What do people think of this site:
www.freedom.gov
?
What do people think of this site:
www.freedom.gov
?
"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks
Lets just say my face is red and my blood is boiling, I've had to close the browser after 1 min tops of looking at it.
I can't believe that anyone would have the ordacity to put something like that up on the web. It just highlights that america thinks its so far ahead of everyone else that it needs to solve the problems of the worlds second class citizens by making them americans.
ARGH
TiG
-- Hexus Meets Rock! --
Not just anyone mate, check the domain...
It gets better...
www.ready.gov
My favoutite page:
http://www.ready.gov/supply_checklists.html
That's right; when the terrorists strike, fight back with MOIST TOWELETTES!
"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks
LOL
The other page is funny as hell
Tools
Cash or traveler's checks, change
ROFL
heheh
TiG
-- Hexus Meets Rock! --
Hilarious
operation thirsty dodge vipermore like
I was pro-war and genuinely convinced that there were chemical/bio weapons in iraq but it now seems clear that we have been decieved by our own government.
I think its ironic that bush and blair told us- without taking note of public concern that we were going to war to remove a dictator.
The motives for engaging in this conflict seem to be purely financial rather than helping the iraqui people to freedom.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2...200301234.html
that has to get a mention, so saddam used chemical weapons in 83... wasnt that the year donald rumpsfeld was pictured shaking saddams hand...?
HEXUS FOLDING TEAM It's EASY
Unbelievable!!
US politics and their view of the rest of the world just SUCK.
I still think the war was (with reservations) right but it isn't trendy to say so, thus most people are against it. If you actually read a serious analysis of the situation (like a commentary by the left-wing journalist Christopher Hitchens for example - look it up on Amazon) you'll see another side to the story. Most people are however too keen on looking snow-white to examine all the issues.
Having said all that - the site is cringeworthy. Tasteless things aren't however always wrong, just tasteless.
I'm just reading Hitchens' book as we speak, but I have to say I disagree with you.
Firstly, I think it's a little out of order to describe being anti-war as "trendy". People were against the war for damn serious reasons, and being trendy certainly wasn't one of them. Not for me or anyone I know, anyway.
Hitchens' book is interesting, but it does contain a number of contradictions. Having said that, he also comes out with some interesting statements like: "Who doesn't think oil is worth fighting for, anyway". At least he tells it like it is.
I agree with his analysis to a certain extent in as much as the French and Russian contingent did not help the UN process, but then again they didn't invade a country resulting in the subsequent death of over 15,000 innocent Iraqi's and god knows how many conscripted soldiers. Also, based on the current events in Iraq (ie. total chaos) some of his points are shown up to be quite naive.
I was personally for the war, as long as it was backed by a UN force, along with CLEAR AND DETAILED documents detailing plans for the recontrstuction and contingnecy in the country.
As it is it looks in retrospect like the invasion was somewhat gung-ho and, as usual, with a callous disregard for post-war events that have left countless innocent people dead.
Finally, I hate being lied to.
Last edited by DaBeeeenster; 06-11-2003 at 12:49 AM.
"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks
'callous disregard'?
Does that apply to your view of the Kuwaitis killed by Iraqis and to the Kurds killed by them too? Or to the dead from the twin towers killed by Islamic extremists? Or do you just want to be selectively sloganizing? Americans aren't the only ones who kill.
But I don't look as good for saying this, do I?
As I said, I was not against the war. I was all for the removal of Saddam Hussein. Did you not read that part?
I'm not sure what this has to do with the people who died in the 9/11 attacks?
Given the number of people that have died at the hands of Americans or American sponsered states, compared to the number of dead at the hands of Saddam Hussein (who was US sponsered up until the late 80's/early 90's, btw) or any terrorist group that you care to mention, I'd say that the US top the table. By a long way.
"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks
Oh, and by the way. If you are concerned about the Kurds, maybe you should be concerned about the amount of money the US provided to Turkey before the war. The Turkish human rights record regarding the Kurds is utterly atrocious.
"All our beliefs are being challenged now, and rightfully so, they're stupid." - Bill Hicks
Fair enough - you've obviously thought about it which is fair enough - I don't fully agree with you but you understand the issues. Most people these days simply accept the simplisitic anti-Bush/Blair propaganda. What we've got to accept is that there is going to be oppression and killing whatever happens - in my case I've decded its better the Americans do it than Saddam.
On Turkey its a tough call. On one hand the Americans get slagged for being anti-Muslim, the next they're being slagged gor being too cosy with a Muslim state? Its a variation on Turkey vis-a-vis the EU. You either block them out which may well reinforce the hrdliners internally, or you accept it warts and all and hope that through greater international contact it slowly loses some of its 'bad old' ways and becomes more secular / progressive.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)