Fahrenheit 9/11...

[Mojlnir]

Has anyone ever noticed that the more apparent failure becomes the more fiercely and vocally those who support the position defend it?

 

Tyjet3, your blanket insinuation concerning the intelligence of those who post on this forum is offensive and uncalled for. Following your initial post you have not presented anything in factual context and have resorted to volume and insult in order to forward your position. If you checked the resources I posted you will find that they all referrence either government documents or the research of respected non-partisian think tanks. I quote (unlike nut-jobs like Ann Coulter) as correctly as possible, and while I search for sources to support my opinion, I make every attempt to avoid blatantly partisian matterial unless it has factual basis.

 

What you and Untouchable advocate harkens to the world of George Orwell's 1984 wherein questioning the government is outlawed to the point where the thoughts within your head are barely private and you can be sent to prison for even thinking foul of the ruling class.

 

It is unfortunate in the extreme that the result of our national tragedy has not been a reaffirmation of traditional American values but rather the rise of Drakonian and frightfully dictatorial tendencies. Lest anyone forget, America espouses the ideals of democracy, wherein every person is allowed their own opinion and, most importantly, it is every person's civic responsibility to question the actions and decisions of those we have chosen to lead us. Blind acceptance of governmental decision-making is not democracy...it is facism.

 

And yet these tactics are employed and accepted on a national scale, though in recent months cracks have begun to appear in the rhetorical armour of the administration. Good men and women have lost jobs, career's, been imprisoned...have died because debate was crushed in the name of "freedom." Frank and open discussions among citizens, like those who post here, are important...ney the very life-blood of our great nation. How can we possibly seek to bring freedom and democracy to the world when we can't even manage it at home?

 

In short, get some factual information (it exists I guarantee) and start defending your positions or conceed and sit the hell down.

 

-M

[ImmortalSnafu]

Something is wrong with the [ quote ] code....so I'll bold the quotes

 

quote me you vultures...

In honor of your love for my quoting, here it goes ;).

 

we could have just left it at that but the devs had to spit on it and build their little fortress on it,

A fortress which neither you nor Tyjet have been able to breach.

 

raining down quote arrows to any an onlooker,

Only if the onlookers wish to debate.

 

and sitting back in their little chairs

I've got a big chair, and it's leather :).

 

because its even remotely about politics

Dictionary.com defines "politics" as:Political attitudes and positions

Dictionary.com defines "remotely" as:Far removed in connection or relevance

 

I'd say that this discussion isn't "remotely" related to politics...It's pretty much the definition of politics.

 

they should be hailed as high diplomats or something.

When did we ask to be hailed as high diplomats? Maybe I missed it.

 

a warning to anyone reading this post, please do not post in this thread unless you enjoy your words chopped and screwed and regurgitated onto a rusty dwemer platter.

So far you've been most successful with you smiting of our posts...

 

just ignore them and maybe they'll go away.

That's the attitude that wins wars in the Debate Forum.

 

maybe if were lucky Switch will come down with his signature :rip: and put an end

*looks at Peregrine's post*

Seems as though the Mods have spoken.

 

to this mockery.

Mockery of what? You? Or Bush?

 

Hope you enjoyed that as much as I did Untouchable1.

[Malchik]

Perhaps slightly off topic but not wildly so:-

 

I think one of the saddest things about the Iraq debacle is that there may be another occasion when a rogue state with a nuclear arsenal becomes a real threat to the world. It is going to be so much harder now to convince the peoples of the world to take action. It is the repeat of the story of the boy who cried wolf!

 

And even if Bush's problem (and Blair's) was that they were fed misinformation sadly they are the ones in charge and to them falls the responsibility of ensuring that can't happen. That is where the buck has to stop!

[tyjet3]

It is the repeat of the story of the boy who cried wolf!

 

This is very true... The only way anyone will be able to attack somewhere for the defense of innocent people will be after innocent people have died. Nor the US or UN will attack another place unless they have undeniable information of WMD like half a city blown up. Then after people have died, the UN might help. But don't you think it is kind of stupid to wait that long. If you had information that you thought was true and it could lead to many dead innocent people (don't even bring up Iraqi deaths, it's called war it happens...) wouldn't you act on it?

 

Just to verify something...

 

Difference between Iraqi civilian deaths and US 9/11 deaths

 

-Iraq is in the state of war, US was not

-Common soldiers in Iraq look like civilians, better safe then sorry (if i was a US soldier and thought I saw a weapon in someone's hands and they looked threatening, I would not hesitate to protect myself by taking the first shot...)

-US used civilized methods of war, Iraqi used stealth, cheap bomb tricks, and sometimes killed their own people in the process.

 

People are always talking about the iraqi deaths, well what about the Americans that have died in the past five years!! I would believe American lives would mean more to an American then Iraqi lives...

[Malchik]

Iraq has nothing to so with Al Quaeda. Indeed Saddam Hussein refused to deal with that organisation. Be careful what parallels you are drawing.

 

As for killing civilians 'just in case' - in the UK if the police kill innocent civilians by 'accident' there has to be a detailed investigation. Perhaps in the US with its prevalence of guns that is unnecessary. But I prefer our approach.

[Zmid]

It is the repeat of the story of the boy who cried wolf!

 

This is very true... The only way anyone will be able to attack somewhere for the defense of innocent people will be after innocent people have died. Nor the US or UN will attack another place unless they have undeniable information of WMD like half a city blown up.

Or confirmed, accurate intelligence of this.

 

Then after people have died, the UN might help. But don't you think it is kind of stupid to wait that long. If you had information that you thought was true and it could lead to many dead innocent people (don't even bring up Iraqi deaths, it's called war it happens...) wouldn't you act on it?

 

No. If I had confirmed intelligence that something is definately the case which would definately lead to innocent people dying, I would act on it. If I had some unconfirmed intelligence which only suggests this might possibly maybe the case, the only action I would take would be to try to get better intelligence.

 

Just to verify something...

 

Difference between Iraqi civilian deaths and US 9/11 deaths

 

Well, I'll just point out there is still no confirmed link between Iraq and the WTC attack, but...

 

-Iraq is in the state of war, US was not

 

Iraq was only in a state of war because the US and UK attacked it. This is like saying that you were in a fight because I walked up to you, then punched you.

 

-Common soldiers in Iraq look like civilians, better safe then sorry (if i was a US soldier and thought I saw a weapon in someone's hands and they looked threatening, I would not hesitate to protect myself by taking the first shot...)

 

Fine, fair enough. What about things like the incident where US missiles hit a marketplace with no military targets anywhere around? If the US can't trust it's missiles to go where they are intended to, why are they using them, especially when they are claiming they were making pains to avoid civilian casualties?

 

-US used civilized methods of war

 

In my opinion, 'civilised methods of war' is a contradiction in terms. War is always bloody, violent and quite often avoidable.

 

Iraqi used stealth, cheap bomb tricks

 

Otherwise known as 'guerilla warfare', and, even then, that only started after the US and UK conque...I mean, 'liberated' Iraq.

 

and sometimes killed their own people in the process.

 

? :huh: ? :huh: ? :huh: ? :huh: ? Where did you see this? The only time that the Iraqis were even accused of killing their own people during the war was in the marketplace incident I referred to above, and that was pretty much disproven when pieces of wreckage were found from the missiles with US markings and serial numbers on them.

 

People are always talking about the iraqi deaths, well what about the Americans that have died in the past five years!!

 

What the hell's how many Americans have died in the past five years got to do with Iraq?

 

I would believe American lives would mean more to an American then Iraqi lives...

 

Personally, I look on it as human lives. Nationality, skin colour, religion, or anything else is irrelevant.

[Brighid]

The thing about this film, is even if you consider that the editing skewed to be as partisan as possible, Bush hangs himself with his own quotes.

 

The 11 minutes bush sat there acting like an idiot in a Flori-duh classroom MAY have been enough time to prevent the Pentagon attack had he acted immediately and appropritely. But without Rove right beside him to pull the puppet strings, Bush doesn't know what to do.

 

And Bush's own quote....."some call you the elite, I call you my base" That sickens me. He pretty much confirms that if you aren't rich, the Bush administration doesn't care about you whatsoever.

 

And Moore attacks the democrats too. That movie makes me want to write Kerry and say "whre the #### were you" the disenfranchised African-American voters in Florida needed one senator to stand up for them. Where was Kerry then? Where was Durbin then? Is it because there is not a single African-American senator? Moore also made Tom Daschle look like a complete idiot, and made a rather scathing indictment of congressmen.

 

So yes, there is propaganda, and partisanship, but not as much as you would expect from Moore, and not enough to cloud the fact that there are seroiusly scary things happening in this administration.

[ImmortalSnafu]

You took the words out of my mouth White Wolf,I couldn't agree more.

[Untouchable1]

as there always have been... kinda like the 'oh its the end of the world' thing these christians wine about. theyve been saying that since around 0030 AD. well so has the idea of shifty goings on in the government, not that there ever wasnt any theres tons of historical evidence to prove it so. but its just the fact that people rediscover these facts like theyve never happened before, and thats what gets people into the anti-democracy state of mind that they dont know its a constant thing now some new revelation. just like people think now 'omg end of tha world' when really the idea has been around for millenia.

[surian]

Just because it's been going on for a long time doesn't mean that we should turn a blind eye to it. Also, I know that corruption in governments is common, but again, that doesn't mean that we should sit back and watch it happen, nor does it mean we should become jaded to it. I would much prefer people get angry about it than to become complaicent. That way, at least something may happen to stop it all eventually.

 

EDIT: Also, what you call anti-democracy I call pro-democracy. I'm fighting for our democracy, not against it. The view that liberals and whistle-blowers are anti-democracy or anti-american is one of the most unintelligent views our country has today. It says to people that if you disagree with the government you are a traitor to the country... very democratic don't you think?