Skimmer and Stas Bush

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:25pm

Stas Bush wrote://Let's listen to the protestors who think Saddam is a nice man..//
Oh no again! NO ONE has love for Saddam or his regime. But it's THEIR business, not some freakish "WE ARE THE world order".
Saddam ATTACKS NO ONE and as long as his "cruelty" is in his sovereign state, he's INDEPENDENT!

Obviously americans like their own independence and scream a lot about it. But they don't respect others, neither the sovereigh state of Iraq nor the UN. I wonder, the UN also thinks Saddam is a good man? Or they just don't like
ILLEGAL AGRESSION?

It's not about Saddam - it's about how US are acting.

Oh yes. I forgot. You idiots think that it doesn't matter how horrifically evil someone is, they should be left alone if they don't bug YOU. What a self-centred ass you are.

I support this war for one reason: There are too many dictators, and this will at least deal with one. And yes, it is about Saddam. That's who is being hunted here. Probably for the wrong reasons(Bush getting revenge for his Daddy), but it is Saddam being hunted.

This 'It's not about Saddam' bullshit is pissing me off. Of course it is.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-21 01:27pm

How funny. The anti-war types will accept ANYTHING the Iraqis say as truth and give them the full benefit of the doubt. But anything said by the US administration is to be met with nothing but skepticism and mockery.

After all, the Iraqi government has been such honest brokers, their hands clean of any wrongdoing....

The "peaceful" left is open to anything Saddam says, ignoring his use of WMDs on civilians and his open advancement of Nuclear Proliferation. The same people that argued about the US pullout of the Test Ban Treaty now will accept any of the ass-porridge that come out of Saddam's regime.

And then you get all offended and wonder why we call protesters "anti-American"!

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-21 01:27pm

Stravo
OPh yes. The rockets. WOW!!! None of them was even NEAR to hit a target. That's SUPER WEAPONS! Obviously Saddam can destroy the world with it...
(ohhh)

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:29pm

Stas Bush wrote:Stravo
OPh yes. The rockets. WOW!!! None of them was even NEAR to hit a target. That's SUPER WEAPONS! Obviously Saddam can destroy the world with it...
(ohhh)

I see you learned to type at Paul Jaques U.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-21 01:29pm

If you attacked USSR and killed Stalin to "FREE" the Russian people from the tyrant, they would HATE you. You don't understand. Each country has the regime it deserves.

And this is why the initial German troops that entered Russia were WELCOMED by the people until the SS arrived and started butchering them as badly if not worst than Stalin. Read up on YOUR OWN HISTORY before flinging bullshit.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-03-21 01:30pm

Stas Bush wrote:Stravo
OPh yes. The rockets. WOW!!! None of them was even NEAR to hit a target. That's SUPER WEAPONS! Obviously Saddam can destroy the world with it...
(ohhh)

You're an asshole, have you any idea of what type of guidance mechanisms the missiles had? The hit probabilities? Just because some missiles miss, doesn't mean they're not a threat.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-21 01:30pm

Stas Bush wrote:Stravo
OPh yes. The rockets. WOW!!! None of them was even NEAR to hit a target. That's SUPER WEAPONS! Obviously Saddam can destroy the world with it...
(ohhh)

Hey ass...how about commenting on a logical point instead of spouting your bullshit.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-21 01:31pm

I smell a troll who lives under the bridge....

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-03-21 01:32pm

You hit the nail right on the head, Bush. We're violating the opinion of the majority of the international community, most of whose outlook on September 11th ranged from, "Oh, that's just too bad," to, "Man, thank God that wasn't me," and, "They deserve it, the fucking Americans." Only a relative handful of nations were actually sincere in their sympathy. The rest privately applauded the action and smiled inwardly at the concept of a "death of a thousand cuts" for the hated United States.

I don't know about you, but I'm less than enthusiastic about the demand that we permit an avowedly anti-American debating society plot our foregin policy now and into the future. Sure Hussein's not a threat - to Paris or Berlin. From our point of view? He's just getting started.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-21 01:34pm

Evil and legitimacy have nothing together. No one wants US in Iraq. We have seen the live footage. They said they will blow up their OIL just to keep it off someone's hands.
Yeah, wrong reasons. And the target is oil. Not Saddam.
I wonder why US statements are met with skepticism and mockery. You know why? Because we are not blind fools. We SEE what's going on.
Saddam? Well why don't you fuck off - in Iraq he is the legitimate leader. LEgitimate means he's LEGAL. He's own people are fine with him, as we in the USSR were fine with Stalin, Chrushev and all the others.
And agression (no matter how GOOD are your purposes, although it's clear they are NOT GOOD AT ALL!) is NOT legitimate.
US fucked off the UN. US fucked OFF our countries. US FUCKED OFF my country. You think I should now give respect to some US lies? What the hell! I will belive MY country. It's not a totalitarian state. We are NOT blind.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:35pm

Axis Kast wrote:You hit the nail right on the head, Bush. We're violating the opinion of the majority of the international community, most of whose outlook on September 11th ranged from, "Oh, that's just too bad," to, "Man, thank God that wasn't me," and, "They deserve it, the fucking Americans." Only a relative handful of nations were actually sincere in their sympathy. The rest privately applauded the action and smiled inwardly at the concept of a "death of a thousand cuts" for the hated United States.

You have serious, serious issues in your head, if you think any of the civilized world applauded that action.

I don't know about you, but I'm less than enthusiastic about the demand that we permit an avowedly anti-American debating society plot our foregin policy now and into the future. Sure Hussein's not a threat - to Paris or Berlin. From our point of view? He's just getting started.

The UN disagrees with America once and it's an 'Anti-American Debating Society'. People like you remind me why I don't invite my relatives to this country...

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-21 01:36pm

People say that "Iraq is not a threat to America". But they base this on the only previous historical model that we have to go on: the Soviet-American standoff. The USSR had the capability to attack the US with missiles and had the sealift and airlift capacity to back up an invasion. Saddam obviously does not have these things.

But that historical model is flawed. There are so many other ways to attack a country, as has been clearly demonstrated on September 11th. Saddam would not, could not, threaten us in old-fashioned Soviet ways but can threaten us in innovative new ways (kamikazes, nukes in ships, etc).

Another thing to bear in mind is if Saddam gets nukes, how long will they stay in his borders? The other Arab countries will create nuke weapons programs of their own, since they must all have "parity". Eventually a fanatic or sympathizer will pass one of these on to an extremist group. Do we want to see another Cold War standoff with a hair-trigger Arab bloc full of extremists that think nothing of committing suicide while taking their enemies down with them?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:36pm

Stas Bush wrote:Evil and legitimacy have nothing together. No one wants US in Iraq. We have seen the live footage. They said they will blow up their OIL just to keep it off someone's hands.
Yeah, wrong reasons. And the target is oil. Not Saddam.
I wonder why US statements are met with skepticism and mockery. You know why? Because we are not blind fools. We SEE what's going on.
Saddam? Well why don't you fuck off - in Iraq he is the legitimate leader. LEgitimate means he's LEGAL. He's own people are fine with him, as we in the USSR were fine with Stalin, Chrushev and all the others.
And agression (no matter how GOOD are your purposes, although it's clear they are NOT GOOD AT ALL!) is NOT legitimate.
US fucked off the UN. US fucked OFF our countries. US FUCKED OFF my country. You think I should now give respect to some US lies? What the hell! I will belive MY country. It's not a totalitarian state. We are NOT blind.

I see. Tell me, do you believe it was immoral to aid the Allies in WWI and WWII, because it was 'Aggression'?

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-21 01:38pm

Stas Bush wrote:Evil and legitimacy have nothing together. No one wants US in Iraq. We have seen the live footage. They said they will blow up their OIL just to keep it off someone's hands.
Yeah, wrong reasons. And the target is oil. Not Saddam.
I wonder why US statements are met with skepticism and mockery. You know why? Because we are not blind fools. We SEE what's going on.
Saddam? Well why don't you fuck off - in Iraq he is the legitimate leader. LEgitimate means he's LEGAL. He's own people are fine with him, as we in the USSR were fine with Stalin, Chrushev and all the others.
And agression (no matter how GOOD are your purposes, although it's clear they are NOT GOOD AT ALL!) is NOT legitimate.
US fucked off the UN. US fucked OFF our countries. US FUCKED OFF my country. You think I should now give respect to some US lies? What the hell! I will belive MY country. It's not a totalitarian state. We are NOT blind.

Wow, excuse me...let me stand back in awe of the FUCKING LOGIC that pervades this post.

Blind no. Stupid maybe, but definately not blind.

Kelly Antilles · Post by **Kelly Antilles** » 2003-03-21 01:38pm

Stas Bush wrote:You don't understand. Each country has the regime it deserves.

The regime it DESERVES??? WTF? So you are saying that the Iraqi people DESERVE to have Saddam as their ruler. Germany DESERVED to have Hitler. Well, how interesting.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-21 01:39pm

Stas Bush, so what about the oil? What will Saddam build with the oil? Hospitals and schools? He will buy Nuclear Weapons. Is that what you want?

How about when those Nuclear Weapons turn up in the hands of Chechens?

Da svedanya Rodina.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:40pm

Kelly Antilles wrote:
Stas Bush wrote:You don't understand. Each country has the regime it deserves.
The regime it DESERVES??? WTF? So you are saying that the Iraqi people DESERVE to have Saddam as their ruler. Germany DESERVED to have Hitler. Well, how interesting.

Careful: Not agreeing mindlessly with him and the other peaceniks makes you the brainwashed one.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-21 01:40pm

Iraq is placed under economic blockade. THEY are forced to live for their OIL. They were FORCED to be disarmed.
And now, when NO resistance can be shown, the US victoriously attcks Iraq.
It's like fighting with a sword against an UNARMED.

Logic? You want logic? I have some. I don't want US attack ME. Today Iraq. Tomorrow China. And who will be next? Go to hell! US has their own continent.

About Sep. 11 - Saddam didn't do that. And US FAILED to eliminate Bin Laden. Don't blame others for the in-state problems of the US.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-21 01:41pm

Yeah, wrong reasons. And the target is oil. Not Saddam.

Proof, dammit, proof!

And agression (no matter how GOOD are your purposes, although it's clear they are NOT GOOD AT ALL!) is NOT legitimate.

Even if the person you're aggressing against is standing atop a mountain of bodies, laughing at you as you look upon him?

US fucked off the UN. US fucked OFF our countries. US FUCKED OFF my country. You think I should now give respect to some US lies? What the hell! I will belive MY country. It's not a totalitarian state. We are NOT blind.

Of course, when we believe what our country tells us, it's because we're brainwashed; when you believe what your country tells you, it's because you're not blind to the truth.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-03-21 01:42pm

Coyote wrote:How funny. The anti-war types will accept ANYTHING the Iraqis say as truth and give them the full benefit of the doubt. But anything said by the US administration is to be met with nothing but skepticism and mockery.

The US is supposedly above lies and bullshit, yet they've done nothing but lie and bullshit us about what's really going on.

The pro war forces:
Lied about Iraqi troops on the Saudi border
Lied about babies taken out of incubators and left to die
Lied about the aluminum tubes
Lied about nuclear materials from Nigeria
Witheld material from the UN (thousands of pages out of the big report)
Made a pathetic wooden plane out to be a weapon of terror
Plagiarized a term paper for use in a presentation to the UN
Spindoctored Blix's opinions and statements
Said empty warheads = WMD program
Contradict what the CIA had to say about Saddam's threat to America
Has made claims about a 9/11 / Iraq connection, with no evidence
Lied about more things (and Vympel, Kin, etc covered them)

The "peaceful" left is open to anything Saddam says, ignoring his use of WMDs on civilians and his open advancement of Nuclear Proliferation. The same people that argued about the US pullout of the Test Ban Treaty now will accept any of the ass-porridge that come out of Saddam's regime.

First, no evidence of a nuke program has been found
Second, the US lied over and over and over again. Maybe the reason why people are taking Iraq's words over ours is because the evidence favors Iraq's claims?

And then you get all offended and wonder why we call protesters "anti-American"!

Which is all you can do once the evidence is stacked against you.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-21 01:42pm

Logic? You want logic? I have some. I don't want US attack ME. Today Iraq. Tomorrow China. And who will be next? Go to hell! US has their own continent.

I smell the acrid stench of a fucking slippery-slope fallacy, to quote Wong.

Kelly Antilles · Post by **Kelly Antilles** » 2003-03-21 01:42pm

SirNitram wrote: Careful: Not agreeing mindlessly with him and the other peaceniks makes you the brainwashed one.

Thanks Nitram. Almost lost it there.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-03-21 01:43pm

Stas Bush wrote:Iraq is placed under economic blockade. THEY are forced to live for their OIL. They were FORCED to be disarmed.
And now, when NO resistance can be shown, the US victoriously attcks Iraq.
It's like fighting with a sword against an UNARMED.

So where are those missiles and artillery shots coming from? That AA fire? Oh yea, you're full of shit.

Logic? You want logic? I have some. I don't want US attack ME. Today Iraq. Tomorrow China. And who will be next? Go to hell! US has their own continent.

Slippery slope fallacy.

About Sep. 11 - Saddam didn't do that. And US FAILED to eliminate Bin Laden. Don't blame others for the in-state problems of the US.

No one here has claimed a connection.

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2003-03-21 01:46pm

Obviously U all like war.
Fine than. I've seen Sep. 11. Agression. Death. Pain. You have seen that. You don't like when someone KICKS in your HOME. Neither do the Iraquis. But U don't care for them.
And it's pure bullshit about needing to "wipe" Saddam. There's diplomacy. But this word has lost it's meaning.
Saddam won't attack ME. He CAN'T. He was kicked out of action long ago. But US CAN. And they show agression. We have some oil, by the way. Gee thanks. I don't need such "freedom".

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-03-21 01:46pm

Stas Bush wrote:(...)
Logic? You want logic? I have some. I don't want US attack ME. Today Iraq. Tomorrow China. And who will be next? Go to hell! US has their own continent.

Tell me, do you buy Macdonalds? Do you like Coca-Cola? Why would the US invade Russia? They're already there! It's more important for world stability to economically help Russia then invade... DO you live in this century???
As for China, that's impossible, unless you're craving for a World War, then again, Stalin din't like the chinese either...

By the Stalinistic bitch wrote: About Sep. 11 - Saddam didn't do that. And US FAILED to eliminate Bin Laden. Don't blame others for the in-state problems of the US.

Well, if you had read US-controlled news, you would know that's an on-going operation, and it was refered by defence analysts after 9/11 that it might take years.