O'reilly Vs. Moore

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@1 August 2004 - 18:51
Okay.

What you are saying is that because the U.S. helped Osama bin Laden in his efforts to fight the Russians in Afghanistan, one would quite naturally and logically conclude Osama would eventually turn against the U.S.? :huh:

9/11 aside (I must say you have a unique view of the event), we still could not have "jumped" much more slowly than we did in Iraq; well over a year and beaucoup U.N. resolutions later?

---

I suppose I don't quite see how supporting Bin Laden's activities was ever good, how could someone ever justify supporting a man like that?

Clearly he never fought for America, but rather for himself, and the methods he employs most certainly seems a tad, how to put this, inaccurate. Or are you saying that his actions in afghanistan did not entail any collateral damage, and that he always hit those responsible for what was done to the country?

Putting weapons in the hands of fanatics can't be a good thing, even if they are pointing the other way, I should think.


As for Iraq, can you truly say the wait was long enough? what with the fact that they turned out to not have weapons of mass destruction.

Having said that, my problem lies with why things were done rather than with the fact that they were done at all in Iraq, taking down Saddam wasn't what I'd call a bad thing. But I'll always wonder about the why.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@1 August 2004 - 12:08
I suppose I don't quite see how supporting Bin Laden's activities was ever good, how could someone ever justify supporting a man like that?

---

bin Laden wasn't "...a man like that..." at the time, Snny.

Saddam, while not a savory character by any means, was not, at the outset of his relationship with the U.S., what he became.

I guess you could make the case that, absent sufficient will to take the bull by the horns (as we've done with Iraq, now), you run the risk of strengthening the Saddams and Osamas of the world when offering mere "aid".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+1 August 2004 - 19:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 1 August 2004 - 19:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@1 August 2004 - 12:08
I suppose I don&#39;t quite see how supporting Bin Laden&#39;s activities was ever good, how could someone ever justify supporting a man like that?

---

bin Laden wasn&#39;t "...a man like that..." at the time, Snny.

Saddam, while not a savory character by any means, was not, at the outset of his relationship with the U.S., what he became.

I guess you could make the case that, absent sufficient will to take the bull by the horns (as we&#39;ve done with Iraq, now), you run the risk of strengthening the Saddams and Osamas of the world when offering mere "aid". [/b][/quote]
It&#39;s always been my impression that they were a pair of wild-cards. They were decidedly not as extreme as they are today. But definitely working with their own agendas and methods from the start.

Why America ever needed to work through proxy at all has always seemed slightly odd to me. Better then to not get involved at all than to support people that then turn out to be villains and monsters. And it seems to me this has been happening a couple of times, I&#39;m thinking of Noriega for one.

To stand by and do nothing is not the way to go either, but it seems to me that the current ways are not working.

J2

The whole anti communist thing in Afghanistan was frighteningly fundamentalist. We supported a side in a game of chess that was going on over the whole world without thought for the future. In short we opposed an ideology (communism) and were content to release whatever dogs of war came to hand. Unfortunately mad dogs will bite any hand.

The Osamas of this world will always take whatever weapons we give them but they never forget we are not part of their world order. I recall criticism to this effect at the time resulting in Margaret Thatcher calling them "wonderful people - heros" and Ronald Reagan coining his famous "one man&#39;s terrorist is another man&#39;s freedom fighter". This is actually very true and to the victor goes the writing of the history books. If the Nazis had won all Partisans would have gone down in the history books as evil terrorists.

if you dance with the devil in hell you must expect your butt to get burnt

Hobbes,

I said that in the main, the USA have been good guys.

They have done some Godawful things, just like many nations, including my own... however in BALANCE, they are good guys.. I&#39;ll stand by that.

I have never suggested for one second that the USA were angels prior to GW.


The change came with PNAC for me.

That is a declaration that America is the world leader and will do anything to anyone that doesnt do exactly what they want.

It very plainly puts into perspective what these neo-conservatives want.

Its further than Hitler went in publicly stated aims until 1930, 9 years after the party was formed.

Consider the war didnt start until 1939 in Europe.. thats 6 years after he came to power.

Consider that it took only 3 years for this very similar public agenda until Bush was elected and they are in the whitehouse.

In only 4 years, the whitehouse has had 2 wars.

Maybe its due to the fact that there wasnt a depression, and they had money to start with, unlike Hitler.



I make no apology for my comparing Bush to Hitler.

I dont compare the American people with the German people at the time.

And no, just because Granpap was a nazi, does not mean that he is as well.

He made that statement himself when he appointed so many of the PNAC into office, and by adopting their policies as his own. His brother is also a founding member of this group.

So what if he is supportive of Israel and Jeudism? That has absolutely nothing to do with Nazi&#39;sm.

The only reason that Jews were persecuted was as a scapegoat...you think Hitler believed for 1 second that the Jews were responsible for everything? Of course not...that was a handy "enemy" to hand the populace. They were in Recession, the Jews were a minority, and they were smart enough to own more money per head than average, so the Government could get hold of it.

The Jewish vote in the USA is important, there would be no way on earth he would use Jews as a scapegoat, what better than their enemies?


How many times have you seen yourself, people posting crap that all Muslims are terrorists? On this board only?

There is now a substantial proportion of Americans that genuinely believe that this is the case, that the Muslims are all evil... you&#39;ve seen that crap posted here yourself by numerous different kids and fools.

I didnt bring Cuba up, however since you did...the number in Cuba that were Al Queda are very few. The vast majority are Taliban... the only thing the Taliban did was defend their country against an aggressor. YOU would have done the same, and im bloody sure i would have.

And before you start "well they should have handed him over"...they wouldnt hand him over to the USA because they didnt think he&#39;d get a fair trial, they were quite willing to hand him over to a 3rd party.

The very fact of the Cuban camps existance gives credance to what they claimed.


To Conclude:

I stand by:

That I think Bush is the most dangerous man in the world, and I wouldnt shed one tear if him and his whole administration were blown away. I dont say this lightly, its very rarely that anyone or anything gets me so hyped up... He and his managed that before he was ever elected.

He is, in my opinion, a nazi. Thats right, i said it. A Right Wing little prick that wants him and his to rule the world by whatever means necessary. If he just wanted the USA, i wouldnt give a shit... but the PNAC, when you look at it, is quite clear on their goals.

The Laws like the Patriot Act, go further than even Hitler did in Germany in his 1st 3 years of power.

He is a bald faced Liar and Manipulator... however as that fits most politicians of whatever stripe, maybe i shouldnt bother posting it ;)

If it wasnt Bush and the PNAC, then i wouldnt give a hoot about the American Election. As ive said on many occasion, i see little difference between the 2 parties. Hell, ive even defended Bush (once i think) when he was getting labelled for something Clinton started.

There is generally good and bad in most politicians/presidents...however Bush&#39;s ideology is athema to me.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+1 August 2004 - 14:01--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 1 August 2004 - 14:01)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@1 August 2004 - 05:29
The Coalition, over the last 10 years have killed more innocent Iraqi&#39;s than Hussian ever managed.

I might actually turn up to a meal with Bin Laden to listen to why he acts like he does...

Its not as if the Bush family can claim they dont have a history with Nazism either..

Hitler started off with policies similar to the Patriot Act at home, and giving the nation an "Enemy" to hate..in his case the Jews, in the USA&#39;s the Muslims.

Hell the similarities between the start of the 3rd Reich and the USA today are astounding.

... no one looks to the US for the moral Highground

However Bush, Chaney, Wolfowitz and Co are the most dangerous people in the world at this moment in time.

I hope to hell someone takes them out at the earliest opportunity.




Please dont look at this as an "Anti-American" post.

---

Wash off the sauce and that is the meat of your post, Rat.

I used the Michael Moore editting technique; I&#39;m sure you can appreciate it. ;) [/b][/quote]
You know fine well what i think of Mr Moore :P

And the edited highlites i do take exception too... as the way you&#39;ve done it really does read anti-american.

You know fine well that ALL my enmity is headed towards the Whitehouse and PNAC, its not even aimed at Republicans.... :angry:

Rat Face

Ok, so stop beating about the bush (sorry :( ) do you like GW or not?




:lol:

Happy Lughnasad by the way - may all your harvests be good ones.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Biggles@1 August 2004 - 20:29
Rat Face

Ok, so stop beating about the bush (sorry :( ) do you like GW or not?




:lol:

Happy Lughnasad by the way - may all your harvests be good ones.

---

The rocks, the stones and the crystals
Hey yung, hey yunga, hey yung.
The rocks, the stones and the crystals
Hey yung, hey yunga, hey yung.
The power of the Earth,
The power of the Earth,
The power of the Earth,
The power of the Earth&#33;



May Lugh Long Arm Be With You&#33;









Sorry, dont speak Gaelic :(



............. How do you now about Celtic Festivals, I thought the Celts stopped all that with the Clan Clergy? :ph34r:

Well I am a Celt.

Bit pagan around the gills too I am afraid.

We celebrated simply though - had corn on the cob. :01:


I just gently obseve the Sabbats - my daughter tends to take it more seriously.

I am from the North East (our North East) the bible bashers never really got the same foot hold there somehow. :)