Which country is biggest threat to peace? - Page 7

GeneralTacticus · January 15, 2003, 02:38

Quote:

Where did the sig quote come from, GT? I like it.

Oddly enough, it came from a very anti-American site, which I believe you've had an encounter with before:

http://www.americanstateterrorism.co...UncleSham.html

Click on the link 'The Lbieral Extreme'. It should be at the bottom of the page.

Quote:

Mine was a genuine question too

You print three pages of propaganda, and want to drop it when people call it biased...

No, I want to drop it because it's patently obvious that neither of us are going to change our minds. wtf is the point of arguing when it's not going to achieve anything?

Ming · January 15, 2003, 02:47

I'm not arguing with you... you are a rabid anti-american, and nothing will change your mind. You believe it hook line and sinker, even admitting you don't read much on the subject. I'm hoping that educated people will consider the source of your propaganda before they give it any credibility.

Docfeelgood · January 15, 2003, 03:16

Hitler youth screamed that it was not propaganda also!

Damn boy, use what GOD gave you between those ears.

Master Zen · January 15, 2003, 14:44

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

The words the US lives by. Just stop and think for a moment about this.

Arrian · January 15, 2003, 16:28

Quote:

There was no war. No combat. There was only a deliberate, systematic genocide of a defenseless population while barely setting foot on Iraqi soil

But, nahh, that guy isn't biased at all.

I also liked the part where it quotes the combat tapes of American pilots yeehawing as they blew up Iraqi tanks. I'm sure troops of any other country would have killed the enemy in silence, wiping the tears from their eyes as they fired. Please.

Again, it's all well and good to check out stuff like that, but damn, admit it's biased! If I went and posted a bunch of links to US government sites, and claimed it was all perfectly true, I'd be laughed at, and rightly so!

If you can't see the guy's bias, then I question your reading comprehension. It leaps off the page.

-Arrian

Arrian · January 15, 2003, 16:38

Oh, and in response to Trajanus, who referred to me as a "sarcastic fool" waaaaay back on page 2, I present this:

Quote:

The poll has choices between Iraq, NK and USA in the year 2003. In 2003, the biggest threat is the US, of course...

Posted by King of the Apes, also back on page 2.

I clicked on the link, saw the three choices, and drew the obvious conclusion. So obvious, in fact, that I chose to be sarcastic. I figured others would also click on the link, see the three choices, laugh, and be done.

Not so, apparently.

-Arrian

Wernazuma III · January 15, 2003, 18:20

Bush called Iraq unreliable at an UN meeting because, "first they attacked Iran, then Israel and Kuwait, they are unpredictable". Now what does that say about the USA?

"First they back Iraq in fighting Iran, providing them with all necessary and unnecessary military knowledge and equipment, then they change sides and attack them. Same goes for the Taliban..."
Just worth to think about.

Arrian · January 15, 2003, 18:23

A nitpick: not the Taleban. They showed up several years after we bailed. They were backed by Pakistan, not the US. At the time they became a force, we couldn't have cared less about Afganistan.

The Mujahadeen (sp? That's gotta be wrong) on the other hand... then connect the dots to Al Qaeda.

-Arrian

Ned · January 15, 2003, 18:32

Quote:

Originally posted by raguil_79
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

The words the US lives by. Just stop and think for a moment about this.

APPEASEMENT IS STRENGTH
SLAVERY IS FREEDOM
SMUGNESS IS WISDOM

The words the West, other than the US, lives by.

Garth Vader · January 15, 2003, 18:40

Again, it's all well and good to check out stuff like that, but damn, admit it's biased! If I went and posted a bunch of links to US government sites, and claimed it was all perfectly true, I'd be laughed at, and rightly so!

That's true, but most of the pro US people here just parrot info that their government has been spouting.

Since they fail to see that their side is biased, it's no surprise the anti US side also uses biased info and fails to acknowledge it.

Wernazuma III · January 15, 2003, 18:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
A nitpick: not the Taleban. They showed up several years after we bailed. They were backed by Pakistan, not the US. At the time they became a force, we couldn't have cared less about Afganistan.

The Mujahadeen (sp? That's gotta be wrong) on the other hand... then connect the dots to Al Qaeda.

-Arrian

Well, you backed the Mujahedeen directly, but AFAIK the US for quite some time backed the Taliban too, because they bet on them to stabilize the country. Might be wrong though in this, can't back it up, have heard it down the road.

Garth Vader · January 15, 2003, 18:43

Well, you backed the Mujahedeen directly, but AFAIK the US for quite some time backed the Taliban too, because they bet on them to stabilize the country. Might be wrong though in this, can't back it up, have heard it down the road.

As I understood, the US sent money through Pakistan and told them to use it to aid Afghanistan. The Pakistanis aided the Taliban. So US money was used to back them, but the US didn't explictly back them.

Arrian · January 15, 2003, 18:45

@ Ned.

Garth,

Quote:

Since they fail to see that their side is biased, it's no surprise the anti US side also uses biased info and fails to acknowledge it

And where, exactly, does this get us? Nowhere.

Wernazuma,

I do think there was some small aid package aimed at stopping the Heroine trade, but I don't think that can be characterized as support for the Taleban regime.

-Arrian