Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Soldier's Chilling Warning


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#41 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 12:34 PM

d0lfins0ng,

You seem to be on a mission to prove that I only harbor negative viewpoints of america. This is my perception of it anyways, and I am personally offended. I'm sure when clinton was in office, you didn't have many nice things to say about him or his administration (much of that I can understand btw) but I can just about guarantee that regardless of your dislike for him, that did not change your feelings about america or your fellow countrymen. All I'm trying to ask here is to realise that this is no different. I don't like bush - he scares the hell out of me. I love this country and I hate what is happening to it. I have a right to express my opinion. I can discuss this with you in a civilised manner. Please try not to be so snide in your remarks.

I missed your response to the czech-slovak anti-chemical unit.



Here's the url: Czech unit starts monitoring situation in Kuwait

Sorry if I sound more concerned about our soldiers and civilians than I do about our gov's reputation.

Which country are you referring to as an example?



This could be any country. How about the UK? Actually it was Gospel that first expressed these feelings to me. I didn't refer to any specific action/inaction - just the basic feelings involved.

Two wrongs do not make something right.



Exactly my point. I happen to believe in the golden rule here - treat others as you would have them treat you. If I don't like getting bashed because I am american, I will not bash others based on their nationality. It's wrong, and I won't participate in this. I will express my opinions concerning politics and policies - but I really try to abstain from generalizing this to the population as a whole.

It is our right and freendom to boycott anything we choose. Is that wrong?



It's your choice to do so. However, I think this is all a over-reaction. I certainly don't want anyone boycotting our products just because Bush is an idiot.

To which stereotype are you referring, anti-war implies anti-Americanism?



No, the stereotype of ignorant, arrogant americans that is so often brought up here.

those people tow the line with Bush without question.



I think you know what I'm talking about here. Didn't you say earlier on this thread that Saddam is abetting our enemy because there are al qaeda cells in Iraq (which btw, are in the UN protected safe-zone. ) Just because Bush says it's true we are supposed to believe it.

Do you understand my point?



Dolf, I've expressed that point over and over. Every country looks out for it's own self-intrests. All politicians lie and spin things to make their motives sound pure. I've said over and over, it's all a game. Should I put this in my signature to remind you where I stand?

:mad:
  • 0

#42 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:00 PM

Plsek you are a intelligent women who probably seen inferior white males advance farther economically than yourself. I believe you suffer from "envious of successful white male syndrome complex". I probably dislike Bush more than you, but I won't in anyway give support to a cruel dictator Saddam Hussein. Your bias opinion is detrimental to the welfare of the Iraqi people. I would recommend you to step back and review your actions. If Clinton were President would you favor war?
  • 0

#43 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:11 PM

LifeisGood,

I believe you suffer from "envious of successful white male syndrome complex".



I can't say that has not bothered me from time to time, but I am still a clever gal - I've overcome enough obstacles in my life to know I can do it again. I really don't see how that applies to my feelings towards Bush. And I've never expressed support for Saddam.

If Clinton were President would you favor war?



No, I think it's obvious from my postings that I did not agree with intervention in the Balkans, why would I support a pre-emptive strike in Iraq just because someone else is behind it? I like what Clinton did domestically, I respect him as a good communicator, but that's as far as it goes.
  • 0

#44 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:14 PM

Did you favor the Gulf war 12 years ago?
  • 0

#45 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:19 PM

No, I didn't. Mainly because I didn't have much sympathy for the Kuwaitis. They were playing a dangerous game at the time with Iraq because they knew if things went to far, we would come and save the day. I think we were being used and I kind of resent that. Not to mention the fact that many rich Kuwaitis just fled to there vacation homes or hung out in Saudi Arabia living it up while we fought the war for them. I know this opinion is biased, and again, I don't favor Iraq over Kuwait - just resent our troops being used in this way.
  • 0

#46 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:31 PM

Be careful of what you wish for Plsek. In a proletariat cultural revolution like the one Mao had, you'd be tolling in the fields. I have great respect for your intelligence Plsek, but you scare me.
  • 0

#47 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:36 PM

LifeisGood,

I don't understand? Exactly why do I scare you and what do you think I am wishing for? :confused:

My attitude towards the Kuwaitis mainly come from my cousin who was stationed in SA. He heard comments like "why should we send our sons to die - we have our american slaves to do that." I'm sure not everyone felt that way, but that just floored me!
  • 0

#48 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 01:50 PM

I dislike the bourgeoisie of the Saud Arabians and Kuwaitis to. Time after time you expose the misdeeds of the U.S. and yet the "I don't support Hussein regime" doesn't convince me you being fair and balance. If the U.S. practice your ideas the Saddam Hussein's of the world would rule.
  • 0

#49 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:03 PM

LifeisGood,

Wrong. Actually, I would like to see Saddam forced into exile. I'm actually begining to think this is more the plan of our admin than they are letting on. Make war imminent, but offer a backdoor escape. Our administration has already said this would avert war and Powell has been working with other countries to provide this option. Also the fact that we haven't already intervened there could be telling. If we can pull this off, I would have great respect for our admin. The problem is - will Saddam play game here? This doesn't seem promising at the moment. If he truly cared about his people, he would have stepped down already. I think he might be holding out hope that Europe will stop us from going to war and then he'll be safe. However, If we turn up the pressure a bit...well, I can only hope. There is more than one way to skin a cat LIG. If we can spare our troops and civilian lives in the process, we will come of like heroes.
  • 0

#50 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:09 PM

Well you made me feel a little better. I'm going to copy your last statement, and will post later when needed.:)
  • 0

#51 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:25 PM

LifeisGood,

That's fine. I'm not giving out hope that it won't happen. I think a pre-emptive strike would be setting a dangerous precendent. Will other countries use this as an excuse to attack their neighbors? Do we want India to attack Pakistan with full force because there is an imminent threat? That scenerio could be clearly justified by terrorists attacks and the trouble in Kashmir, but could potentially start a nuclear war. We have to be careful of what we do and look at the long range consequences. In central asia, there are countries using the war on terror as an excuse to further oppress their people. It's a slippery walk LIF, we have to be careful what we do - the world is watching.
  • 0

#52 MirrorMan

MirrorMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8418 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:32 PM

LifeisGood

His warning comes amid revelations Saddam Hussein may be planning to use pilotless drone planes to spray British and US troops with anthrax and sarin gas if they attack.



So what? If the U.S. were faced with a strong military force about to remove the U.S. president from power, the U.S. military would have done far worse things. The U.S. also has chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and they would have been used in this sort of a situation.
  • 0

#53 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:49 PM

MirrorMan- The U.S. has been at war for over ten years that has been declared by sub-cultural groups throughout the world, and you sir are no friend of the U.S..
  • 0

#54 MirrorMan

MirrorMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8418 posts

Posted 11 March 2003 - 02:55 PM

LifeisGood, I wouldn't say so. The U.S. has intervened in many places all over the world. But the U.S. has never faced total annihilation. Even 9/11 was no big deal. I mean the Russians had to deal with terrorism too, and they were criticized for going into Chechnia (which is part of Russia) by the U.S. Only after 9/11 did the U.S. view change.

Can you imagine that a U.S. terrorist group based in, say, Texas was responsible for something like 9/11, and Russia would criticize the U.S. for going after the terroists in Texas?
  • 0

#55 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2003 - 01:27 AM

d0lf?
  • 0

#56 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 12 March 2003 - 01:50 AM

I hope Plsek you do not mean I'm a moniker of dolf, though I respect his outlook on life.
  • 0

#57 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2003 - 01:57 AM

LifeisGood,

No sweetie, I was trying to get dolf's repsonse :)

d0lfins0ng,

Thanks. I've posted about 4 or 5 different threads with info on the anti-chemical unit but they usually go unnoticed. Probably not alot of people aware of the contribution. Did you know czech scientists invented a patch to protect against several forms of chemical agents? Instead of taking injections after the fact, you can put on a patch and be protected for up to 14 hours. Cool idea I think :)
  • 0

#58 LifeisGood

LifeisGood

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1934 posts

Posted 12 March 2003 - 02:00 AM

dolf- A female? Strong willed? A today's woman? Oh yea!
  • 0

#59 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2003 - 02:10 AM

Here you go:

Military to test chemical remedy
  • 0

#60 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2003 - 02:20 AM

Dolf,

Some more links:

Czech scientists develop new antidotes to fight chemical attacks

(this article talks of czech findings from the last gulf war)
U.S. forces exposed to chemical and biological agents in Gulf War?

Czech-Slovak unit to operate in Kuwait from March

Ready for war

have fun.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru