Page 2 of 3
Posted: 04 Jun 2006, 13:55
by thelostdragon
Hey, why have you deleted your message?
Posted: 04 Jun 2006, 13:56
by EvaUnit02
I'm surprised that you haven't caught on yet.
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/in ... America%3F
The most right-leaning biased new source Foxnews was used, the ridiculously redneck yank imagery and statements, that I linked to the site of a computer game (America's Army), that I used a phrase from
Zero Wing (For great justice), that the picture of Jesus has Commander Riker's head imposed on it.
Enough lulz have been had now.
Posted: 04 Jun 2006, 13:56
by thelostdragon
There it is again. Huh?
Posted: 04 Jun 2006, 13:59
by EvaUnit02
One last lul was had.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 01:07
by thelostdragon
Interesting article:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1 ... 48,00.html
More Blood, More Money, More Doubts
By Georg Mascolo in Washington
130,000 US soldiers haven't been able to bring peace to Iraq. Now George W. Bush has admitted his error -- and is sending in a further 21,000 troops. The US President is thus almost completely ignoring the recommendations of the Baker Commission.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 01:33
by Yi-Long
Yeah... 20.000 more troops will surely help(!)
They wont get ANYWHERE as long as they dont get the Iraqi people behind them. And to be honest, I doubt America will EVER get those people behind them, after all the shit they've pulled.
On the one hand, I'd say: America should stay, build the country, clean the mess they made, as they owe it to the citizens.
On the other hand I say, the sooner they are outta there, the better. But then it coul just as easily mean even worse times for the citizens, because then the terrorist group(s) will immediately take control, and probably wont improve matters much either...
The best sollution would probably be to have other nations sending troops, and purely for rebuilding the country. BUT 1: I dont think other countries should be stuck with cleaning up the mess the USA has made, and 2: I dont think it's possble rebuilding it, cause the non-american troops would also get attacked. Just like the Dutch troops who are supposedly in Afghanistan to 'rebuild the country', but are just every day fighting with the Taliban, and havent built shit...
So basically, it's just a huge big fucking mess, and the victims are the Iraqi people, and the young american poor people, who signed up for the army as a last resort and hope for a better future, and had to go fight in a war based on lies, for leaders who are only insisting on thsi war for their own personal gains...
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 01:59
by thelostdragon
Yi-Long wrote:They wont get ANYWHERE as long as they dont get the Iraqi people behind them. And to be honest, I doubt America will EVER get those people behind them, after all the shit they've pulled.
It's funny you'd write that, because they recently brought a programme on TV about a German journalist (Ulrich Tilgner I think) who has been in Iraq for almost a year and mostly in Baghdad. He has been working on several statistics and for each statistic his team has been trying to ask as many people as they could get, from farmers, people walking in the street to high officials. 80% think believe that they are less safe under the the Americans/new Iraqi Government if you will, than they were with Saddam in power. At least you wouldn't have to worry sending your kids to school, at least there were schools.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 02:10
by Yi-Long
thelostdragon wrote:Yi-Long wrote:They wont get ANYWHERE as long as they dont get the Iraqi people behind them. And to be honest, I doubt America will EVER get those people behind them, after all the shit they've pulled.
It's funny, because they recently brought a programme on TV about a German journalist (Ulrich Tilgner I think) who has been in Iraq for almost a year and mostly in Baghdad. He has been working on several statistics and for each statistic his team has been trying to ask as many people as they could get, from farmers, people walking in the street to high officials. 80% think believe that they are less safe under the the Americans/new Iraqi Government if you will, than they were with Saddam in power. At least you wouldn't have to worry sending your kids to school, at least there were schools.
yeah, exactly my point. And that situation wont change as long as americans are still there. Unless they can suddenly and magically kill all the terrorists who are attacking the troops as well as the civilians, and also can magically stop new terrorists from appearing...
So at this point, it's just a total lose-lose situation, for all parties involved. Except ofcourse the weapon-industry.
Can you think of a sollution? I sure cant. Not a reasonable or realistic solution anyway.
Ah well... anyway... time for a soothing bedtime story about eating babies, to calm me down and make sleep well...
http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/lofiver ... 170-0.html
(link not for the faint hearted)
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 19:34
by bradavon
Agreed Bush is wrong but give it a rest with your America bashing LD it's getting dull.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 19:38
by Shen
bradavon wrote:Agreed Bush is wrong but give it a rest with your America bashing LD it's getting dull.
if you dont like it...dont read it. sorry but thats the simple answer, i know your a mod and all, but unless it gets out of hand, just ignore it. i do with some stuff on here, its not hard to do.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 19:47
by romerojpg
Start a "Iraq citizens are mentalists" thread Brad
as hell they kill/torture/maime/rape each other a lot more than the Americans ever could, but thats not fun news for the reporters and stupid websites to talk about.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 19:48
by Shen
romerojpg wrote:Start a "Iraq citizens are mentalists" thread Brad
as hell they kill/torture/maime/rape each other a lot more than the Americans ever could, but thats not fun news for the reporters and stupid websites to talk about.
no thats just for the mainstream to report on...
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 19:58
by bradavon
Shen wrote:i know your a mod and all
My comments are mine not mine with mod hat on.
Shen wrote:but unless it gets out of hand, just ignore it.
I intend too. It just gets pretty sad really the constant American bashing.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 22:18
by Yi-Long
Why this is called debate, isnt it? All these crimes by America are in the news. So why shouldnt we debate about it?
Like Shen said, if you dont like it, dont read it or get involved. Simple as that.
Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 22:23
by Shen
bradavon wrote:
It just gets pretty sad really the constant American bashing.
funnily enough i find it sad at all the muslim bashing thats taking place in the uk and around the world. so america bashing makes a change for me to read/hear
Posted: 13 Jan 2007, 06:32
by EvaUnit02
romerojpg wrote:Start a "Iraq citizens are mentalists"
Wow, all Iraqis have psychic powers. You learn something every day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mentalist
Posted: 13 Jan 2007, 20:06
by thelostdragon
LOL @ Eva.
Brad, I am not bashing Americans.
Posted: 14 Jan 2007, 05:19
by EvaUnit02
thelostdragon wrote:Brad, I am not bashing Americans.
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 19:15
by thelostdragon
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 19:39
by bradavon
George Galloway is "really" against the war. He's even gone as far to say Tony Blair is a murder and should be tried at The Hague.
His words are extreme.
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 20:13
by thelostdragon
bradavon wrote:His words are extreme.
Extreme situations require more than that if you ask me.
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 22:29
by bradavon
Well he is a politician so in his eyes he's doing more than just words. The problem is his words are so extreme (say what you will about the Iraq war but hanging Tony Blair, come on) virtually no one listens to him.
Posted: 29 Jan 2007, 00:04
by thelostdragon
bradavon wrote:(say what you will about the Iraq war but hanging Tony Blair, come on)
This statement is so widely spread, because he was mis-quoted by the "Daily Telegraph". He said that if he was an Iraqi person whose family had been wiped out, he'd seriously consider to commit a suicide attack on Blair.
Posted: 29 Jan 2007, 00:24
by Markgway
Problem is: suicide attacks are never carreid out on the people who may or may not be responsible (and even then it would be morally dubious as nothing is black and white in war) but on innocent civilians like you and me.
I don't want to die or lose a limb because someone halfway across the world lost their granny. I really don't care that much. Sorry.
Suicide bombers are scum. Fact.
Posted: 29 Jan 2007, 08:58
by Yi-Long
Markgway wrote:Problem is: suicide attacks are never carreid out on the people who may or may not be responsible (and even then it would be morally dubious as nothing is black and white in war) but on innocent civilians like you and me.
I don't want to die or lose a limb because someone halfway across the world lost their granny. I really don't care that much. Sorry.
Suicide bombers are scum. Fact.
What's the difference between carpetbombing a civilian area and suicide bombing then? Morally I mean.
To me, lobbing rockets from a height of 3-4 km's on the heads of innocents, is even worse then a suicide bomb taking out innocent civilians.