You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
Now online (1)
big
...and 300 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614156
Today 1
Topics 127544
  
 
Messageboard index
Legality of This War
 

offline glass_eater from a blind nerves area (Switzerland) on 2003-03-20 19:59 [#00606741]
Points: 4904 Status: Regular



you seem like a stressed cat indeed :)


 

offline Red from Hell (New Zealand) on 2003-03-20 20:06 [#00606745]
Points: 378 Status: Addict | Followup to virginpusher: #00606712



just a little point.. the handful of scuds were brought from
the Russians in 1974...missiles developed and tested by
iraqis since have mostly proved to be inaccurate to a point
where when fired they spin around in circles and miss
targets...they lack the technology as you are well aware
from the sanctions


 

offline dmise from Melbourne (Australia) on 2003-03-20 21:45 [#00606808]
Points: 635 Status: Lurker



This is a pretty good perspective. It is by an
Iraqi in Baghdad.

This is an interesting quote:
No one inside Iraq is for war (note I said war not a
change of regime), no human being in his right mind will ask
you to give him the beating of his life, unless you are a
member of fight club that is, and if you do hear Iraqi (in
Iraq, not expat) saying “come on bomb us” it is the
exasperation and 10 years of sanctions and hardship talking.
There is no person inside Iraq (and this is a bold, blinking
and underlined inside) who will be jumping up and down
asking for the bombs to drop. We are not suicidal you know,
not all of us in any case.



 

offline weatheredstoner from same shit babes. (United States) on 2003-03-20 22:09 [#00606816]
Points: 12585 Status: Lurker



This is scary.


 

offline neetta from Finland on 2003-03-20 22:34 [#00606830]
Points: 5924 Status: Regular



kaurismäki wont even send a representative to the oscars..
he is cool :)

yesterday after taking official stand to the war finland had
flags half-way to show the sadness.. i was in the antiwar
protest (which didn't even get near the usa embassy - they
have security levels up due to protests). there where people
wearing those funeral hats with the black veil holding grave
candles.


 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-21 03:07 [#00607004]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to neetta: #00606830



yes I am glad for him doing so.

I think almodovar should have done the same


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-03-21 03:10 [#00607010]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to BlatantEcho: #00606623 | Show recordbag



Yes, I've always thought, people would only abide by "laws"
if they were enforced by a more powerful
organisation/country than yours. If you are the most
powerful why would you honour them?

If the US could give the UN a kicking (they probably could,
esp. if the UK sided with them...) it does seem silly they
should bother to listen to it.


 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-21 03:14 [#00607013]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #00607010



actually they didnt listen to UN

I am the strongest so I can punch you cos nobody will dare
to punch me


 

offline Kill Switch from Belgium on 2003-03-21 03:16 [#00607016]
Points: 661 Status: Regular



Offcourse it's illegal.
And a question to all of you who are pro war. If the main
purpose of this was is maintain world peace, why didn't they
start in North Korea where the threat is much bigger?


 

offline Kill Switch from Belgium on 2003-03-21 03:17 [#00607019]
Points: 661 Status: Regular



was = war


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-03-21 03:17 [#00607021]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to nacmat: #00607013 | Show recordbag



I know they didn't listen to the UN re the war in Iraq, but
I mean listen to it at all. Why don't they use illegal
weapons, attack anyone they like etc. (cue "They do, they
do!" ;) )

"I am the strongest so I can punch you cos nobody will dare

to punch me"

That's the way it works unfortunately...

(I don't know Nac, I've got a pretty tidy left jab and good
reactions)


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-03-21 03:18 [#00607022]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to Kill Switch: #00607016 | Show recordbag



I agree, I'd rather they had sorted out Korea and Mugabe
first...


 

offline Charles D Ward from ASS, okay? (United States) on 2003-03-21 03:20 [#00607027]
Points: 1072 Status: Addict



fuck war


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2003-03-21 03:24 [#00607031]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #00607022



But there is no oil in North Korea and Zimbabwe and they are
not strategically important.


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-03-21 03:33 [#00607044]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to jonesy: #00607031 | Show recordbag



I know, it is sad that that has no doubt influenced which
one to sort out first (how much it has influenced it is
certainly debateable). However, that doesn't change my
opinion that Saddam needed to be displaced. Resources are
limited and it'd be foolish to attack all hostile regimes at
once. One every couple of years is as good as we'll get.
Understandably the US tries to kill two birds with one stone
by selecting targets that have other benefits.


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2003-03-21 03:42 [#00607053]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #00607044



Come on Ceri. Saddam's supposed likeness to the devil is
nothing to do with this war. If it was why were we patting
him on the back in the 80s?


 

offline Cfern from Sacto (United States) on 2003-03-21 04:05 [#00607080]
Points: 1384 Status: Lurker | Followup to jonesy: #00607053



because we had the ussr to worry about back then.... hence
the war in afghanistan in the 80's.......

this is a real turningpoint in the sense that the un is
bassically done as a meaningful orginazation....

by the way the un was originally created to batlle the
ussr....once it dissovled it really had/has no more point to
it... why does france have veto power anyways.....


 

offline Cfern from Sacto (United States) on 2003-03-21 04:06 [#00607082]
Points: 1384 Status: Lurker



anyways the war looks to be going good... reports say that
saddam might be toast....if he is dead there won't be a full
scale invasion..


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-03-21 04:08 [#00607084]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to jonesy: #00607053 | Show recordbag



Cfern is right- like I said, so many enemies- it'd be
foolish to fight them all at once (Germany's mistake in WW2
was to get overconfident and take everyone on...). They just
deal with one at a time. Back then it made sense ot use
Saddam and it would of been foolish to try to fight him and
Russia.


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2003-03-21 04:15 [#00607098]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to Cfern: #00607080



Oh right, my bad. So we can sell gas to dictators while a
cold war is on?


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2003-03-21 04:16 [#00607101]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #00607084



Why did it make sense to use Saddam?


 

offline Kill Switch from Belgium on 2003-03-21 04:31 [#00607121]
Points: 661 Status: Regular



Irony of the whole story is that Saddams weapons and
knowledge were provided by the US when they bonded against
Iran.



 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-26 14:01 [#00617947]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker



I am just posting in an existing thread:

what about the people dying in the bagdad market today?
and how can the pentagon say it was a missil thrown by the
iraquis?

this is crazy


 

offline child810 from boston (United States) on 2003-03-26 14:07 [#00617962]
Points: 2103 Status: Lurker



they're (the US) is just saying they didn't "Target" the
market, Iraq's propaganda just want to make the US seem like
villians, while Iraq soldiers go around killing surrendering
Iraqi troops.


 

offline danbrusca from Derbyshire (United Kingdom) on 2003-03-26 14:25 [#00617986]
Points: 4570 Status: Lurker | Followup to nacmat: #00617947



I don't think it was the Iraqis, but nothing they did would
surprise me. Just look at Basra, there's reports today that
the army is sending civilians out onto the battlefield as
cover for artillery behind.


 

offline E-man from Rixensart (Belgium) on 2003-03-26 14:29 [#00617991]
Points: 3000 Status: Regular | Followup to Ceri JC: #00607084



i hope you'll understand the motivations of uncle bush when
the war'll be over and that the UK will realize it has been
fucked in the butt...


 

offline xian_ecci from los angeles on 2003-03-26 14:40 [#00618023]
Points: 251 Status: Regular



Oh my name it is nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And the land that I live in
Has God on its side.



 

offline xian_ecci from los angeles on 2003-03-26 14:40 [#00618025]
Points: 251 Status: Regular



I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war comes
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.



 

offline xian_ecci from los angeles on 2003-03-26 14:40 [#00618027]
Points: 251 Status: Regular



This discussion is irrelevant.

while i find it encouraging that many around the world see a
road to peace, i wonder if they see the same world i see;
the same path of history, the same future.

i can understand those who support this war, although i
think the vast majority of them have fooled themselves into
thinking it is for a humanitarian end. it is primarily an
imperial act that many substantiate as an act of defense- a
defense of the stability and status quo some in this country
embrace. they would love more than anything not to worry
about anywhere else, without realizing how we affect others
regardlessly.

i can understand those opposed, for obvious reasons. if
they, however, believe that a global police state can be
soon avoided, i would disagree. perhaps they live in a
bubble, or a country where conflict is rare.

the united states has a freightening 'manifest destiny'
lingering. if the U.S. military were to 'step down', does
anyone really believe that the role of superpower would
remain empty? of course not.

keep protesting-- you do make a difference. but don't think
that any country's leadership if free from corruption.
they're all sleeping in the same bed. change will only
happen from the ground up, until borders disintegrate.

Until then, be happy it is only the U.S. that possess such
nastiness, and are willing to police for you.


 

offline xian_ecci from los angeles on 2003-03-26 14:43 [#00618032]
Points: 251 Status: Regular



NOTE:

sorry-i tried to include the entirety of dylan's 'with god
on our side' because- it's a good one.
but a bunch of it didn't go through, so you'll have to
listen to it yourselves.
or not.


 

offline promo from United Kingdom on 2003-03-26 16:04 [#00618164]
Points: 4227 Status: Addict



1441 makes the War legal end of story.

All those who are anti-war. Will always be anti-war so
whether it be Hilter or some other nut they'd probably just
prefer if they carry on killing more instead of logically
putting an end to it.


 

offline promo from United Kingdom on 2003-03-26 16:18 [#00618182]
Points: 4227 Status: Addict



I agree with Ceri we need to sort out these other rogue
states as well. Its just not on living in a World where the
leaders of these countries just pillage their countries and
murder their people.


 

offline xian_ecci from los angeles on 2003-03-26 16:25 [#00618199]
Points: 251 Status: Regular



i wonder which would be more devastating, a world of
militias or a world of law firms.

1441: welcome to the Palendrome


 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-31 16:01 [#00626165]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker



I take this as my official war thread.

The Pentagon has confirmed that U.S. troops killed seven
Iraqi women and children at a checkpoint when their van
would not stop as ordered, CBS News Correspondent Bob Fuss
reports.

Two other civilians were wounded in the incident at a U.S.
Army checkpoint on a highway near Najaf in southern Iraq, a
military spokesman said.

The U.S. Army 3rd Infantry was manning the checkpoint when
the van, which was carrying 13 civilians, refused to stop.
They fired warning shots, the spokesman said, and the van
still didn't stop. So they fired into the engine and then
into the vehicle itself.

Troops have been much more aggressive in dealing with cars
at checkpoints since a suicide bomber in a car killed four
Marines near Najaf Saturday.

In a statement, U.S. Central Command said, "In light of
recent terrorist attacks by the Iraqi regime, the soldiers
exercised considerable restraint to avoid the unnecessary
loss of life."



 

offline surrounded from it won't be hard anymore to li on 2003-03-31 16:16 [#00626197]
Points: 3787 Status: Regular



Well that was bound to happen sooner or later. The main
tactic of iraq seems to be disguising it's soldiers as
innocent people to get close to the americans and then
suddenly attack.

It's only a matter of time before the american soldiers
start shooting everybody just to be on the safe side. I even
find that understandable... if i were a soldier i might act
the same :-/

That is war... to kill or to be killed.


 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-31 16:19 [#00626200]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to surrounded: #00626197



I find it understandable too

but it is sad... and it is sad that I know this will happen
many more times.

and all thanks to this war


 

offline mylittlesister from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2003-03-31 16:27 [#00626205]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular | Followup to promo: #00618182



america stole its citizens' rights to protest during a time
of war.... that make them a rogue state?


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2003-03-31 16:30 [#00626214]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker



why should iraqi citizens have to abide by the wishes of
american soldiers. if iraqi soldiers invaded pennsylvania
and stopped me i probably wouldn't be too cooperative
either.


 

offline surrounded from it won't be hard anymore to li on 2003-03-31 16:31 [#00626216]
Points: 3787 Status: Regular | Followup to nacmat: #00626200



yes... i hope bush is also reading all of this. All his
fantasies about a 'clean' and 'fast' war must have gone up
in smoke by now.


 

offline X-tomatic from ze war room on 2003-03-31 16:32 [#00626220]
Points: 2901 Status: Lurker | Followup to surrounded: #00626197



Wether you're pro-war or anti-war, whichever way you look
upon this conflict, there's no question that the only way to
end it now is to purge the Saddam ruling. If not it's like
you just poked at the tail of a sleeping dragon with a
sword, infuriating it but not slaying it. The damage is
done, a gaping festering wound in an arm that can only be
mended by amputating it and taking a large healthy part with
it.


 

offline mylittlesister from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2003-03-31 16:33 [#00626222]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular | Followup to titsworth: #00626214



good point, i wouldn't be too happy if a UK soldier told me
what to do..... and i live in the UK.


 

offline surrounded from it won't be hard anymore to li on 2003-03-31 16:33 [#00626223]
Points: 3787 Status: Regular | Followup to titsworth: #00626214



"if iraqi soldiers invaded pennsylvania and stopped me i
probably wouldn't be too cooperative either.
"

That's a good point.
Atleast it shows the iraqis hardly think of the americans as
their liberators.


 

offline surrounded from it won't be hard anymore to li on 2003-03-31 16:37 [#00626235]
Points: 3787 Status: Regular | Followup to X-tomatic: #00626220



hehe, that's exactly the same viewpoint as the
biggest leftwing party in the netherlands has ;-) (sucking
up to the rightwing party because they want be in the
government).

"Yes ofcourse we are against the war... but now that it's
started anyway, we should finnish it properly."


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2003-03-31 16:38 [#00626237]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator



i would probably cooperate as i'd be to scared to do
anything else
but the thing here was, the driver didnt stop, those people
were just driving along and that is sad


 

offline korben dallas from nz on 2003-03-31 16:53 [#00626269]
Points: 4605 Status: Regular



Helen Clarke [NZ prime minister]: "we can't trade
soldiers' lives for a free-trade agreement with America."


She may not be pretty, but I'm very impressed how firm she's
holding. It seems NZ is under mounting pressure to join in,
for economic reasons, and trade relations etc.

The sad thing is, Syria and Iran seem to be on an inevitable
collision course with the US as well - US has implied few
times already that they will not tolerate support for the
"regime" - no longer restricting the "regime" to Iraq
itself.


Attached picture

 

offline X-tomatic from ze war room on 2003-03-31 16:55 [#00626273]
Points: 2901 Status: Lurker



well ending it now would certainly not resolve anything at
all, sure civillians would cease to get killed by the
coalition, but saddam will most likely set that straight and
then some. Whatever anger is infused into the arab world by
this stupid conflict will not die away if the war is ended.
Nor will their Anti-US attitude grow bigger if they continue
because it's already peaking. So the only logical decision
is to continue this disgusting bloody effort til Saddam is
gone.


 

offline korben dallas from nz on 2003-03-31 17:08 [#00626290]
Points: 4605 Status: Regular



sure .. but that in no way should justify the war.
and, if it turns ugly (uglier), this is probably the
justification they will offer. - if the US stays - people
will continue to get killed also!!! catch 22 - in the name
of Bush or Saddam?

i do think there is more opposition than expected, and that
is throwing a spanner in the works.

dunno .. sick stuff this war


 

offline Cfern from Sacto (United States) on 2003-03-31 17:23 [#00626318]
Points: 1384 Status: Lurker



"why should iraqi citizens have to abide by the wishes of
american soldiers." - becuase they'll be killed if they
don't.

it's war - people die....


 

offline nacmat on 2003-03-31 18:05 [#00626359]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker | Followup to Cfern: #00626318



right its war...

the point is: it is an illegal war.

the usa started a war just cos they wanted to (economic
reasons obviously)
(seconded by uk and my poor country of suckers)


 

offline korben dallas from nz on 2003-03-31 22:54 [#00626534]
Points: 4605 Status: Regular



"legal war" has quite an odd ring to it.


 


Messageboard index