts
and please stay out of US Politics - the US will get the job done and we'll all be better off for it!
France's protest against the war has much more to do with oil than the US's reasons for war. They have much more to lose when the back door oil deals they currently have (in violation of the UN embargo) are ended then the US has to gain.
As far as the gas guzzling SUV's - there are curently 22 million of them regestered in the US about 10% of the total US vehicles. Pick another target.
As for the amount of oil the US buys, Why is this a concern for other countries ? OPEC pumps it out of the ground and we BUY it.
I for one am more than a little tired of people from outside the US bitching about what we do within our borders.
You want to oppose the WAR, fine that is a global concern.
If you do not live and pay taxes in the US you do NOT have any right to
Bitch about what we drive.
Bitch about what we do and do not spend our money on.
Tell us what our tax rates on anything should be.
Bottom line is the US domestic issues are just that, DOMESTIC issues, if your not paying US taxes you have NO right to have an opinion on them.
I can sit here all day long and list what I feel is wrong with the political systems of other countries, however, that is none of my business.
By they way, my real hope for the war in IRAQ is it is simply a stepping stone to put a force in place to keep the entire region under control.
If we are indeed moving towards a single world government I am very much in favor of ours.
Originally posted by OldJeff@Feb 26 2003, 02:03 PM Just to add a little fuel to the fire...
France's protest against the war has much more to do with oil than the US's reasons for war. They have much more to lose when the back door oil deals they currently have (in violation of the UN embargo) are ended then the US has to gain.
Im glad someone finally brought this up
France's National Petroleum company has a deal with Iraq for cheap oil BELOW market price.
France has the MOST to lose in a war option
they will have to pay full price for oil and that will hurt their ecnomy even more than its hurting now
AND
once we get in there and find all the stuff sadam has been hideing that came from French comnpanies and french scientist....Then we will see why they dont want a war
Serge, where is that pic of you fucking Osama...
you should put Chirac and sadam instead
__________________
Need design work done? CLICK the SIG!
118156620-icq Forest AT silverclouddesign.com
well here is the deal. I have french friends..I am not going to starve them. I am also not going to cut off all contact. Also, living in the UK it is a LOT harder to turn your back on French goods than it may be in N. America. Hell, half the sodas in the supermarket are bought over there and imported here because it is cheaper. Train and bus companies are owned by the French. So, I wouldn't be able to go anywhere on public transport, etc.
There are many reasons not to like things France does..the UK can just talkto you about that until you go blue in the face. You all have EVERY right to boycott anything you want to and to a degree I understand but sorrry, I would be a liar if I said I was going to avoid their products. I don't activly search them out either.
There are other countries in this world whose goods I would boycott first.
I had a date last week with a guy and we drank FRENCH wine, talked about putting a FRENCH drain in my yard, he FRENCH kissed me and he had the personality of a FRENCH fry. I'm boycotting him
Face it - unless we're growing our own crops, walking everywhere (including to conventions - last I checked, planes didn't fly by having all the passengers waving their arms up and down ), we're living in a grass hut, going shoeless, watching goats mate for entertainment (Serge is excluded), none of us is using oil for heating our homes, and we have a cotton field and/or sheep in the back yard and we're making our own textiles, we're ALL just as dependent on fossil fuels as the next person. Just because you get 10 MPG better in YOUR car doesn't mean squat.
I have a rule: no one gets to criticize what I wear, what I drive, what I eat or what I live in unless they're paying for it
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 12:52 PM I got an idea... let's all boycott IRAQ.
Wait, you all drive big ass SUVs that get about 3 gallons per mile... you couldn't live without the oil.
Too bad, so sad.
Alex
Alex, you truly are a strange bird.
I'm surprised you have not come up with the idea of passing a law that says all motor vehicles must be painted shit brown with no power steering or brakes, no A/C, etc.
That way, they wouldn't be cool and nobody would drive them.
__________________
***********************
» Owner/Designer - Wyldesites, Inc.
» Industry Leading Adult Graphic Design Since 1998
» Visit me at: http://www.wyldesites.com
» ICQ# 18188566
Wig, I love cars. I own cars (and a motorcycle) I use to race cars... might do it again some time soon... I read alot of car magazines...
Would you like to join Vick in asking me not to take part in these discussions? I can handle that just fine.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
I am not surprised you do not find my post (and parody of your anti-gun rant) funny. After all, you said humor was not my strong point.
However, to answer your question... nope, i won't ask you to not take part. not my place. it is a free world (for the most part) and I certainly respect anyones right to say what they believe.
In fact, I think the more you post the better. I get a good laugh.
Nahh, wig, I learned something today... I am going to go pick up a good conservative manual of some sort, and start toeing the party line around here. Having any other ideas than "kill them all, amen" is pretty much not popular around here. There are people I thought could actually see things from both sides, appreciate that there is more than one opinion, instead I find that they are narrow minded... and that they prefer to point and snicker rather than actual think about the world around them.
I have alot of work to do. This isn't productive. 'nuff said.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 03:47 PM If you don't think it is about oil, then try to figure the difference between North Korea (nuclear armed, firing test missles actively, etc) vs Iraq (might have weapons, nothing found yet except for missles that might be able to go 15 miles further than the UN allows). There is ONE major difference, and it is what is under the ground in the two countries... one is poor and without the ability to feed it's people, and the other sits on the largest oil reserves in the world.
Just assume that the US were going to war with both North Korea and Iraq. Would the order of importance of the action be the only determining factor in which would be attacked first? Since when does one tackle objectives only in their order of their importance?
In my opinion, North Korea is a bigger threat than Iraq and I doubt many in the US administration see it differently. Diplomacy, in the eyes of many, has failed with Iraq. Many Diplomatic efforts will still be made with North Korea.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 04:38 PM It would be, IMHO, foolish to think that the US isn't going to Iraq for the oil.
Someone who disagrees with your PRESUMPTIONS and ASSUMPTIONS is FOOLISH?
What is the complete chain of thought again? Bush and some of his cabinet members were in the oil industry. Iraq has oil. Therefore, the "war is about oil"? That's a weak chain of logic at best. One cannot even make any logical connections from any assumptions to the conclusion. It is no stronger a case than that.
Remember Bush's infamous "Axis of Evil" statement. Maybe Bush deemed Iraq, Iran, and North Korea an "axis of evil" because he knew Saddam would continue to defy the UN inspectors after which he would be able to "take Iraq's oil" and then use it to fuel further attacks on North Korea and later Iran. That's it, huh? Funny.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 06:50 PM Nahh, wig, I learned something today... I am going to go pick up a good conservative manual of some sort, and start toeing the party line around here. Having any other ideas than "kill them all, amen" is pretty much not popular around here. There are people I thought could actually see things from both sides, appreciate that there is more than one opinion, instead I find that they are narrow minded... and that they prefer to point and snicker rather than actual think about the world around them.
I have alot of work to do. This isn't productive. 'nuff said.
Alex
Alex,
See things from both sides?? Like you do?
You easily characterize the ppl "around here" as not "Having any other ideas than "kill them all, amen"
but yet you don't think you are "narrow minded" and "prefer to point and snicker"?
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 26 2003, 06:50 PM There are people I thought could actually see things from both sides, appreciate that there is more than one opinion, instead I find that they are narrow minded.
Come on Alex, you give up too easily... I think you know that most people here CAN SEE things from both sides, but have simply chosen to BE on one side or the other. I personally have strong feelings about the whole thing (this thread/french boycott). Yes I love my country, yes I have the worst gas guzzling American cars on the market, yes I'm a conservative at heart, yes I think Saddam has to go no matter the cost, yes I think the French govt. is in the wrong for not backing us and the U.N. ... yet those feelings don't drive me to boycott the French products that I do consume. It's my RIGHT as an american to choose what I want to consume and if I want to buy french products, then our free marketplace will determine what price I have to pay for it. Do I think any less of the people in this thread that choose to boycott French products? .. of course not, many of them are my dear friends and I repsect their choice, hopefully they will show me the same respect.
__________________
***********************
» Owner/Designer - Wyldesites, Inc.
» Industry Leading Adult Graphic Design Since 1998
» Visit me at: http://www.wyldesites.com
» ICQ# 18188566
Originally posted by MikeW@Feb 26 2003, 07:25 PM
Come on Alex, you give up too easily... I think you know that most people here CAN SEE things from both sides, but have simply chosen to BE on one side or the other. I personally have strong feelings about the whole thing (this thread/french boycott).
Mike, here's the thing: I have complete respect for your choices, and I have total respect for everyones choices as they make them. I respect the opinions of others... and I have strong opinions of my own.
Actually, I just deleted three paragraphs. I realized as I re-read them that all those comments are going to lead to is more of the same...
My opinions are mine, I am not going to change anyone's opinion here, I accept that. I am tired of the snickering and snide comments, it's just not really very much fun. When it comes to this subject, I am saddened to find that the gumbo is very sour indeed.
Colin, I thank you. You taught me something that JR didn't. For that I am grateful.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Peaches: I have a rule: no one gets to criticize what I wear, what I drive, what I eat or what I live in unless they're paying for it
Go Peaches!! Well said!
Quote:
RawAlex: Would you like to join Vick in asking me not to take part in these discussions? I can handle that just fine.
Why not? You asked me - albeit politely - to fuck off... what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You asked what your job has to do with this - well, quite a bit. You take every opportunity to slam American's habits, luxuries, and policies - yet the majority of money you make is American. If you really are disgusted that much by who or what we are, or what we do, why aren't your convictions strong enough to make you not accept our money?
You say that this isn't about Americans - thank you, Sarettah, for quoting where Alex specifically brought up *American* oil consumption. How about posting statistics on everyone else's oil consumption as well? Hell, how about posting France's oil consumption, and the amount of barrels they get each year from Iraq?
Look, I DO agree with you on many points. Everyone should use less oil. But face the facts, man. This isn't 1840. We're not riding one mile to the corner store on a horse to get our groceries and spending an hour catching up on the latest town gossip with our best friend, the grocer.
This is 2003. To get anywhere, you need a car. There are laws that prohibit you from carrying small children in a car without massive space-consuming carseats.
How do you propose that I get my two 35-lb children and their 20-lb huge carseats to the grocery store that is miles and miles away, and get back with a week's worth of groceries, without my Jeep? I'm sorry, but the carseats alone won't fit into the 240SX SE, nevermind the kids and the groceries. Yeah, it's a lot better on gas, and it's a hell of a lot more fun to drive, but it just doesn't get the job done.
You love to bash SUVs - what's the alternative? That no one has children, that no one has family gatherings or outings? If we didn't have my Jeep, when my family of 4 and my 2 parents wanted to go out to celebrate something, we'd have to take two vehicles. That's wasting even more precious oil than the Jeep does.
Other ways to save resources? Okay, how about solar panels on your house? Sorry... can't afford them. How about an underground house? I'd love to have one and my father even has designs for one, but sorry - can't afford that either. I've got it - windmills. Nope, can't afford the land to put them on and can't afford the equipment for that either.
I do what I can... I don't make unnecessary trips to the grocery store, I do all of my weekly errands at once. I turn off the lights in empty rooms. I wait until my laundry will completely fill the washer before running that machine. I usually take showers instead of baths. But things like that aren't enough for you - you've identified one product - the SUV, the ultimate "vehicle of destruction" for the Liberals, speaking of toeing the party line - and declared that everyone should stop using it without a thought as to those who NEED it.
Where are the majority of SUVs sold? I'd be willing to bet that it's in states where the weather demands a vehicle with 4WD, like Syracuse New York, which gets more snow annually than Siberia, and which is where I was living when the Jeep was purchased.
Who are the majority of people who buy SUVs? Again, I'd be willing to bet that it's FAMILIES or people with two or more children.
Sure, there are guys out there buying SUVs just because they look cool or just because they can - but lumping us all together as purposefully wasteful insensitive bastards is just as bad as lumping together all content providers just because a few of them resell pics they're not licensed to sell.
And all of this bullshit of "It's all about the oil" - give it a break!
We were attacked on September 11th, 2001. On our own soil. What is so frigging wrong about us putting our foot down and saying enough is enough? Americans have been attacked all over the globe for far too long and that was the last straw. Bush has made it quite simple - the terrorists have gotten away with their activities long enough, it's time someone did something about it. THAT is what this is about.
Saddam Hussein is a terrorist. He kills his OWN people. He has different weapons to use against people - bombs, missiles, chemical weapons - and he has shown that he's not against using them for no particular reason other than a stray air molecule brushed one of his nosehairs. If you listened to his interview with Dan Rather tonight, he made it quite clear that he intends to follow the "rules of Allah" to the letter - do you know what those rules are? The most important one to this discussion is that anyone who does not pray to Allah is an infidel, and all infidels should be killed. Does that not strike home a little bit? I haven't seen you wearing a turban lately.
He also made it very clear that once we attack Iraq, he's going to attack us on our own soil. It was a clever threat surrounded with artful language, but it was clear. How can he do that if he hasn't prepared for it already? He doesn't have anything that could reach us if launched from Iraq, but we do know that he has nerve gas that takes one single drop to kill a man... he's got 4 friggin TONS of the shit.
Colin Powell clearly laid out what Hussein has, and what he's hiding from us. Who do you believe? Powell or Hussein?
This isn't about oil. It's about turning the other cheek so many times that you don't have a cheek to turn anymore. It's about wiping out an obvious threat before it becomes an even bigger threat - not just to the US, but to the entire world.
So no, I won't politely fuck off... but I guess I will refrain from joking with you again since you seem to have totally lost your sense of humor.
__________________
Need a kick-ass design done quickly?
I recommend Sex Creator - they absolutely ROCK.
could I suggest that all you wine drinkers give up your ****** wines and switch to Red Breast Whiskey
I don't usually enjoy Whiskey and this is the most amazing drink, serious 4 star
A single, unblended, Pure Pot Still, Irish Whiskey, triple distilled and matured in Oak Casks for 12 years
I drink it neat with a coke back
Highly recommended!!! I had a hard time finding it but it is worth it
__________________
Pssst Click the Button Above
I once wanted to be a Gynecologist
But I couldn't find an opening
Originally posted by Vick@Feb 27 2003, 12:11 AM could I suggest that all you wine drinkers give up your ****** wines and switch to Red Breast Whiskey
I don't usually enjoy Whiskey and this is the most amazing drink, serious 4 star
A single, unblended, Pure Pot Still, Irish Whiskey, triple distilled and matured in Oak Casks for 12 years
I drink it neat with a coke back
Highly recommended!!! I had a hard time finding it but it is worth it
I think MikeW brought me a bottle of it too!
He hooks me on hard liquor, so he could enjoy the French wines
;-))))
I'm just not sure what I think is dumber ... the idea that it's all about oil for our gas-guzzling S.U.V.s, or the "we were attacked on 9/11, and he's a terrorist, and he's a Muslim, so we gotta attack him" mentality.
But Alex, if the U.S. was going to go to war over oil riddle me this ... why the fuck did we ever leave Kuwait? Get real - if oil was all we wanted we'd end the sanctions and flood the country with Haliburton executives and Starbucks franchises - and he'd accept them. Saddam Hussein is as much of a fundamentalist Islamist as John Ashcroft is a convert to Hasidism. And if the U.S. were inclined to go to war for oil, I think we could find significant quantities of it much closer to home. Better beer, too ....
Carrie, only the predisposed or truly naive would believe that Saddam Hussien's claims of Islamic purity as uttered to Dan Rather were anything other than posturing. A number of the folks his terrorist regime has killed off include Islamic fundamentalists. As far as him killing his own people, well, jeez, we've had a lot of friends throughout the years who've done that - is that what compassionate conservatism is? He was killing his own people just as proficiently back when he was our ally against Iran. Are we going to renoucnce that kind of short sighted policy? Only one American President - Jimmy Carter - has ever tried to distance us from that kind of policy. Can I assume that Bush & Co. have decided Carter was right?
And you're angry because Saddam said he's going to strike back why? What the hell was he supposed to say - "Oh, golly gee Dan, if you blokes come over here to my country and start a war, well, I wish you wouldn't, but I assure you I'm going to be sporting about it and play by the rules?" In case you haven't noticed those are U.S. troops piling up on his borders. He's going to play every game in the book to attempt to persuade American public opinion that this war is a mistake. If he thinks that threatening America is a way to do that he's far stupider than I thought - but that's not the audience he was playing to. Saddam knows exactly what the people in Homeland Security knows - the alQaida types (remember alQaida?) will use our war with their pther enemy - Iraq - as recruiting fodder, and probably strike at us here and around the globe. They were going to do that anyway, but using the war in Iraq as an excuse is very effective propaganda for them.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Feb 26 2003, 11:29 PM I'll see you on Satrurday with a bottle of
Bellecart-Salmon Champagne you brought the other day and empty it on a palm tree near your house!
Doug will make pics,
Shannon will be nekkid so the photo will be on CNN and all major media networks!
hahahahaha, my palms need a good watering!!
__________________
***********************
» Owner/Designer - Wyldesites, Inc.
» Industry Leading Adult Graphic Design Since 1998
» Visit me at: http://www.wyldesites.com
» ICQ# 18188566
Originally posted by sarettah@Feb 26 2003, 12:47 PM I'm not sure of the year, but a ways back, France lost most of their Vineyards, can't remember if teh cause was drought or disease or some other form of pestilence... But,
At that time, virtually all of France's vineyards were replanted with cuttings from California Vineyards (makes sense since most of California Vineyards were started with French Cuttings).. So, when you drink French Wine, you are actually drinking the same grape as California....
Save yourself the import fees and be Patriotic at the same time...
Drink California Wine !!!!
If you want to help out one of our staunchest Allies...
Drink Australian Wine !!!!
Boycott the French Wines !!!! Dump them down the drain....
Besides if you go experiment a bit, you will find some really really excellent California Wines on the shelfs at $7.00 a bottle.......
Love that Gundlach Bundschu... Sonoma Valley.... Yummmmmmmmmmmm
I'm all for boycotting France. I'm all for buying wine from our truly great friends, Australia. I draw the line, however, at The People's Republic of California. I won't subsidize Gov. Grey Dufus...
Originally posted by Colin@Feb 27 2003, 05:53 AM PD,
Nice post.
What are your thoughts ON the causes of the war?
It was a good interview. Saddam continues to be a world-class politician.
Colin, my thoughts on the war are very simple.
Saddam Hussein reached an agreement with the United Nations to settle the Gulf War 13 years ago. He continues to refuse to comply, or provide proof of compliance, with the agreements he reached. That refusal cannot be tolerated and the U.N. remain something other than the joke that the League of Nations became.
The difficult situation here is that the U.S. can accomplish exactly what we allege we are concerned Saddam is doing by acting unilaterally. We have a history of opposing unilateral action. The quote I posted in another thread - "We believe these actions to have been taken in error, for we do not accept the use of force as a wise or proper instrument for the settlement of international disputes." - were not uttered by some "pinko pussy" Democrati" President - that was Eisenhower's response to uniltateral Franco/British action in the Middle East.
I think Saddam has to go in order to ensure the rule of international law. I recognize that there are those more inclinded to admiration of Bismark than of Marshall who won't agree with that. I got no problem with that.
Last edited by PornoDoggy at Feb 27 2003, 03:07 PM
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
02-26-2003
, having Beautiful women and incredible Strip clubs 
, Curling, Cirque du Soleil, Hockey and getting paid in American Dollars for your work/porn efforts 
h34r: 
), we're living in a grass hut, going shoeless, watching goats mate for entertainment (Serge is excluded), none of us is using oil for heating our homes, and we have a cotton field and/or sheep in the back yard and we're making our own textiles, we're ALL just as dependent on fossil fuels as the next person. Just because you get 10 MPG better in YOUR car doesn't mean squat. 
Linear Mode
