Opinion poll

[Phreakmeister]

Has your opinion on the war in Iraq changed since the outbreak of the war?

[Serendipity]

I didn't vote in the poll as my stance is not represented there. I don't feel there's a single "correct" attitude to the war in Iraq. I support my country's troops 100% - there's nothing worse for a soldier than to feel that he's not got his country's backing. I also don't care if Saddam rots in hell. However, the rifts that have been made - made, not exposed - within Europe, between Europe and the US, within the UN, and so on will take a long time to fix. Now it's started, let's hope there's a quick and successful military outcome - but there's a lot of work to do afterwards.

The west put Saddam where he is, it's right that the west should remove him. Saddam has nothing to do with 9/11 or al-Qaeda, though, and he's not a threat to American domestic security (he might be if he's not captured/killed soon!).

[Shadaik]

Uhm, why is trhis thread marked as "unread" every time I return to the forum although this is the third time I read it and still find no new messages in here?

[King Solomon]

Because someone voted in the poll. Even though there are no posts it will show as unread when someone votes.

[DEAD ZONE]

The Mouse Trap

A mouse looked through a crack in the wall to see the farmer and his wife opening a package; what food might it
contain?

He was aghast to discover that it was a mouse trap!
Retreating to the farmyard, the mouse proclaimed the warning,"There is a mouse trap in the house, there is a mouse trap in the house."
The chicken clucked and scratched, raised her head and said,"Mr. Mouse, I can tell you this is a grave concern to
you, but it is of no consequence to me; I cannot be bothered by it."
The mouse turned to the pig and told him, "There is a mouse trap in the house."

"I am so very sorry Mr. Mouse," sympathized the pig, "but there is nothing I can do about it but pray; be ***ured that you are in my prayers."
The mouse turned to the cow, who replied, "Like wow, Mr. Mouse, a mouse trap; am I in grave danger, Duh?"
So the mouse returned to the house head down and dejected to face the
farmer's mouse trap alone.
That very night a sound was heard throughout the house, like the sound of a mouse trap catching its prey. The farmer's wife rushed to see what was caught.
In the darkness, she did not see that it was a venomous snake whose tail the trap had caught.
The snake bit the farmer's wife.
The farmer rushed her to the hospital.
She returned home with a fever. Now everyone knows you treat a fever with fresh chicken soup, so the farmer took his hatchet to the farmyard for the
soup's main ingredient.

His wife's sickness continued so that friends and neighbors came to sit with her around the clock. To feed them, the farmer butchered the pig. The farmer's wife did not get well, in fact, she died, and so
many people came for her funeral the farmer had the cow slaughtered to
provide meat for all of them to eat.
So the next time you hear that someone is facing a problem and think
that it does not concern you, remember that when the least of us is
threatened, we are all at risk.
And so it may be with Germany, France, Russia, China, and Belgium one day...

[King Solomon]

So, tell me DZ, how did you get that terrible taste out of your mouth after you bit the farmer's wife :confused :wink :lol

[Phreakmeister]

So a venomous snake gets caught in a mouse trap and bites the lady of the house, which gives her only a fever... Now why don't I find this story/metaphor very realistic... :wink

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
So a venomous snake gets caught in a mouse trap and bites the lady of the house, which gives her only a fever... Now why don't I find this story/metaphor very realistic... :wink because,as usual,you did not read it all.
It started with a fever{thats how invenimation works}it ended with her death. try actualy readding what others say in full before comentting .:rolleyes: :smash

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by King Solomon
So, tell me DZ, how did you get that terrible taste out of your mouth after you bit the farmer's wife :confused :wink :lol Actually.I died from bitting you.You should not have tried killing me in your trap.
This is my ghost speeking.:p

[King Solomon]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
Actually.I died from bitting you...

I see the farmer's wife dress didn't fool you for a moment. Darn it, maybe I should have shaved my legs :lol

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by King Solomon


I see the farmer's wife dress didn't fool you for a moment. Darn it, maybe I should have shaved my legs :lol

Klinger you aint.

he was at least a snappy dresser.
:p :wave

[Sjax]

Another interpretation of DZs story.
The farmer and his wife started out by trying to solve a minor problem. Because they tried it in a wrong way they created a much bigger problem. In this story it was a snakebit, in the real world its hostility towards USA in the whole moslem world, a hostility that might result in many new terrorists.

[DustyBottoms]

This is actually very interesting. Americans support it by 69% as of today.

When you lump in the rest of Dumb Laws members it is slightly below 50%.

I wonder if the favorable vote will increase if we fine the WMD materials.

[Phreakmeister]

This does not really belong in this thread, but nevermind:

Do you know why the US and the USSR never attacked each other? It was called, as has been mentioned here before, MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction). Both countries/leaders knew, that if war broke out, it would lead to the total destruction of both nations. The same applies here. It is exactly Iraq's possession of the filthiest weapons possible that requires delicacy and prudence. Not just for this war, but also for the period after it. It is hardly in doubt that Saddam's regime will fall. What requires care and tact is the way we deal with each other after all this is over. Iraq needs to be rebuilt. The economy needs to be revived. International relations need to get back to normal. Nuclear disarmament worldwide needs to be restarted. The environmental problems (and imminent catastrophes) need to be tackled. All this can't be done in the current poisoned climate between what once were Allies. It is exactly the attitude of the Bush administration towards "dissident" nations and it's naive attitude to the rest of the world that endangers the future of this planet after this war is over.

[Sjax]

Not to keep bugging you on your remark in the "The Real Treat"-thread, Phreak, but writing what you just wrote, how can you say that WMD dont have a defensive purpose?

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Sjax
Another interpretation of DZs story.
The farmer and his wife started out by trying to solve a minor problem. Because they tried it in a wrong way they created a much bigger problem. In this story it was a snakebit, in the real world its hostility towards USA in the whole moslem world, a hostility that might result in many new terrorists.

You clearly have never been a farmer.Mice are a pest that multiply rapidly and destroy grain stocks just as fast.
the problem was a mouse,not a snake.

mouse trap.get it.
You dont mess with a snake.YOU KILL IT ,Or turn it loose carefully to do its job on the mouse,which it clearly was not doing in the first place .Otherwise,no need for the trap.

Which also fits the story my u.n. loving friends.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
This does not really belong in this thread, but nevermind:

Do you know why the US and the USSR never attacked each other? It was called, as has been mentioned here before, MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction). Both countries/leaders knew, that if war broke out, it would lead to the total destruction of both nations. The same applies here. It is exactly Iraq's possession of the filthiest weapons possible that requires delicacy and prudence. Not just for this war, but also for the period after it. It is hardly in doubt that Saddam's regime will fall. What requires care and tact is the way we deal with each other after all this is over. Iraq needs to be rebuilt. The economy needs to be revived. International relations need to get back to normal. Nuclear disarmament worldwide needs to be restarted. The environmental problems (and imminent catastrophes) need to be tackled. All this can't be done in the current poisoned climate between what once were Allies. It is exactly the attitude of the Bush administration towards "dissident" nations and it's naive attitude to the rest of the world that endangers the future of this planet after this war is over.

Brain dead .HE HAS NO NUKES YET.MAD was based on nucleare destruction not chemicals and bio werapons.

For the millionth time.

Nuclear disarmament worldwide needs to be restarted HOW.Get the N.Koreans, pakistanies, and india to do it.This I got a see.

What a pipe dream.Its a nice idea but you and me winning the lottery is much more likely.

It is exactly the attitude of the Bush administration towards "dissident" nations and it's naive attitude to the rest of the world that endangers the future of this planet after this war is over. It is the stupidity of europe and their inability to learn from past mistakes when dealing with tyrants that has got us here and is the bigger threat.{see pipe dream above}. Talk about naive.:rolleyes:

but we have been over this already.You are not going to change your mind and neither am i.:wave

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
It is the stupidity of europe and their inability to learn from past mistakes when dealing with tyrants that has got us here and is the bigger threat.{see pipe dream above}. Talk about naive.:rolleyes:

See, it is this nonsense, the way you portray your lack of knowledge of basic facts concerning this world, that disqualifies you for any rational political discussion.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister


See, it is this nonsense, the way you portray your lack of knowledge of basic facts concerning this world, that disqualifies you for any rational political discussion.

It is this European arrogant attitude that makes us ignore you for the one-sided want Abe great powers that your are not.
Your argument in a nut shell:
Anyone that disagrees with us {and can back it up} is substandard and not worth listening to
:rolleyes:

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
Anyone that disagrees with us {and can back it up} is substandard and not worth listening to
:rolleyes:

Anyone that can back it up is more than worth listening to. Only problem is: you can't back anything up. The best you can do is come up with half truths. But half truths are no complete truths. Your lies, rhetoric, twisting of words, changing the facts of history, changing the facts of modern-day life, ignoring the realities of intercultural intercourse and interaction make you believe in your opinion, but what is worst of all: you yourself have no idea of how wrong you are. For which you will one day pay a high price.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister


Anyone that can back it up is more than worth listening to. Only problem is: you can't back anything up. The best you can do is come up with half truths. But half truths are no complete truths. Your lies, rhetoric, twisting of words, changing the facts of history, changing the facts of modern-day life, ignoring the realities of intercultural intercourse and interaction make you believe in your opinion, but what is worst of all: you yourself have no idea of how wrong you are. For which you will one day pay a high price. That’s rich coming from someone that insisted the single British paper you quoted was correct and others wrong when they said the two-afghan prisoners were killed "while under interrogation”. Others said we need to wait on the investigation into the two deaths in Afghanistan. You just insisted they were killed under interrogation, before anyone else new much about it. I posted an article quoting they were found in their cells dead but everyone else is wrong and you are always right.

A common tactic is to make such false accusations to demonize your opposition and instill doubt about their character because you cant back up your position effectively.


Lets see, I have an African American in-law, several Hispanic ones, polish, Irish slave and a list of others. But I know nothing of international culture.
I live in a city with a major university and interact with every culture imaginable and even have friends from overseas, been in their homes, eaten their meals but I know nothing.

One need not have to travel to a foreign land to get a true taste of it. Not in this neighborhood.

Now, who spreads lies, half-truths, twists words ECT.

You speak big phreak, but say little.



The only high price that will be paid is the one of constant appeasement of evil hidden in the guise of cultural tolerance.

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
Lets see, I have an African American in-law, several Hispanic ones, polish, Irish slave and a list of others. But I know nothing of international culture.
I live in a city with a major university and interact with every culture imaginable and even have friends from overseas, been in their homes, eaten their meals but I know nothing.

One need not have to travel to a foreign land to get a true taste of it. Not in this neighborhood.

This may be new to you, DZ, but actually one does. The only way to get to know Iraq and the Iraqi's is not by talking to Iraqi refugees in the US or Europe. They can't have a completely true image of Iraq, simply because they do not live there anymore. The influence by their native culture has waned, while the influence of the dominant culture(s) of their new (temporary) residences has increased.
I know several muslims, but does that mean I know the nature of islam in the Middle East? No. The only way to get to know the islam of the Middle East is by experiencing the islam in the Middle East itself. The only place to experience Nigerian culture is in Nigeria, not through interacting with Nigerian refugees abroad. It may give an indication, but never anything more than that.

The only high price that will be paid is the one of constant appeasement of evil hidden in the guise of cultural tolerance.

The problem the US faces in the Middle East is that it has an extremely negative image. And regardless of whether that image is right or wrong, it is something that has to be taken into consideration when fighting the consequences of that image. What Bush is doing, is trying to fight the image by confirming it. Which works counterproductive. He does not stop the flow of people to Al Qaeda, he supercharges it. He opens up new markets for Al Qaeda. He is playing right into the hands of Al Qaeda. I so wish you were right, because it would make the world a whole lot easier, but it's not. You're plain wrong.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister







This may be new to you, DZ, but actually one does. The only way to get to know Iraq and the Iraqi's is not by talking to Iraqi refugees in the US or Europe. They can't have a completely true image of Iraq, simply because they do not live there anymore. The influence by their native culture has waned, while the influence of the dominant culture(s) of their new (temporary) residences has increased.You are making bad assumptions. Who said anything about refugees?I know several muslims, but does that mean I know the nature of islam in the Middle East? No. The only way to get to know the islam of the Middle East is by experiencing the islam in the Middle East itself. The only place to experience Nigerian culture is in Nigeria, not through interacting with Nigerian refugees abroad. It may give an indication, but never anything more than that.Again. You assume too much. No one said anything about refugees. And I disagree with you tremendously about only in country can one know a culture. They keep those traditions and cultures alive even here. And even the Muslim I once worked with would disagree with you.The problem the US faces in the Middle East is that it has an extremely negative image. And regardless of whether that image is right or wrong, it is something that has to be taken into consideration when fighting the consequences of that image. Agreed.

What Bush is doing, is trying to fight the image by confirming it. Which works counterproductive. He does not stop the flow of people to Al Qaeda, he supercharges it. He opens up new markets for Al Qaeda. He is playing right into the hands of Al Qaeda. I so wish you were right, because it would make the world a whole lot easier, but it's not. You're plain wrong. Wrong. What he is doing {in his belief anyway} is confronting a threat and the image will have to wait. Why worry about an image at the expense of those who he has sworn to serve and protect. The U.S. image will be bad as long as we refuse to capitulate and sell out Israel. That is simply a fact.

Al Qeada already had the flow {just look at its size and reach before this even started}. What he did was no massive boost to anything that did not already have it. It is a wake up call to states like Syria, Korea and the like.We do not take to having several thousand of our Damned Yankees killed.A part of he message is, reign your little b@stards in or we will orphan the little s.o.b`s

I think the gap, the gulf, between the Islamic world and Europe and North America is deeply troubling; I think the degree of antipathy in the Islamic world to the West is very worrying. Of course hatred of America is wholly, wholly unjustified, but as an American I'm not sure that I would necessarily feel that it could be best dealt with by bombing the haters.only in some cases will that do any good.

There are sometimes situations that can only be dealt with effectively by the use of force and if that can be reasonably anticipated at the outset, it seems to me foolish, dangerous and costly to indulge in a prolonged period of ineffective political and economic measures.The image will have to wate because the image will always be like it is as long as our freindship with the devil israel is alive.

[Phreakmeister]

I do not disagree with you on the point that force can sometimes be necessary to face up to a certain evil. The only thing we disagree upon is whether that is the case here. And I still say, despite all the developments of the past month, that in the long run, Bush's decision to wage war on Iraq will prove to have been a fatal one.

Your assumption that this war has proven or will prove a wake-up call to countries like Syria and DPR Korea is extremely naive. Do you seriously think that they will now say: "Oh I'm sorry, we we're wrong but we didn't know it. Forgive us, and please give us a chance to show that we have now understood what you meant."? I sure hope for you that that is not what you think, because it won't happen. Countries won't try to prevent attacks by changing their lives. Even if they wanted to (which I doubt in the first place), they don't trust the US enough to rely on the success of policy change in preventing an attack. They have now seen that they can be attacked, and they will learn from the mistakes of Iraq. They will increase or start up their nuclear armament, they will increase the size and power of their armies, they will prepare for the battles that lie ahead. They won't roll over (one of dave's favourite terms), they won't be caught off-guard. They will follow the motto of the boy scouts: be prepared.

[King Solomon]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
...in the long run, Bush's decision to wage war on Iraq will prove to have been a fatal one...

In the Political sense I hope this statement is true for Bush (I will make note here that as much as I hated President Reagan I wished the President or her husband Ron no physical harm :rolleyes: )

On the other hand I do believe this war is going to, again in the long run, bring more fatalities to the American and British public by way of Fundamentalist Islamic terrorism.

[Maderic]

In regards to Phreak's post about the USSR and USA...... The USSR didn't have a 100th of what they claimed to have... A great majority of the nukes they claimed to have, weren't real...

And in any case, we could have white washed the Commies....

Maderic......

[Serendipity]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
I think the gap, the gulf, between the Islamic world and Europe and North America is deeply troubling; I think the degree of antipathy in the Islamic world to the West is very worrying. Of course hatred of America is wholly, wholly unjustified, but as an American I'm not sure that I would necessarily feel that it could be best dealt with by bombing the haters.only in some cases will that do any good.

There are sometimes situations that can only be dealt with effectively by the use of force and if that can be reasonably anticipated at the outset, it seems to me foolish, dangerous and costly to indulge in a prolonged period of ineffective political and economic measures.The image will have to wate because the image will always be like it is as long as our freindship with the devil israel is alive. DZ, I know that spelling ain't your strongest suit :) but please acknowledge those whom you quote. This lot came from the Trilateral Commission's discussion on The State of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership last October: Chris Patten vs. Richard Perle (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4865). At least credit your sources, it's only polite :)

[aclu14]

Originally posted by Maderic
In regards to Phreak's post about the USSR and USA...... The USSR didn't have a 100th of what they claimed to have...



Only four trillion dollars worth?