Announcement

**Ajax** · 13 March 2003, 13:55

Originally posted by Byock

If I offended you, too bad.

You can't even post a picture of a squirrl on here without offending someone.

**Strahd** · 13 March 2003, 13:58

Let's try.

**mmp121** · 13 March 2003, 13:59

Can't we all just get along?!

I happen to agree with Byock. If you don't agree with someone you should be able to discuss it in a calm and reasonable manner. The last thing I or anyone else here wants to see is Ant getting fed up with all this childish behavior and locking this thread.

Open discussion is fine and dandy. All opinions are welcome, but lets all leave the juvenile behavior behind.

Just my $0.02 worth.

**Byock** · 13 March 2003, 14:00

Originally posted by Strahd
Let's try.

OT

MUWAHAHAHA!

That is too funny!!

**Brian R.** · 13 March 2003, 14:19

Discussing news is one thing.

Trying to intelligently discuss a right-wing editorial is another.
Byock, You have a distorted view of news if you think this is even close to fact. No data are given, just opinion. That is why it is labeled "Editorial".

And then, after quoting the editorial, Mordrid goes on to say:
"Kinda hard to get a concensus when so many on the council have dirty (filthy?) hands."

Purely inflamatory.

I hope this thread gets locked or deleted soon.

**Byock** · 13 March 2003, 14:27

So, posting an editorial is wrong? I don't see a problem with discussing anything, fact, or speculation. I like to hear various political views. What do you think? and more importantly, why?

Did I say it was fact? I just like to read info, fact or not.

**Damien** · 13 March 2003, 14:27

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gurm
[B]Also please take note that all of the "easily offended" members are from... Germany, Northern Europe, France... emm, need I go on?

One thing that has me wondering is this.

Let's say that the USA goes bulldozing into Iraq, without the approval of the UN. What happens when we find all those nasty weapons, with French and Chinese and Russian fingerprints all over them?

And what if they find all the bio weapons that America supplied.

**Byock** · 13 March 2003, 14:32

And? It is no secret no one has clean hands. I just don't think there is an alternative other than to get rid of a mad man with his hands on the button so to speak.

IMO The UN can talk until they are blue in the face. Nothing they have done has changed anything. Saddam still follows his same course. Is there another option?

**mmp121** · 13 March 2003, 14:42

Originally posted by Damien
And what if they find all the bio weapons that America supplied.

No one here has denied that we might find bio-weapons that the US provided Iraq. I was shocked to find out that the USA had provided Iraq with the first samples of anthrax during the Iran/Iraq war.

However that fact does not keep the US of A from realizing that it was a mistake. We are trying to do something about it so that no one will have to suffer the effects of that bio-weapon. Unlike other countries that shall go nameless. And who knows what additional nations might be found guilty of supplying Saddam with his weapons. But doing nothing about it is NOT the thing to do.

**Wombat** · 13 March 2003, 14:48

Originally posted by Damien

And what if they find all the bio weapons that America supplied.

Actually, that's one of the reasons we're pressing for military action. Ever since Iraq "fully disclosed" their weapons program, the US has been saying, "This report is a piece of ****! You didn't even list the stuff we sold you!" We're not trying to hide it.

**Damien** · 13 March 2003, 14:50

Originally posted by mmp121
No one here has denied that we might find bio-weapons that the US provided Iraq. I was shocked to find out that the USA had provided Iraq with the first samples of anthrax during the Iran/Iraq war.

However that fact does not keep the US of A from realizing that it was a mistake. We are trying to do something about it so that no one will have to suffer the effects of that bio-weapon. Unlike other countries that shall go nameless. And who knows what additional nations might be found guilty of supplying Saddam with his weapons. But doing nothing about it is NOT the thing to do.

Providing bio weapons is not a mistake. It is called taking advantage of the situation at hand and then dealing with the outcome later. Human life is cheap and that is not going to change regardless of who is at the helm.

**Brian R.** · 13 March 2003, 14:50

Originally posted by Byock
So, posting an editorial is wrong? I don't see a problem with discussing anything, fact, or speculation. I like to hear various political views. What do you think? and more importantly, why?

Did I say it was fact? I just like to read info, fact or not.

Unfortunately, even though I agree with you, it is obvious that Ant does not want posting that is inflammatory.

Don't forget that reading editorials is not providing you with information, only opinions. The only information you can get from Mordrid's post is what the author thinks about the situation. You can't start an argument from this alone, since the author is not the poster, but any agreement and elaboration (see both the final comment in Mordrid's post and Gurm's post for example) will start an argument that goes nowhere, only causes ill will.

Again, purely inflamatory.

It is clear that this situation is not wanted by the administrators of this forum.

**SpiralDragon** · 13 March 2003, 15:00

Originally posted by Gurm
Also please take note that all of the "easily offended" members are from... Germany, Northern Europe, France... emm, need I go on?.......

Nobody bitched this loud over Serbia, or Lebanon, or any of the other nasty invasions we've had in the past 20 years... why Iraq? Why now do the French suddenly develop a conscience? What do they have to hide?.......

And WOE to the rest of the world if we invade and Saddam DOES have the weapons... and tries to use them on us......

- Gurm

lebanon is insignificant i guse... so we had to live the war

..... but i was not only refering to non US nationals being offened becuse this can go both ways.... the US has blood on its hands just like the rest......

**Byock** · 13 March 2003, 15:09

Originally posted by SpiralDragon
lebanon is insignificant i guse... so we had to live the war ..... but i was not only refering to non US nationals being offened becuse this can go both ways.... the US has blood on its hands just like the rest......

No, no country is insignificant, regardless. And I don't think anyone can dispute that the US has blood on it's hands. War is never good. But the alternative could be alot worse.

**Ant** · 13 March 2003, 15:37

I always thought the idea of the security council with members having votes and powers of veto were sort of to make it democratic, or is that just my silly misconception? Seems the idea is great when they all vote one way but when some want to exercise their democratic right and go another way that is a different story. There must be checks and balances. To brand people the way some are being branded now because of choosing not to follow the US/UK line is a disgrace from countries that supposedly pin the badge of democracy so proudly to their chests.

If people want to post blanket statements about "the French" etc etc they should damn well justify those statements themselves rather than making one liners that just make themselves look stupid. If not shut up and don't enter into it.

Announcement

The France/Syria/China Connection.....

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment