OT - US Presidential Candiates Arrested! [Archive]

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 11:19 AM

Okay first off I'm a boy from the USA so to the God Damn the USA line I have a big UP YOURS!!! from the USA jerkoff....especially because if you weren't free your dumbass would be in jail for bashing your government.

NOW on to the Civil Disobedience bit there, face it Anti-War Protesters fall under civil disobedience because they are usually a royal pain in the *** that block streets and generally cause a headache wherever they go with all their "Sadam wasn't so bad" and "Bin Laden's a Nice Guy....REALLY" crap so don't even get me started on making it sound like the American Government is a FACIST party sort of deal.....especially because I DON'T LIKE THE GREEN PARY :p

BTW AMERICA IS NOT A FRIGGIN DEMOCRACY look up your history we are a Republic which means "LIMITED POWER TO THE PEOPLE!" you know why? Because unlike Athens where a voice for every man and a man for every voice we have a population of over 300 MILLION (and that's just the legal ones) so a true democracy where eveyone gets to do what they want would be anarchy.....and Civil Disobedience has to be shut down SOMEWHERE especially because those dumb greenparty and Libertarians WANTED TO BE ARRESTED and I'm sure we are only getting their "We are so martyrs!" side of this story.

Oh and under most state laws CROSSING A POLICE LINE IS ILLEGAL! no matter who you are and so they deserved to get their arses busted for that dumb move......so don't even make them sound like poor little angels who were jumped by the Government SS troopers (Stormtroopers were friggin soldiers ELITE GERMAN soldiers who stormed Trenches during WWI so please stop referring to every facist like police force as stormtroopers as they would be closer to the "Gaurd" branch of the SS and NOT even the Wauffin (Field corps) SS)

Anywhoo Gandalf my boy to your little quote

"Which was also the claim of England, and Russia, and even Germany in its heyday. Of course, it depends on your concept of liberation. Now people are trying to liberate countries from the US. Crossing another nations borders to liberate them can be a dangerous concept if not done carefully."

England was trying to "civilize" the world NOT liberate it, the countries they conquered they occupied and established as tax paying provinces (AND DON'T EVEN CLAIM THE US HAS PROVINCES OR I WILL BEAT YOU WITH A STICK :p) and not simply trade partners.
Germany! fah they were trying to "liberate" their "Aryan brothers" not impoverished countries run by dictators who were responsible for OVER A MILLION DEATHS in the course of their reign many tens of thousands of which being at the hands of said dictators secret police force (and their sons who just decided to rape women for the hell of it).
Why the HECK does a country like the US trying to free these people get treated like it's doing something wrong, maybe those big bad European powers should show more concern for the world outside their borders as well and start HELPING rid the world of dictators for a change. WHY THE HECK does getting rid of a freakin dictator now a days become a BAD THING. think about a world with no dictators? Wouldn't that be great.....

And RUSSIA "liberating" their neighbors from rival empires was land grabbing that's all, they too occupied said nations and turned them into paying provinces with no independant government or anything of that sort.

Now moving onto your remark on those terrorist scum crossing the borders to "liberate" Iraq from the US LIBERATION IS NOT THEIR INTENT! they simply want to kill as man servants of "The Great Satan" as they can else wise they would actually try to defeat the army and not just kill women children and their own "Islamic brothers" without discression....that is not LIBERATION by ANY definition.....

Sorry for any spelling errors but I had a total of 3 hours of sleep Last night and political BS like this pisses me off when people don't bother trying to get a second viewpoint into the picture.

YES America has it's flaws but we are also the Strongest, and I have to say most FREE nation on earth and people need to learn to appreciate that freedom and that greatness and their heritage with respect and not try to make our government sound like a damned fascist state.

HELL we have MORE rights then our American ancestors I meam look at the "civil rights" of everyone during the Civil War era....sorry that wasn't that good as only the elites could afford to vote on anything.....anyway I'm too tired to say anything else....sorry for the excessive cussing but I DON'T LIKE MY COUNTRY being bashed....especially by people who don't friggin live here like you limeys in the group :p

Edited for unnecessary rudeness

TerranC

October 23rd, 2004, 11:26 AM

http://www.sharedvoice.org/unamerican/

Starhawk, please edit out some of your drugatory words, they are not needed here.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 11:29 AM

Oh and this deserves a seperate post:

Democracy DOES NOT WORK for the long term even Republics have not Lasted and most of those throughout history have fallen do to dumbass citizens who pulled so much crap that they were eventually brought under an iron grip because they were seen as too stupid or anarchy ridden to rule themselves. not acusing anyone Here of this (cept Ed)
Either that or they have been conquered by a nation that is unified through force and pretty much shoots anti-war types and makes dissenters disapear.
The United States is the oldest surviving Republic and the most powerful nation in the world so I'm sorry but we must be doing something right....(not to mention that we get the HIGHEST friggin immigration rates of any country on earth) so for all you "US is evil" folks maybe you should think about your own government first......because I can say plenty of things that England has done crappy throughout their history, and Germany, and Russia, and France and EVERY DANG COUNTRY ON EARTH!.

Now I am saying that until hopefully someday something better then both the current "Democracies" (and that means ALL of THEM) and the current "Iron Grip" regimes comes along I WILL GO FOR the American "Democracy" any day....thank you.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 11:33 AM

"No....though for some of them I'll say sorry.....I'm tired so I'm a litle testy...sorry......cept for my remarks toward Ed those stand.

I am an advocate of peace don't get me wrong, but as the old saying goes for the country that choses they aren't going to learn war anymore they will be crushed under the boot of those who still learned war.

And again that song is biased they don't exactly give you both views so sorry I don't like biased views like that either.....especially SINCE WE ARE NOT proffiting from the damned war in Iraq....in fact it's COSTING US MONEY....oy.

Like I said USA is far from perfect but it is the better choice out of any other country around."

Oh and my oppinion of Kerry is that he is a flipflopping jackass who wants to win on his "I won three purple hearts!" line.....so BFD my Great Uncle DIED in Nam after staying for two tours and getting hit twice....Kerry got pissant wounds (not even enough to send him home for God's sake or keep him in hospital for more then a few days) and went home after 4 months after writing his own report to make himself a hero......yeah I don't want that guy in office I'm sorry.

Now I'm going back to making my mod and hopefully making people happy with it.....and other fun stuff here.
I like most of you guys so as I said to most of you sorry for getting testy it's just US bashers piss me off especially when hey never point out the flaws of their own countries first and instead focus on us.
Now anyway this is likely my Last post in this thread so http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif cya'll in the more lightheared and fun threads.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 01:29 PM

Post deleted by Gandalf Parker

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 01:43 PM

England was trying to "civilize" the world NOT liberate it, the countries they conquered they occupied and established as tax paying provinces (AND DON'T EVEN CLAIM THE US HAS PROVINCES OR I WILL BEAT YOU WITH A STICK :p) and not simply trade partners.

By the way... as far as US territorys...
American Samoa
Federated States of Micronesia
Guam
Marshall Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
Puerto Rico
Palau
Virgin Islands
and until recently the Phillipines

just to name a few. Yes they are territorys. Their citizens can serve US military and they pay US taxes. They have no state rights and cannot vote in elections. This is not propaganda. The US fully acknowledges them as US provinces and always has even though most americans arent much aware of them.

Germany! fah they were trying to "liberate" their "Aryan brothers" not impoverished countries run by dictators who were responsible for OVER A MILLION DEATHS in the course of their reign many tens of thousands of which being at the hands of said dictators secret police force (and their sons who just decided to rape women for the hell of it).

Do you not see that as kindof an opinion? Im not saying that you arent correct but surely you see where the same COULD be said about the US by others. Doesnt mean its true but secret police, atrocities, and freeing someone from one form of government to another should surely sound familiar.

Why the HECK does a country like the US trying to free these people get treated like it's doing something wrong, maybe those big bad European powers should show more concern for the world outside their borders as well and start HELPING rid the world of dictators for a change. WHY THE HECK does getting rid of a freakin dictator now a days become a BAD THING. think about a world with no dictators? Wouldn't that be great.....

Generally any country crossing into another because they dont like who is in charge has been frowned on. Even when its done for the right reasons it hasnt been liked because someone is bound to disagree with who was chosen and why. Often not the first one, but the second or the third such choice. They all gradually get more and more questionable in the eyes of others.

And RUSSIA "liberating" their neighbors from rival empires was land grabbing that's all, they too occupied said nations and turned them into paying provinces with no independant government or anything of that sort.

Again kindof point of view. If you check the list of US territories you find that most of them were areas we occupied after a war for the purpose of helping them recover. And we are still in most of them. To some that would be "spoils of war". Im sure there are good reasons for it, Im just pointing out that the same facts can be worded different ways depending on who is doing the wording.

Now moving onto your remark on those terrorist scum crossing the borders to "liberate" Iraq from the US LIBERATION IS NOT THEIR INTENT! they simply want to kill as man servants of "The Great Satan" as they can else wise they would actually try to defeat the army and not just kill women children and their own "Islamic brothers" without discression....that is not LIBERATION by ANY definition.....

Wow. Where to begin. You dont expect that to sit as a "fact" do you? The way you worded it? Thats what they are doing and how they see it?

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 02:01 PM

As far as I was aware Puerto Rico does not pay taxes.

As for US military service anyone can join the US military (as you can gain citizenship through service) so that's not a big deal that these territories can.

A brief bit about the FSM
"In 1979 the Federated States of Micronesia, a UN Trust Territory under US administration, adopted a constitution. In 1986 independence was attained under a Compact of Free Association with the US. Present concerns include large-scale unemployment, overfishing, and overdependence on US aid. "
Not a province as they are not a US territory they are an independent nation.

Wee bit about American Samoa (yeah it's a teritory):

This is a traditional Polynesian economy in which more than 90% of the land is communally owned. Economic activity is strongly linked to the US, with which American Samoa conducts most of its foreign trade. Tuna fishing and tuna processing plants are the backbone of the private sector, with canned tuna the primary export. Transfers from the US Government add substantially to American Samoa's economic well-being. Attempts by the government to develop a larger and broader economy are restrained by Samoa's remote location, its limited transportation, and its devastating hurricanes. Tourism, a developing sector, has been held back by the recurring financial difficulties in East Asia.

They don't pay taxes to us they do however have trade tariffs.

Guam (US Territory no independence)

The economy depends on US military spending, tourism, and the export of fish and handicrafts. Total US grants, wage payments, and procurement outlays amounted to $1 billion in 1998. Over the past 20 years, the tourist industry has grown rapidly, creating a construction boom for new hotels and the expansion of older ones. More than 1 million tourists visit Guam each year. The industry has recently suffered setbacks because of the continuing Japanese slowdown; the Japanese normally make up almost 90% of the tourists. Most food and industrial goods are imported. Guam faces the problem of building up the civilian economic sector to offset the impact of military downsizing.

again sounds like we give them money no mention of taxes being paid.

The Marshall Islands are actually independant:
21 October 1986 (from the US-administered UN trusteeship)

A little on their economy:
US Government assistance is the mainstay of this tiny island economy. Agricultural production is primarily subsistence and is concentrated on small farms; the most important commercial crops are coconuts and breadfruit. Small-scale industry is limited to handicrafts, tuna processing, and copra. The tourist industry, now a small source of foreign exchange employing less than 10% of the labor force, remains the best hope for future added income. The islands have few natural resources, and imports far exceed exports. Under the terms of the Compact of Free Association, the US has provided more than $1 billion in aid since 1986. Negotiations have continued for an extended agreement. Government downsizing, drought, a drop in construction, the decline in tourism and foreign investment due to the Asian financial difficulties, and less income from the renewal of fishing vessel licenses have held GDP growth to an average of 1% over the past decade.

Northern Mariana Islands:
Govermant status: commonwealth in political union with the US; federal funds to the Commonwealth administered by the US Department of the Interior, Office of Insular Affairs

Government type: commonwealth; self-governing with locally elected governor, lieutenant governor, and legislature

Economic status:
The economy benefits substantially from financial assistance from the US. The rate of funding has declined as locally generated government revenues have grown. The key tourist industry employs about 50% of the work force and accounts for roughly one-fourth of GDP. Japanese tourists predominate. Annual tourist entries have exceeded one-half million in recent years, but financial difficulties in Japan have caused a temporary slowdown. The agricultural sector is made up of cattle ranches and small farms producing coconuts, breadfruit, tomatoes, and melons. Garment production is by far the most important industry with employment of 17,500 mostly Chinese workers and sizable shipments to the US under duty and quota exemptions.

Palau:
Independence was given: 1 October 1994 (from the US-administered UN Trusteeship

Economic State:
The economy consists primarily of tourism, subsistence agriculture and fishing. The government is the major employer of the work force, relying heavily on financial assistance from the US. Business and tourist arrivals numbered 50,000 in FY00/01. The population enjoys a per capita income twice that of the Philippines and much of Micronesia. Long-run prospects for the key tourist sector have been greatly bolstered by the expansion of air travel in the Pacific, the rising prosperity of leading East Asian countries, and the willingness of foreigners to finance infrastructure development.

Puerto Rico
Status: Commonwealth

Economic Status:
Puerto Rico has one of the most dynamic economies in the Caribbean region. A diverse industrial sector has far surpassed agriculture as the primary locus of economic activity and income. Encouraged by duty-free access to the US and by tax incentives, US firms have invested heavily in Puerto Rico since the 1950s. US minimum wage laws apply. Sugar production has lost out to dairy production and other livestock products as the main source of income in the agricultural sector. Tourism has traditionally been an important source of income, with estimated arrivals of nearly 5 million tourists in 1999. Growth fell off in 2001-03, largely due to the slowdown in the US economy.

Virgin Islands:
Status: Unincorporated Territory

Economic State:
Tourism is the primary economic activity, accounting for 80% of GDP and employment. The islands normally host 2 million visitors a year. The manufacturing sector consists of petroleum refining, textiles, electronics, pharmaceuticals, and watch assembly. The agricultural sector is small, with most food being imported. International business and financial services are a small but growing component of the economy. One of the world's largest petroleum refineries is at Saint Croix. The islands are subject to substantial damage from storms. The government is working to improve fiscal discipline, to support construction projects in the private sector, to expand tourist facilities, to reduce crime, and to protect the environment.

So a few of the territories you listed are out of date as they are now independent. I'm still looking for their tax paying status.

Though I do suppose you are right about your views on "Liberation" vs "occupation" being a point of view. But if you look at it the US still hasn't fully "rebuilt" many of those territories to where they could function as seperate states as many of them are too poor to function on their own without soon becoming 3rd world nations.

And yeah the fact that the terrorists are scum is kind of a wild opinion that is strictly POV based as I am sure they beleive they are holy warriors and justified.....though I still say they are scum as I'm sure many do.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 02:39 PM

A brief bit about the FSM
"In 1979 the Federated States of Micronesia, a UN Trust Territory under US administration, adopted a constitution. In 1986 independence was attained under a Compact of Free Association with the US."

Not a province as they are not a US territory they are an independent nation.

Hmmmmmm OK that would be a fact. Although the wording of that and the fact that it takes so long for these nations to find a form of government acceptable for independance, is something that people like to look at. I remember the comparisons between these and the Russian countries that we kept calling "satellite not-really-free nations".

So a few of the territories you listed are out of date as they are now independent. I'm still looking for their tax paying status.

Yes I noticed that after I posted it and went to get the source (www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/).
Palua was freed. Nice thing of Clinton. Looks like the only one though. I lost the full list of american governed non-US territorys but thats OK, the point is still made. US does have provinces.

Ed Kolis

October 23rd, 2004, 02:57 PM

To Starhawk:
I believe fully in the principles in which the USA was founded. However, the USA today is based on the OPPOSITE of those principles - we have BECOME the Tories, and IMHO it's time for another rebellion! I'm just not the one to lead such a thing... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 04:11 PM

Ever hear of a positive change instead of jumping right into the flag burning government bashing militant?

Sorry but you'll still not get me to agree with you on anything you say as long as you don't even attempt to seek any positive ways of changing things....right now you just sound like a hicksville (I'm from the south so I REALLY don't like the hick stereotype so don't try to sound like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif) militia nut who wants to lead a revolution that would get creamed in an hour because there are too many people who are happy with the government and don't want people like you or with your viewpoint ruling this or any other country.

To Gandalf yeah we do have territories like I said though it seems they cost us money and give us little in return when I say province I mean taxed (as in we get more mone from them then we spend on them) territory that has the choice of either paying or getting creamed by an invasion force ala British Empire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

There is a difference between a territory and a province as far as I'm aware though I could be caught up in semantics there.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Will

October 23rd, 2004, 05:28 PM

Where to begin... there's so much.

First off, Starhawk... we're serious when we say please tone down your Posts. The SEIV Forums will not tolerate extended ad hominem attacks, flames, etc.

especially SINCE WE ARE NOT proffiting from the damned war in Iraq....in fact it's COSTING US MONEY....oy

The argument about war profiteering isn't about the US gaining or losing money. It's about the military/industrial complex corporations profitting on an enormous scale because of the war, to the detriment of the rest of the economy. The profits are going to Halliburton, BAE, Saab Missiles, United Defense, Carlyle Group, Glock, Bofors Defense, Boeing, Northrup Grumman, etc, etc... These also happen to be the corporate Groups that own the most politicians...

As for all the comments on the "US bashers", "US haters", "flag burners", and so on. The strength of the United States comes from the fact that its citizens CAN dissent. If there is ever a time when there is no dissent, then I will be very, very afraid... because that will mean that the US is truly no longer a free country. All of your comments, which you seem to indicate are directed at Ed Kolis, are completely false over-reactions, the typical frenzied oversimplifications that drive the radical nutjobs on both ends of the political spectrum. People who are generally high on rhetoric and righteousness, and low on critical thinking skills. Examples: the Republican mailings in, IIRC, West Virginia, which say that "the liberals" want to ban the Bible and legalize gay marriage... only half of which is sometimes true
the "think of the children!" Groups, which seem to use that one argument to justify anything under the sun
Groups such as PETA, who semi-regularly break into labs, dump fake blood on people, all in the name of treating animals fairly
Bill O'Reily, Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, Ann Coulter (on that Last one, I can't believe anyone sane would really believe that Sen. McCarthy and the communist witchhunts were really a Good Thing)
the environmental group that firebomed a few hundred SUVs a while ago (six months?)
Timothy McVeigh, John Mohammed/John Lee Malvo, Osama bin Laden

All those Groups are guilty of mischaracterizing people they don't agree with, some to a much higher degree than others. Don't make their mistake, please.

As for the whole "liberation of Iraq" thing, I have to wonder if the countries we have "liberated" really are better off now. Afghanistan (which we ignored soon after invading and focus went to an Iraq which was all bark/no bite) went from the centralized, organizing... and oppressive... rule of the Taliban, to a short period of rule by an occupying US force, then degenerated into various territories held by warlords, and is in many ways just as bad or worse than before we invaded. The "provisional government" in Afghanistan is a joke, the only power they have is that of the few US troops we left there. In Iraq, we went in because of a supposed threat of Saddam either giving weapons to terrorists, or not having good enough security to prevent terrorists from taking weapons. We find in hindsight that there were no weapons, that analysts were pressured to conclude that Iraq probably had weapons, based only on Iraqi bravado which was meant to keep Saddam's enemies throughout the Middle East at bay. We removed a dictatorship again, and replaced it with chaos again, as we didn't put in enough resources to keep the area stable. We also removed the biggest asset the US had in the Arab world to hold the power of fundamentalist Islamic Groups in check. While Saddam was not our ally, he was a major reason why militant Groups were not forming in the Middle East as quickly or efficiently as they could have, since they were a threat to his secular state. So, based on very bad decisions that no one is living up to, we have two occupied countries that we screwed up, billions of dollars of the economy going to war instead of back into strenghening the economy, 1000+ soldiers dead, 6000+ soldiers wounded, and the biggest recruitment fair terrorist organizations could have hoped for. Wonderful http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Now, all this terrible stuff has happened because of the hawkish policies of the current administration, and the "shoot first, ask questions later" type of personality the President seems to prefer. And you're calling into question the motives of those who are criticizing this government? The simple thing is, this government needs to change, and as I believe was already said by Atrocities on these Boards before, it needs to change through one of four boxes, in the following order: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. This is the soap box. The ballot box for me is in the mail right now (absentee ballot). I can't really sit on a jury with enough power to change much in the government (SCotUS is pretty much the only one with that power). And, if it comes to it, I may go to the ammo box. But unlike this administration, I have some patience before I will put my finger on the trigger, and even more patience before I actually pull it.

Oh, and on Kerry's "flip-flopping": How can Kerry be changing positions all the time, yet be more liberal than Ted Kennedy, as the Bush campaign claims? And why does changing opinions based on new data constitute a character flaw (I thought bull-headed stubornness was supposed to be the vice)? And what about Bush's flip-flopping? Steel tarrifs, not taking money from Medicare/Social Security, the Department of Homeland Security... hypocrites.

narf poit chez BOOM

October 23rd, 2004, 05:29 PM

Oh, please. This has nothing to do with Iraq or crossing police lines. It's about the US government only letting two parties into the official debates. That is a fault. If you do not like it, feel free to stick your head back in the ground.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 05:43 PM

Starhawk, I'll not comment, I'll just provide the info below...and ask you to read it with an open mind. Not my words.

(source linked at end)

Even if they don't like to say it out loud, lots of Democrats think that George Bush's supporters are a horde of ignoramuses. Now comes evidence that they're right! A remarkable new report, titled "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters," from PIPA, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, suggests that rank and file Republicans are more benighted than even the most supercilious coastal elitist would imagine. (link mentioned:
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html#1)

Analyzing data from a series of nationwide polls, the report finds that a majority of Bush supporters believe things about the world that are objectively untrue, while the majority of Kerry supporters dwell in the reality-based community. For example, Bush backers largely think that the president and his policies are popular internationally. Seventy-five percent believe that Iraq was providing "substantial" aid to al-Qaida, and 63 percent say clear evidence of this has been found. That, of course, would be news even to Donald Rumsfeld, who earlier this month told the Council on Foreign Relations, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two."

Though its language is dispassionate, the report lays responsibility for this epidemic of ignorance at the White House's door. "So why are Bush supporters clinging so tightly to these beliefs in the face of repeated disconfirmations?" it asks. "Apparently one key reason is that they continue to hear the Bush administration confirming these beliefs."

Indeed, it says, "an overwhelming 82% [of Bush supporters] perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or a major WMD program (19%). Only 16% of Bush supporters perceive the administration as saying that Iraq had some limited activities, but not an active program (15%) or had nothing (1%). The pattern on al Qaeda is similar. Seventy-five percent of Bush supporters think the Bush administration is currently saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda (56%) or even that it was directly involved in 9/11 (19%). Further, 55% of Bush supporters say it is their impression the Bush administration is currently saying the US has found clear evidence Saddam Hussein was working closely with al Qaeda (not saying clear evidence found: 37%)."

These people aren't going to be swayed by the argument that Bush has alienated America's allies and left the country isolated in the world, because they don't believe this to be the case. "Despite a steady flow of official statements, public demonstrations, and public opinion polls showing that the US war against Iraq is quite unpopular, only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq," the study says. Bush supporters also think that world public opinion favors Bush's reelection. In a poll taken from Sept. 3-7, the study says, "57% of Bush supporters assumed that the majority of people in the world would prefer to see Bush reelected, 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred."

In fact, a PIPA study released in early September found that a majority or plurality of people from 32 countries preferred Kerry to Bush. PIPA surveyed 34,330 people, ages 15 and above, from regions all over the world. A Pew poll released this spring similarly found that "large majorities in every country, except for the U.S., hold an unfavorable opinion of Bush."

Bush supporters are also mistaken about the president's own positions (a pattern of misapprehension that an earlier PIPA report also documented). "Majorities incorrectly assumed that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues -- the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%); 51% incorrectly assumed he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty -- the principal international accord on global warming ... Only 13% of supporters are aware that he opposes labor and environmental standards in trade agreements -- 74% incorrectly believe that he favors including labor and environmental standards in agreements on trade. In all these cases, there is a recurring theme: majorities of Bush supporters favor these positions, and they infer that Bush favors them as well."

According to the report, this reality gap is something new in American life. "So why do Bush supporters show such a resistance to accepting dissonant information?" it asks. "While it is normal for people to show some resistance, the magnitude of the denial goes beyond the ordinary. Bush supporters have succeeded in suppressing awareness of the findings of a whole series of high-profile reports about prewar Iraq that have been blazoned across the headlines of newspapers and prompted extensive, high-profile and agonizing reflection. The fact that a large portion of Americans say they are unaware that the original reasons that the US took military action -- and for which Americans continue to die on a daily basis -- are not turning out to be valid, are probably not due to a simple failure to pay attention to the news."

The analysis says that the roots of this denial could lie in the trauma of 9/11 and people's desire to hold on to their image of Bush as a "capable protector." It offers no guidance, though, on how ordinary Republicans might be coaxed back to reality.

And while "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters" may be perversely satisfying to Democrats in its confirmation of blue-state prejudices, it carries a pretty disturbing question for all rational Americans: How can arguments based on fact prevail in a nation where so many people know so little?

from:http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/

narf poit chez BOOM

October 23rd, 2004, 05:59 PM

And on your comment about people not criticizing their own country, let me take a moment to say:

Hey, Canada has dedicated soldiers. That way, they can be brave and bold while their equipment falls apart around them.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 06:06 PM

Starhawk said:
YES America has it's flaws but we are also the Strongest, and I have to say most FREE nation on earth and people need to learn to appreciate that freedom and that greatness and their heritage with respect and not try to make our government sound like a damned fascist state.

Sorry, but I'll disagree with you here. I live in Canada, and I think that as of now, we are more free than the US has been for quite some time. I am more free than you ever will be. At least the police here don't have the right to detain you without just cause indefinitely, like they do in the US. At least my government doesn't invade other countries, killing untold thousands of innocent people (along with the thousands of guilty). My country believes in peacekeeping, not war-mongering. Who's in Afghanistand with their troops, keeping the peace now that the US lost interest and went on to invade Iraq? Canada does.

Give me a break Starhawk. Your attitude seems to suggest that you think America and Americans are the best thing the world has ever produced! That you always were, and always will be the most powerful, most free and best thing ever! Do you also believe in Manifest Destiny, like many Americans seem to? That it is your "destiny" to rule the entire world? That you have right to do whatever you want, simply because there is no one else in the world who has the military might available to stop you? I'm sorry, but just because you're the most powerful, doesn't mean you're always right, like you seem to believe.

I mean no disrespect to you Starhawk, I simply do not understand when people have attitudes like yours. I don't mean to insult you or anything, but I can not sit here, reading this stuff, and not comment. I hope no one is offended by this, and I hope the meaning of my words makes it through the transition from my mind into print!

Raging Deadstar

October 23rd, 2004, 06:08 PM

Renegade: It's called Patriotism simply put. Not necerssarily a bad thing but not always a good thing.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 06:08 PM

Will said:
Oh, and on Kerry's "flip-flopping"...

The funniest thing about the whole "flipflopping" issue (aside from the fact that it isn't true, but simply the right's propoganda machine at work) is that we're saying that Kerry is not fit to be President because....he CHANGES HIS MIND!

OH MY GOD. They're right. Surely we don't want someone who CHANGES THEIR MIND at the helm of the country.

I mean, just think of it. What if they learned new information or *gasp* intelligence that didn't fit with thier plans? They might CHANGE THEIR MIND!

Or, if they got advice from an advisor that was smarter on a subject than they were and they convinced them that they might be wrong? they might CHANGE THEIR MIND!

Holy cow. Think of the possibilities. It would be devastating to have a president that listened to advice and then made up a decision, and was willing to CHANGE THEIR MIND if the country needed it, or if it made sense. Or if, god forbid, they might have been wrong.

I mean, just think, what if Kerry were president, and we got attacked by Al Qaeda and he knew, just knew, that Iran was behind it and so he started to prepare for an invasion but then one of his advisers or the CIA came to him and said, "Mr President all our intelligence indicates that it isn't Iran behind the attack, instead it's North Korea". What if, under that situation, our President CHANGED HIS MIND?

Where would the US be then?

In a hell of a lot better place than now, I can tell you that.

Remember that Cuban Missile Crisis thingy? Where we went eyeball to eyeball with the Russkies and the whole world watched while we almsot blew it up? Well, JFK was a pretty bright guy...because he listened to his advisors on possible options to deal with the Missiles in Cuba...and he CHANGED HIS MIND and instead of airstrikes he blockaded.

WE know now, given that Russian archives have all been released to the public after the wall fell down, that if he had ordered airstrikes, odds are very good that there would have been a nuclear war.

Thank god he CHANGED HIS MIND.

WE need a President that is not so lugheaded and stubborn that he can't CHANGE HIS MIND.

Get it?

Or, is it possible that you can't CHANGE YOUR MIND?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 06:12 PM

Starhawk said:
Ever hear of a positive change instead of jumping right into the flag burning government bashing militant?

You might want to be aware of who you are talking about if you are including me. Although there should NOT be such a thing as a list of qualifications which give the right to comment, if there WERE such a list then many of us would qualify quite heavily. Hmmmm lets see... US citizen, vietnam vet, military retired, tax payer, functional family man, home owner. Thats quite a list of things I can put me on the "politicians listen to me" list. About the only thing I could add to it that I dont have at the moment is that Im no longer a "small business owner" or "CEO of a large corporation". Thats just me. I thought Id clarify it abit.

To Gandalf yeah we do have territories like I said though it seems they cost us money and give us little in return when I say province I mean taxed (as in we get more mone from them then we spend on them) territory that has the choice of either paying or getting creamed by an invasion force ala British Empire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

Again its not the facts, its the way they are worded and looked at by others than the person who keeps saying them louder and louder. And civil disorders in those territories has caused us to send in troops (same as the british empire).

The scarey part is that most of those were taken in war. They were taken to move out the government ruling them, we stayed in control in order to "lead them to a proper government", (sound familiar?) and now decades later they still arent free nations or states. Im sure its all in their best interest but then most such actions by countries usually are as far as the nation doing it says.

Fyron

October 23rd, 2004, 06:12 PM

Renegade 13 said:
Sorry, but I'll disagree with you here. I live in Canada, and I think that as of now, we are more free than the US has been for quite some time. I am more free than you ever will be. At least the police here don't have the right to detain you without just cause indefinitely, like they do in the US.

Minor nit-pick... while the US military can apparently detain foreigners indefinitely, the police could certainly not do this to a US citizen...

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 06:20 PM

Raging Deadstar said:
Renegade: It's called Patriotism simply put. Not necerssarily a bad thing but not always a good thing.

Very true, but rabid patriotism is definitely not good, not when it blinds the person to all other viewpoints.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 06:25 PM

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 06:26 PM

Starhawk said:

Starhawk said:
YES America has it's flaws but we are also the Strongest, and I have to say most FREE nation on earth

[/quote]

Is it?

In terms of Economic freedom, it ranks sixth, behind Hong Kong, Signapore, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the UK (see: http://www.ncpa.org/pi/internat/pd012299g.html)

But I don't think that's what he means. (After all, Signapore is a pretty facistic place in some ways, although, clearly, like Mussolini, the government keeps the train running on time)

So, what about other freedoms?

In terms of press/journalistic freedom (based on things like "attacks on journalists (such as murders, imprisonment, physical assaults and threats) and on the media (censorship, confiscation, searches and pressure).[and]... the degree of impunity enjoyed by those responsible for such violations...), the US is ranked as: 17th (Finland is first, France 11, Canada 5) (see: http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=4118)

SO, how about political freedoms? It's hard to get a "top ten" for this, since most categorize rather than rank dsicreteley. Given that, Freedom House ranks the US in it's highest categrory (for both Political Rights and Civil Liberties) but details some disturbing trends as well
(http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/freeworld/2003/countryRatings/usa.htm)

The US shares this highest ranking with a number of other countries, including Uruguay, Slovenia, Norway, France, Canada, and a whole lot of others.

So, is the US the "most free" in the world? Well, it shares the highest Category, so you could make a case either way, really.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 06:27 PM

Imperator Fyron said:

Renegade 13 said:
Sorry, but I'll disagree with you here. I live in Canada, and I think that as of now, we are more free than the US has been for quite some time. I am more free than you ever will be. At least the police here don't have the right to detain you without just cause indefinitely, like they do in the US.

Minor nit-pick... while the US military can apparently detain foreigners indefinitely, the police could certainly not do this to a US citizen...

Thanks for clearing that up Fyron, I must have gotten my information screwed up in my head. Not the first time that's happened... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

One more thing though...have any of you heard of the Canadian citizen who was travelling to the US, and yet was detained by the US immigration, or homeland security, or some such organization, and then deported to Syria!! He was kept incarcerated by US forces without just cause, simply because he used to live in Syria. He was a Canadian citizen, and yet some braindead organization deported him to Syria! Come on. That's just ridiculous.

I will admit, the Canadian government cooperated with the US somewhat in this, and for that I have no respect for them. Now, Canada was also responsible for that. I admit it. I'm not so rabidly patriotic that I can not see the truth.

Point is, the US does many things that are against basic human rights. Other countries do too. Canada probably does so as well. There are many problems with the world today, and we can't solve them all. That doesn't mean we have to be rabidly patriotic and stick our head in the sand though.

By the way, the name of the Canadian that was deported to Syria was Maher Arrar (not sure of the spelling) just in case anyone wanted to look that up.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 06:29 PM

Gandalf Parker said:

Imperator Fyron said:

Renegade 13 said:
Sorry, but I'll disagree with you here. I live in Canada, and I think that as of now, we are more free than the US has been for quite some time. I am more free than you ever will be. At least the police here don't have the right to detain you without just cause indefinitely, like they do in the US.

Minor nit-pick... while the US military can apparently detain foreigners indefinitely, the police could certainly not do this to a US citizen...

Not indefinately. There is a very specific time limit before they must be charged with something and see a judge. One of the very good parts of the original constitution. Of course there were 1700+ arrested during the republican convention and held for 60 hours.

I thought the limit for holding without just cause was 48 hours, not 60. Also, doesn't the Patriot Act give the police or military the right to detain without just cause if they believe they "may" be a threat to the security of the US? Or am I wrong again? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 06:32 PM

Patriotism?

There are different kinds of patriotism. I think Starhawk Subscribes to the "Ann Coulter" school of patriotism ("my country right or wrong and if you say wrong you're a traitor and we should kill you and convert you to xtianity anyways...!)

Forgive me, but I always get tickled when I think of ann and I have to bring out one of my favorite Coulter quotes:

"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"---Ann Coulter, on Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01

For more Coulter tidbits, see: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0111.coulterwisdom.html

Raging Deadstar said:
Renegade: It's called Patriotism simply put. Not necerssarily a bad thing but not always a good thing.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 06:35 PM

Actually, under the Patriot Act, I beleive you can be detained indefinitely w/o access to legal counsel if they say that terrorism is involved (oh, and all of the evidence, depositions, and the very fact that you've been taken away can be kept secret IIRC...)

Scared? You should be. (EDIT: and you know THEY'RE watching these Boards and recording everything...if I dissappear suddenly, you know why...)

I'll try and drum up some references to confirm or deny this, but I'm pretty sure it is currently the case.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 06:50 PM

Renegade 13 said:

Imperator Fyron said:

Renegade 13 said:
Sorry, but I'll disagree with you here. I live in Canada, and I think that as of now, we are more free than the US has been for quite some time. I am more free than you ever will be. At least the police here don't have the right to detain you without just cause indefinitely, like they do in the US.

Minor nit-pick... while the US military can apparently detain foreigners indefinitely, the police could certainly not do this to a US citizen...

Thanks for clearing that up Fyron, I must have gotten my information screwed up in my head. Not the first time that's happened... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

One more thing though...have any of you heard of the Canadian citizen who was travelling to the US, and yet was detained by the US immigration, or homeland security, or some such organization, and then deported to Syria!! He was kept incarcerated by US forces without just cause, simply because he used to live in Syria. He was a Canadian citizen, and yet some braindead organization deported him to Syria! Come on. That's just ridiculous.

I will admit, the Canadian government cooperated with the US somewhat in this, and for that I have no respect for them. Now, Canada was also responsible for that. I admit it. I'm not so rabidly patriotic that I can not see the truth.

Point is, the US does many things that are against basic human rights. Other countries do too. Canada probably does so as well. There are many problems with the world today, and we can't solve them all. That doesn't mean we have to be rabidly patriotic and stick our head in the sand though.

By the way, the name of the Canadian that was deported to Syria was Maher Arrar (not sure of the spelling) just in case anyone wanted to look that up.

Okay Renegade I'm sorry here but that whole Canadian citizen deal is just BS as a justification for how "evil" we americans are I had a friend who was detained by the RCMP and kept for over four hours of questioning because of one oops in his passport so political mistakes happen on both sides of the border http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

"Patriotism?

There are different kinds of patriotism. I think Starhawk Subscribes to the "Ann Coulter" school of patriotism ("my country right or wrong and if you say wrong you're a traitor and we should kill you and convert you to xtianity anyways...!)

Forgive me, but I always get tickled when I think of ann and I have to bring out one of my favorite Coulter quotes:

"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'"---Ann Coulter, on Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01"

Oh give me a BREAK! I even SAID that the US has it's flaws I just said I'd take it over any other country any day that is hardly a "kill or convert" policy, My problem with you foreigners that go whining about how "evil" we are have no right to judge us when no doubt your country has it's own sorted political crap so why as I said why don't you limit your whining to your own country?
And NO I am not accusing all the folks that disagree with US policy here of being whiney I am just saying folks that are comparing us to "The Evil Empire" and crap like that.

"You might want to be aware of who you are talking about if you are including me. Although there should NOT be such a thing as a list of qualifications which give the right to comment, if there WERE such a list then many of us would qualify quite heavily. Hmmmm lets see... US citizen, vietnam vet, military retired, tax payer, functional family man, home owner. Thats quite a list of things I can put me on the "politicians listen to me" list. About the only thing I could add to it that I dont have at the moment is that Im no longer a "small business owner" or "CEO of a large corporation". Thats just me. I thought Id clarify it abit."

You were ABSOLUTELY not included Gandalf, I was making that remark about those "we need a revolution" folks that seek violence in change instead of positive changes.
If you dislike the US government and are a US citizen and can effect change for the better if enough of you get together then by all means do it.
But there has never been a positive revolution before or since the First American Revolution as revolutions tear countries apart and leave them ripe for other nations to pick apart, not to mention find me two Americans with enough firepower to take on an armored division and then maybe I'll feel threatened by any pathetic attempt at revolution, until then shutup about a violent revolution and instead try to make positive changes and lead the community through peaceful and educated talks about how they can improve things and NOT just whine about how evil the government is and how evil the US military is and blah blah blah ad nauseum.

I am just sick and tired of people acting like the United States is evil, I'm sorry to say we have earned an unfortunate reputation as a nation due to stupid things that we've done but I find it convenient that those very people who say how evil we are never bother pointing out whatever the US has done their country has likely done it LOOONG before and a LOT WORSE (that mainly goes for the older nations like many of those in the MIdeast and Europe) so please save me that saints and angels bit.
Trust me the US could use improvement, mainly in the department of trying to do anything in the world, if you ask me we should pretty much do what European nations do and say "Screw the lot" and stay home, OH BUT WAIT when we tried that the world whined about us NOT doing anything......either way it seems to me we are screwed in the eyes of the world.

So basically my political view on the world today:

Politics 101 the world sucks every nation sucks to someone it's just that the US being the most powerful sucker on the block gets the biggest load when it sucks LOL

And I'm sorry there is a difference between changing your mind and changing your tune during the same speech in one sentence Kerry will be all
"Yes I voted for the war in Iraq"
the next sentence he'll be going
"The war in Iraq is wrong and I've said so from the start"
Or similar (I'm not good at quoting from memory) so I dislike that in anybody but it would be worse in a president.

Do I think Bush is perfect LOL hahahahahahhahahaha muahahahaha heheeeeheeehee ahem cough anyhoo "Strategery" lol. sorry

What I was trying to say is NON POLITICS I love my country so back off.....I'm sure you wouldn't like every political screwup your country ever made to be judged forever would you?

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 06:55 PM

Oh and BTW WAKE UP the world is run by power hungry buisnessmen NOT just the United States so please stop using our power hungry jerks to make u all look evil just because they happen to b richer then your money hungry jerks....thank you.

And I stopped cussing so please stop with the "tone it down" stuff I already did I said sorry publicly and I edited out the cussing.

As I said I was tired and frustrated so I got hot faster then I should have.....can we let that go now please?

"Again its not the facts, its the way they are worded and looked at by others than the person who keeps saying them louder and louder. And civil disorders in those territories has caused us to send in troops (same as the british empire).

The scarey part is that most of those were taken in war. They were taken to move out the government ruling them, we stayed in control in order to "lead them to a proper government", (sound familiar?) and now decades later they still arent free nations or states. Im sure its all in their best interest but then most such actions by countries usually are as far as the nation doing it says. "

Yeah I know I probobly blew a lot of my credibility out the window with the hostile flame and I already said sorry so you are right about the way I phrased things.

Well I do hope that those nations can someday either become states of their own will or become self reliant enough to be an independant nation but until then I just hope they are happy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Now as to the line about "Us giving up on Afghanistan" what the heck news have you been watching

FIRST FREE ELECTIONS EVER are already under way there, that doesn't sound like a nation of dozens of small fifedomes to me?

OH and there are still over 100,000 US service personnell in Afghanistan, pretty much between there and Iraq the bulk of the US armed forces are deployed. There is also a UN peacekeeper contingent in Afghanistan so the US "military" should back out as soldiers are NOT peacekeepers and it's not their duty.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 07:03 PM

Starhawk said:
My problem with you foreigners that go whining about how "evil" we are have no right to judge us when no doubt your country has it's own sorted political crap so why as I said why don't you limit your whining to your own country?

Well, since this was directed at me, I feel obliged to step up and say I am a US citizen, I was in Iraq for the first five weeks of the war (as an analyst working with the Marines), I work for the US government, and I, like many people, got taken in by the lies of this administration vis-a-vis the Iraq war. Oh, I was also in the mideast for the Afghan war, which I still beleive was the right war at the right time. Iraq was based on intentional lies. Going to war is not something one should do lightly, and if a president lies about it, he should be kicked out.

Now, let's stop with the ad hominens and actually debate the issues.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 07:09 PM

I agree with you that Iraq probobly shouldn't have happened my point is we are there now and we can't abandon them and still feel right with ourselves, at least I don't think I would feel proud of a country that backs out after it made a mistake and doesn't try to fix it.

We are there it sucks but we have to see this through or Iraq will become an even worse bloodbath then it is now that would make me sick to be honest.

The Afghan war was the right thing at the right time and it's good that we are still there in a more limited capacity because it's a way of ensuring Afghanistan stays independant and hopefully someday prospers.

Like I said I am exausted I am brainshot and I already said I probobly worded things very poorly. Sorry......again....yet.....again.....oy.

I'm 17 I'm young and I have hope for the future of my country, it's seen bad times before and with any luck it will rise again to a position of respect instead of paranoia and hate.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 07:18 PM

Shoot man, I said some awfully nasty things too. It's the season, ya know? Sorry if I was rude - and I'm sure I was.

Hard to keep one;s cool when it's ten days till the election. First one I've ever gotten THIS worked up about. I'm sure I've lost some friends here and in person lately being a blowhard in yer face type...

Totally agree about Iraq - must fix it now that we're there.

Starhawk said:
I agree with you that Iraq probobly shouldn't have happened my point is we are there now and we can't abandon them and still feel right with ourselves, at least I don't think I would feel proud of a country that backs out after it made a mistake and doesn't try to fix it.

We are there it sucks but we have to see this through or Iraq will become an even worse bloodbath then it is now that would make me sick to be honest.

The Afghan war was the right thing at the right time and it's good that we are still there in a more limited capacity because it's a way of ensuring Afghanistan stays independant and hopefully someday prospers.

Like I said I am exausted I am brainshot and I already said I probobly worded things very poorly. Sorry......again....yet.....again.....oy.

I'm 17 I'm young and I have hope for the future of my country, it's seen bad times before and with any luck it will rise again to a position of respect instead of paranoia and hate.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 07:23 PM

I'm sorry too for the hostile tone I took about Iraq a girl who I consider a dear friend lost her boyfriend in Iraq and I agree with her that his death would be a waste if nothing came of it for the Iraqi people.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 07:24 PM

Starhawk said:
I have hope for the future of my country, it's seen bad times before and with any luck it will rise again to a position of respect instead of paranoia and hate.

One way to ensure that is to not act unilaterally, but with friends and allies. If a nation that is the most powerful in the world acts like nobody else's opinion matters, there is only one ultimate result: the rest of the world will band together against us. You think we're at war now? The rest of the world hates what we did so much that if we don;t regain their trust and respect, we ain't seen nothing yet. And trust and respect is not something you can force on others.

I fear our children and our childrens' children will be reaping the bitter fruit of our dear leader's misguided ways for many years...

I am saddened, also, because I have traveled around the world to countries that ostesibly are enemies of the US. I have been to Iran, Sudan, and a whole load of other places, just me and a backpack. I loved Iran the best - wonderful people, and although they often found issue with US policies, they all loved American people and hated their own government.

Now, I fear that if the American people re-elect Bush, I will never again be able travel in many countries for they will hate Americans as much as they hate Bush.

And, once the world hates the American government AND the American people, we've lost. There will no longer be any "city on a hill" in this country for others to look up to.

EDIT: clarified ambigious grammar

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 07:30 PM

Yes you are completely right but out of Bush and Kerry I don't trust Kerry as I have researched much of his war record and it scares me what his fellow soldiers thought of him.

I do not entirely like Bush either but at least we KNOW what Bush will do most likely, so it is better the Devil you know then the one you won't.

Yeah I've heard Iran is a country of rich culture and background but I've also met a woman from Iran who said getting out was the best thing that ever happened to her....so honestly there I don't judge that country because I'm sure man Iranians LOVE their country as I love the US (not necessarily the government)so I leave Iran alone.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 07:36 PM

Starhawk said:
Yes you are completely right but out of Bush and Kerry I don't trust Kerry as I have researched much of his war record and it scares me what his fellow soldiers thought of him.

Wait, you're talking the Swift Boat Vets, right?

None of whom served with him, and most are paid by republican lobbyists?

Have you listened to what the vets who served with him have said?

Get both sides!

Yeah, Iran certainly sucked for those who were on the losing side of the revolution in 79. I know lots of Irani expats here, and they all had to leave in a hurry, and many didn't get out with all their relatives. No doubt about it - the Ayatolloyah was an evil B****D.

And, yeah, most Muslim countries suck for women. Not all, but most. There's nuances and ways around it, of course. When I was over there there was a thriving underground of booze and pick-up scenes. I could have gotten all the gin and other liquor I wanted. And, the scariest part of my whole trip was when I was in a store having tea with a shop keeper, and in walked three high school irani girls, and they sat and giggled and made jokes in farsi (I couldn't understand a word of it) and then, suddenly, one leaned over and planted one right on my lips. Seriously. I was totally shocked. And scared. Like, the religious police are gonna cut my head off when they come around the corner scared. SO I stammered something unintelligible, and left. The shopkeeper later said that they just thought I was real cute with blond hair and they wanted to marry me. Yowza! Sorry ladies, not gonna happen...

All in all, a memorable experience.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 07:49 PM

"Wait, you're talking the Swift Boat Vets, right?

None of whom served with him, and most are paid by republican lobbyists?

Have you listened to what the vets who served with him have said?"

Well his own CO said he wrote his own after acion report which is not only against military regs it can be punished by legal action (aka quarts martial).

Also as I said he got piddly ant wounds 3 times in a four month period that obviously didn't hurt him much then he ran home and bad mouthed his fellow soldiers in Nam and I mean entire UNITS not just individuals.
My great uncle stayed for 2 tours after getting hit twice (each was enough to put him out for a while) and he died so 4 months and copping out to go home when your comrades have to stay is bull.

Sorry but that's my feelings on Kerry, I think he is a liar as are all politicians but what bugs me about him is his danged "I Wont 3 purple hearts" big deal so you got in the way 3 times and got a skinned knee (or it's wartime equivalent) tens of thousands of other US soldiers got the purple heart after they died (can't remember the spelling of the word so I won't even try right now) so he's nothing special and should stop rubbing those in our faces.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 07:57 PM

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

WHAT?!? What in the world do you base that on? The fact that they dont defend their southern border and rely on us to do it? You realize of course that we dont defend our northern border and rely on them to do it. In fact, most of the missile shield and radar services for the US is Canadian. Is it the fact that there has never been a Canadian war for Canadian reasons? They DO show up for every world war. They DO show up for every UN action in some very nasty places. Their forces are juast as capable and equiped as anyones.

Now if you wanted to say something like "all your decent war equipment comes from research an manufacturing of the US" then that would probably be true. But of course thats true of most of the world and Im not sure its anything I would want to brag about.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 08:01 PM

Starhawk said:
I'm sorry too for the hostile tone I took about Iraq a girl who I consider a dear friend lost her boyfriend in Iraq and I agree with her that his death would be a waste if nothing came of it for the Iraqi people.

No danger of that. We got rid of Saddam. Thats a good thing. But whatever reason we went in for (take your pick of many) we should say "we won now we are going home".

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 08:02 PM

After Action Reports are AFAIK written by the people who participated in the action. I think his CO never met him, right? Or do I have that wrong? WE do it in the Navy and USMC all the time today.

In any case, I don't feel qualified to judge the extent of a man's injuries, nor how they choose to deal with them. Everyone is different, and I don;t think any wound that leaves shrapnel still in one's leg thirty years later could be characterized as "piddly ant" - I do know though that he volounteered for the war when he could have gotten a deferment easily, while Cheney got 5 deferments and Bush, well, we all know what Bush did.

In any case, I do think the Vietnam thing is sort of silly as an issue - I don't think he should have emphasized it as much as he did - it was over thirty years ago. But by the same token, in war I want someone who's actually seen combat to lead a nation.

As to his testimony about atrocities being committed in Vietnam, he was recounting what other vets had told him, and, in any case, atrocities *were* committed.

I think very highly of a man who is willing to stand up in the face of his superiors and his fellows for what is right. Vietnam was a very nasty little affair - and it was the *wrong* war. Atrocities have been committed in Iraq (Abu Ghraib and others that will eventually see the light of day) and for someone today to stand up and shout that "hey that ain't right!" would be a service to the country.

To not say someything in the face of evil is to take the easy way out. I respect Kerry greatly for having the courage to speak out about evils being done in the name of the US. There is not much braver than that.

But, in any case, it was thirty years ago...

Starhawk said:

Well his own CO said he wrote his own after acion report which is not only against military regs it can be punished by legal action (aka quarts martial).

Also as I said he got piddly ant wounds 3 times in a four month period that obviously didn't hurt him much then he ran home and bad mouthed his fellow soldiers in Nam and I mean entire UNITS not just individuals.
My great uncle stayed for 2 tours after getting hit twice (each was enough to put him out for a while) and he died so 4 months and copping out to go home when your comrades have to stay is bull.

Sorry but that's my feelings on Kerry, I think he is a liar as are all politicians but what bugs me about him is his danged "I Wont 3 purple hearts" big deal so you got in the way 3 times and got a skinned knee (or it's wartime equivalent) tens of thousands of other US soldiers got the purple heart after they died (can't remember the spelling of the word so I won't even try right now) so he's nothing special and should stop rubbing those in our faces.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 08:05 PM

Also, the Canadian military is exceptionally skilled at peacekeeping - they are in fact, the paramount force for it. It really illustrates a different mindset - the Canadians use their military to assist the UN, the US uses it military to tell the UN to p*ss off.

And, yeah, the US and Canada have a very integrated defense system - they rely on each other to a great extent.

Gandalf Parker said:
[quote]

Oh and Canada has a military

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 08:07 PM

alarikf said:
And, yeah, most Muslim countries suck for women. Not all, but most.

Careful there. Thats an awful lot of countries. Including ones in Europe, members of NATO, ones in Africa and in the Pacific nations. Im not sure that "most" would apply unless you mean the arabic desert nations. Then it would probably be a safe statement. (my overseas muslim experience was in Turkey)

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 08:08 PM

Gandalf Parker said:

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

WHAT?!? What in the world do you base that on? The fact that they dont defend their southern border and rely on us to do it? You realize of course that we dont defend our northern border and rely on them to do it. In fact, most of the missile shield and radar services for the US is Canadian. Is it the fact that there has never been a Canadian war for Canadian reasons? They DO show up for every world war. They DO show up for every UN action in some very nasty places. Their forces are juast as capable and equiped as anyones.

Now if you wanted to say something like "all your decent war equipment comes from research an manufacturing of the US" then that would probably be true. But of course thats true of most of the world and Im not sure its anything I would want to brag about.

Crap I misworded it again I'm sorry to Canadians everywhere lol I did not meant to imply their soldiers were incompetent ro their technology inferior I meant NUMBERS wise they are by far no true military power and can't fight a "serious war" on their own....as it would probobly bankrupt them....sorry again.

Katchoo

October 23rd, 2004, 08:16 PM

Starhawk said:Sorry but that's my feelings on Kerry, I think he is a liar as are all politicians but what bugs me about him is his danged "I Wont 3 purple hearts" big deal so you got in the way 3 times and got a skinned knee (or it's wartime equivalent) tens of thousands of other US soldiers got the purple heart after they died (can't remember the spelling of the word so I won't even try right now) so he's nothing special and should stop rubbing those in our faces.

I'm sorry, but the complete and utter disrespect being shown to Veterens by Republicans (you included, Starhawk) is disgusting.

Regardless of the injury, how it happend, where it happened, or how often it happend, at least he had the balls to volunteer. What he saw in Vietnam horrified him (and many others), and because of that he spoke out. Until you've walked a mile in that man's shoes, you are in NO position to question, degrade, or insult his Service.

My Grandfather served over 2 Years overseas during World War II, and if I ever degraded someone's Service the way you and the Republican's are (ie: those stupid purple heart bandaids) I would fully expect him to have taken out his WWII pistol out of storage and shoot me dead.

Republicans... I've never seen a more disrespectful and disgusting group of people since a dumb *** KKK supporter tried to march in Ottawa.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 08:18 PM

Starhawk said:Crap I misworded it again I'm sorry to Canadians everywhere lol I did not meant to imply their soldiers were incompetent ro their technology inferior I meant NUMBERS wise they are by far no true military power and can't fight a "serious war" on their own....as it would probobly bankrupt them....sorry again.

AHhhhh the old "US, Russia, China are the big armies" thing. And now that Russia is out of the picture....
Well yes, thats true. Although Im sure thy have enough population to put out a decent military force if ever they were attacked. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 08:31 PM

You're absolutely right, and I shoulnd't have said that - I know better, and I don't even really feel totally like that. I mean, I hate, *hate* vast generalizations like that. My wife and I argue a lot about it. She says, unequivocally, that women in muslim situations have it cr*ppy. I say, yeah, progbably, but, it ain't like you think...And I have known plenty of muslim women who are as strong willed and not-gonna-put-up-with-anything as anyone. This is all somewhat ironic becuase I have an abiding interest in Islam and Islamic countries. In my experience Muslims are, in general, the most polite, kind and generous people in the world - and Muslim countries are FAR different to what we in the west imagine them to be.

What I really should have said was this: in countries where the state religion is Islam, women have a varying degree of structural, insituational and cultural hurdles to overcome. In some cases, these can be extremely oppressive, in others, almost non-existent.

Oh, and, hey, you think NY or Boston drivers are agressive? Man, you haven't seen aggressive until you've seen how women in Tehran drive! Seriously.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

EDIT: a whole bunch of silly spelling mistakes

Gandalf Parker said:

alarikf said:
And, yeah, most Muslim countries suck for women. Not all, but most.

Careful there. Thats an awful lot of countries. Including ones in Europe, members of NATO, ones in Africa and in the Pacific nations. Im not sure that "most" would apply unless you mean the arabic desert nations. Then it would probably be a safe statement. (my overseas muslim experience was in Turkey)

Krsqk

October 23rd, 2004, 08:34 PM

Starhawk said:
Oh and my oppinion of Kerry is that he is a flipflopping jackass who wants to win on his "I won three purple hearts!" line.....so BFD my Great Uncle DIED in Nam after staying for two tours and getting hit twice....Kerry got pissant wounds (not even enough to send him home for God's sake or keep him in hospital for more then a few days) and went home after 4 months after writing his own report to make himself a hero......yeah I don't want that guy in office I'm sorry.

If one thing bothers me about this, it's the instant change in his story. Not during this campaign, but back when he returned from Vietnam. While he was there, he was filming war videos where he was the hero, so apparently he wasn't too upset about the war. In fact, that would seem to indicate he thought war was a good opportunity to display his heroism (whether in RL or just on the silver screen). However, once he got home, he all of a sudden was against the war; he had seen dozens of atrocities committed by our troops; and he even said he had committed some himself. That doesn't sound like a good way to build up his image as a war hero!

I guess my question is: What happened on the flight between Vietnam and the US to change his desire to appear to be a courageous war hero who saved the day several times?

Of course, one could also ask what happened in the past year to change his mind again, but that might be seen as a snide political attack. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif Maybe that whole anti-war thing was just a phase brought on by shellshock?

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 08:41 PM

Problem is he is currently pro-anti-war if you listen to him he tap dances to much to tell whether he wants to stay in Iraq till it's over or whether he wants to lead the US into yet aother humiliating withdrawal ala Bosnia.

TerranC

October 23rd, 2004, 08:42 PM

Krsqk said:I guess my question is: What happened on the flight between Vietnam and the US to change his desire to appear to be a courageous war hero who saved the day several times?

Coming to a theatre near you: The Siamese Candidate featuring John Kerry as John Kerry...

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif I'll go away now.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 08:59 PM

Bosnia was humiliating? I'm not tracking.

Starhawk said:
Problem is he is currently pro-anti-war if you listen to him he tap dances to much to tell whether he wants to stay in Iraq till it's over or whether he wants to lead the US into yet aother humiliating withdrawal ala Bosnia.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 09:02 PM

Im not really seeing any flipflop there. First off, alot of people were for being in the military and against vietnam. And I dont think withdrawing from Iraq now is a humiliating withdrawal. Its done. We are now fighting people we were not fighting when we went in. Thank you but dont stick around.

Of course thats a problem to discuss here. We gamers tend to have a different idea of what is involved in "winning the war" and to EVER leave the area before converting it into a part of ourselves isnt it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Lets just hope that Bush isnt a gamer.

Starhawk

October 23rd, 2004, 09:02 PM

Oh.....crap I think I got the wrong country again.....I give up for tonight I'm waaaay to tired sorry.

Somalia was what I meant.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 09:10 PM

Oh my god, he CHANGED HIS MIND!

No, but seriously, there is no contradiction between being proud of what you are doing at the time and not in favor of the larger policies. When I was in Iraq, I took photos. Can you read my mind as well as yuo can read Kerry's and tell me why? I didn't think so.

EDIT: let me add some words that I think better explain what I mean: There is a world of difference between doing one's duty and trying to right wrongs. When he (or anyone) volounteered to go to Vietnam, to fight and perhaps die for his country, that's a powerful oath you take. You have a duty. It's not just pride in one's work, it's a calling. But, frankly (speaking from personal experience), almost getting killed tends to focus one's mind really well on what is important in life and what is not. And, I would guess that when his duty was over, he felt that he could then move on to dealing with issues or what he heard. A soldier or a marine or a sailor, is not going to disobey, be derelict, or otherwise bring shame upon their oath or their service. But when that is done, then they can reflect on what it was they were asked to do. Again, it takes a courageous man to do such reflection and come to the conclusion that the way the war was waged was wrong. END EDIT

And, perhaps he had an epiphany of sorts. When you're in-country for months and you see just one side, and then you get out and you talk to others and they tell you that they committed atrocities, that certainly could change someone's mind. And, hopefully, it *would* - again, I have a lot more respect for someone who can change their mind, especially on something of vast importance, than for someone who is going to stubbornly cling to some erroneous beleif.

That's why I can't have respect for anyone who says, at *any* point in their life, "Mistakes? I can't recall any I've made..."

That is not the type of person I'd like to be having a beer with.

Krsqk said:
If one thing bothers me about this, it's the instant change in his story. Not during this campaign, but back when he returned from Vietnam. While he was there, he was filming war videos where he was the hero, so apparently he wasn't too upset about the war. In fact, that would seem to indicate he thought war was a good opportunity to display his heroism (whether in RL or just on the silver screen). However, once he got home, he all of a sudden was against the war; he had seen dozens of atrocities committed by our troops; and he even said he had committed some himself. That doesn't sound like a good way to build up his image as a war hero!

I guess my question is: What happened on the flight between Vietnam and the US to change his desire to appear to be a courageous war hero who saved the day several times?

Of course, one could also ask what happened in the past year to change his mind again, but that might be seen as a snide political attack. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif Maybe that whole anti-war thing was just a phase brought on by shellshock?

narf poit chez BOOM

October 23rd, 2004, 09:15 PM

I find it hard to beleive that the Canadian military could have sufficient equipment, given that a) we've had to ship out soldeirs by renting space in other peoples boats, b) our sea king helicopters, a major part of our air force as I understand it, are 50 years old.

Granted, I'm no expert, but that's an alarming trend.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 09:28 PM

heh. Helos, airplanes, ships, and pretty much everything else is too old in the US military. Ask any marine about CH-53s...

The only things that aren't too old are the newest sexiest gear of the moment. Like the Osprey, stealth bombers, JSF, etc....services LOVE to buy the latest toys, but seem to have a real hard time replacing or repairing the ones they've got...

narf poit chez BOOM said:
I find it hard to beleive that the Canadian military could have sufficient equipment, given that a) we've had to ship out soldeirs by renting space in other peoples boats, b) our sea king helicopters, a major part of our air force as I understand it, are 50 years old.

Granted, I'm no expert, but that's an alarming trend.

Krsqk

October 23rd, 2004, 09:44 PM

alarikf said:
Oh my god, he CHANGED HIS MIND!

No, but seriously, there is no contradiction between being proud of what you are doing at the time and not in favor of the larger policies. When I was in Iraq, I took photos. Can you read my mind as well as yuo can read Kerry's and tell me why? I didn't think so.

EDIT: let me add some words that I think better explain what I mean: There is a world of difference between doing one's duty and trying to right wrongs. When he (or anyone) volounteered to go to Vietnam, to fight and perhaps die for his country, that's a powerful oath you take. You have a duty. It's not just pride in one's work, it's a calling. But, frankly (speaking from personal experience), almost getting killed tends to focus one's mind really well on what is important in life and what is not. And, I would guess that when his duty was over, he felt that he could then move on to dealing with issues or what he heard. A soldier or a marine or a sailor, is not going to disobey, be derelict, or otherwise bring shame upon their oath or their service. But when that is done, then they can reflect on what it was they were asked to do. Again, it takes a courageous man to do such reflection and come to the conclusion that the way the war was waged was wrong. END EDIT

And, perhaps he had an epiphany of sorts. When you're in-country for months and you see just one side, and then you get out and you talk to others and they tell you that they committed atrocities, that certainly could change someone's mind. And, hopefully, it *would* - again, I have a lot more respect for someone who can change their mind, especially on something of vast importance, than for someone who is going to stubbornly cling to some erroneous beleif.

That's why I can't have respect for anyone who says, at *any* point in their life, "Mistakes? I can't recall any I've made..."

That is not the type of person I'd like to be having a beer with.

I don't claim to be able to read his mind. His actions simply seem to indicate that he thought war was fine, or at least that being a hero in a war was fine. All right, no complaints there. But you can't say he simply just changed his mind about war, because he came back and said that he himself committed war crimes! That's not "Well, I used to think war was good, but now I've been enlightened to the evil we're doing"--by his own testimony, he was evil during his four months over there, while at the same time he was making films which promoted war. Something just doesn't add up there. If he had honestly just changed his mind, then I could handle that. But apparently, he held both of those opposing viewpoints simultaneously. Maybe he's just a little more open-minded than I am. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

He didn't just "see the big picture" once he got out--he was right there involved in it (his atrocities). That didn't have anything to do with his duty or following orders. If he did commit them, why did he come back and say so? Conviction for that can bring some serious penalties, and he basically confessed in open testimony. And if he really did commit them, how can he say he is "proud" of his service to our country? That doesn't sound like something one can be proud of.

I repeat myself--either he was involved in war crimes while he was making war films, or he lied in his testimony and never saw or committed any war crimes. Either way, his motives are suspect.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 11:12 PM

Starhawk said:
Okay Renegade I'm sorry here but that whole Canadian citizen deal is just BS as a justification for how "evil" we americans are I had a friend who was detained by the RCMP and kept for over four hours of questioning because of one oops in his passport so political mistakes happen on both sides of the border http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

You're friend who was detained...he was released wasn't he? Not deported to some foreign country against his will? All I'm trying to say is that, while both sides of the border make large mistakes, (no one can argue about that!) we don't deport people to foreign countries without due cause, and we don't have laws such as the patriot act. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying Canadians are the moral superiors of Americans, not at all. I'm merely pointing out fundamental differences in our ways of doing things.

As for the Canadian military, point well taken. The Canadian military IS pathetic. But, look at our population as compared to yours. You have about 300 million population, we have 30. You're military SHOULD be 10 times the size of ours. I know, I know, the difference is more than a factor of 10 difference, but that accounts for a lot of it. I for one believe we should have a strong enough military that we can defend our own shores and borders without foreign assistance. But I'm just one small voice. However, if Canada was ever invaded, you can bet our military would be defeated, but the occupying force had better watch out, because I've been shooting guns for as long as I can remember, and I'm a damn good shot http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif You can bet many people wouldn't take it lying down, just as if America was invaded, your civilians would fight back http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif But I am forced to agree with most of your arguements.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 11:16 PM

Starhawk said:
I agree with you that Iraq probobly shouldn't have happened my point is we are there now and we can't abandon them and still feel right with ourselves, at least I don't think I would feel proud of a country that backs out after it made a mistake and doesn't try to fix it.

We are there it sucks but we have to see this through or Iraq will become an even worse bloodbath then it is now that would make me sick to be honest.

The Afghan war was the right thing at the right time and it's good that we are still there in a more limited capacity because it's a way of ensuring Afghanistan stays independant and hopefully someday prospers.

Like I said I am exausted I am brainshot and I already said I probobly worded things very poorly. Sorry......again....yet.....again.....oy.

I'm 17 I'm young and I have hope for the future of my country, it's seen bad times before and with any luck it will rise again to a position of respect instead of paranoia and hate.

I agree once again with you here, now that you're there you have no choice but to see it through. Also, no need to apologize, there's no reason to be sorry for having an opinion. I've been shot down around here before for my political opinion, and all I can say is this: keep an open mind, but also keep your moral values intact while you have this opinion.

I also am 17, one of the youngest people on these Boards. I'd like to say that I'm not paranoid about the US, and I respect you guys immensely. However, there are always things that could be done better, and I was just trying to point some of those out to you. No offense was intended.

Renegade 13

October 23rd, 2004, 11:24 PM

Starhawk said:

Gandalf Parker said:

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

WHAT?!? What in the world do you base that on? The fact that they dont defend their southern border and rely on us to do it? You realize of course that we dont defend our northern border and rely on them to do it. In fact, most of the missile shield and radar services for the US is Canadian. Is it the fact that there has never been a Canadian war for Canadian reasons? They DO show up for every world war. They DO show up for every UN action in some very nasty places. Their forces are juast as capable and equiped as anyones.

Now if you wanted to say something like "all your decent war equipment comes from research an manufacturing of the US" then that would probably be true. But of course thats true of most of the world and Im not sure its anything I would want to brag about.

Crap I misworded it again I'm sorry to Canadians everywhere lol I did not meant to imply their soldiers were incompetent ro their technology inferior I meant NUMBERS wise they are by far no true military power and can't fight a "serious war" on their own....as it would probobly bankrupt them....sorry again.

Once again you are right Starhawk. We have a very small standing military force, as it would most definitely bankrupt us. However, we were in both world wars, and performed very well in them. IIRC, we had 1 million people serve in WW2, and we performed in many operations, and were some of the best sharp-shooters in the entire war. Still are actually. Snipers. We could not start a war if we wanted to, at least not without a whole hell of a lot of extra spending and armament. But maybe that's a good thing.

I'm sorry if lots of this has been said before, but I'm working my way back through the Posts, without reading the most recent ones http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Katchoo

October 23rd, 2004, 11:48 PM

Renegade 13 said:
You're friend who was detained...he was released wasn't he? Not deported to some foreign country against his will? All I'm trying to say is that, while both sides of the border make large mistakes, (no one can argue about that!) we don't deport people to foreign countries without due cause, and we don't have laws such as the patriot act. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying Canadians are the moral superiors of Americans, not at all.

Well, if you won't say it, I will.

"Canadians are moraly superior to Americans". Our Government doesn't fund uprisings and supply weapons to Militias (re: Taliban) to overthrow Governemnts that we don't approve of. That's why Canada has never been hit with a Terrorist attack, and that's why we won't.

Terrorists don't "hate America's freedom", as the Bush Administration keeps preaching. Terrorists hate foreign Countires funding revolutions in their homeland. If the U.S. ever got a clue and realized that giving guns & money to rebel factions doesn't work long term, then there would be a hell of a lot less distate (and hate) towards the U.S. in the Middle East and elsewhere in the World.

Gandalf Parker

October 23rd, 2004, 11:52 PM

Krsqk said:I don't claim to be able to read his mind. His actions simply seem to indicate that he thought war was fine, or at least that being a hero in a war was fine. All right, no complaints there.

Im thinking maybe you werent around then from that. Vietnam wasnt a war you did because you thought war was fine. There was a draft on. You were pretty much GOING to go to war when your country called you. Either that or leave the country and lose your citizenship. There were various sidestepping actions you could work real hard to do but of course it wouldnt work if everyone did it so go to vietnam or go to some other country was pretty much the choice for us.

He didn't just "see the big picture" once he got out--he was right there involved in it (his atrocities). That didn't have anything to do with his duty or following orders. If he did commit them, why did he come back and say so? Conviction for that can bring some serious penalties, and he basically confessed in open testimony. And if he really did commit them, how can he say he is "proud" of his service to our country? That doesn't sound like something one can be proud of.

I guess I can see how that might be confusing. All I can say is that its not confusing at all to me. I was, and am still proud of being a VietVet. Instead of ducking out of the country I plowed right in and volunteered. On the other hand Im not proud of that war, or what was done there by many. Im not glad that the US fought it.

And technically, unless a military man specifically signed a secrecy statement about a particular mission, then it IS his military duty to speak up about atrocities when he returns.

AMF

October 23rd, 2004, 11:58 PM

I don't think he ever said he committed atrocities, right?

Nor would I say that making movies while over there qualfies as "promoting war" - maybe tourism, but not much more than that.

When you're in the service, at war, whether you think war is good or bad is irrelevant. He was serving his country, and he might have thought it wrong what his countryt was doing. I did the same thing in Iraq. If you'd met me over there, and I thought I could speak my mind to you, I would have told you that I thought that war was stupid as heck, but that had NO bearing on whewther I was going to do my duty or not. Now, that's easy for me to say since I was just an analyst, but the concept is ever stronger I would surmise for combat troops. You're over there, whether you agree with the war or not is irrelevant, you have a job to do. Raise your voice when you get out of country, but you don;t do it while in country - that would be probably be illegal under the Uniform Code but would also be very difficult on you and your mates - since you're in combat. I really see no contradiction here. Maybe I'm just being obtuse. Happens a lot.

And, if he did committ atrocities (can you get me a reference?) I think that your statement that " That didn't have anything to do with his duty or following orders." IS FALSE. A lot of atrocities were committed over there, it is EXTENSIVELY documented and it is also very clear to a lot of people that it wasn;t just "spontaneous" - it was condoned or in some cases ordered by superiors. (remember My Lai?)

I really don;t recall him committeing atrocities, so your statement that "And if he really did commit them, how can he say he is "proud" of his service to our country?" seems irrelevant to me, but even if it were true one can certainly be proud of serving one's country, even if one didn't serve it "gloriously" - my own, meager, experience bears this out. And I met a lot of Marines over there who thought it was a damned stupid war - but they were going to serve their country proudly and honorably and they are some of the best people I have ever known (I usually disagree with their politics, but that's another story).

As someone above said, walk a mile in their shoes first...it's easy to second guess someone thirty years after the fact, and about what they did in war...

In any case, I am VERY interested in getting some references that say Kerry himself committed atrocities. Can you point me towards some?

thanks,

Alarik

Krsqk said:
I don't claim to be able to read his mind. His actions simply seem to indicate that he thought war was fine, or at least that being a hero in a war was fine. All right, no complaints there. But you can't say he simply just changed his mind about war, because he came back and said that he himself committed war crimes! That's not "Well, I used to think war was good, but now I've been enlightened to the evil we're doing"--by his own testimony, he was evil during his four months over there, while at the same time he was making films which promoted war. Something just doesn't add up there. If he had honestly just changed his mind, then I could handle that. But apparently, he held both of those opposing viewpoints simultaneously. Maybe he's just a little more open-minded than I am. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

He didn't just "see the big picture" once he got out--he was right there involved in it (his atrocities). That didn't have anything to do with his duty or following orders. If he did commit them, why did he come back and say so? Conviction for that can bring some serious penalties, and he basically confessed in open testimony. And if he really did commit them, how can he say he is "proud" of his service to our country? That doesn't sound like something one can be proud of.

I repeat myself--either he was involved in war crimes while he was making war films, or he lied in his testimony and never saw or committed any war crimes. Either way, his motives are suspect.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 12:28 AM

Katchoo said:

Renegade 13 said:
You're friend who was detained...he was released wasn't he? Not deported to some foreign country against his will? All I'm trying to say is that, while both sides of the border make large mistakes, (no one can argue about that!) we don't deport people to foreign countries without due cause, and we don't have laws such as the patriot act. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying Canadians are the moral superiors of Americans, not at all.

Well, if you won't say it, I will.

"Canadians are moraly superior to Americans". Our Government doesn't fund uprisings and supply weapons to Militias (re: Taliban) to overthrow Governemnts that we don't approve of. That's why Canada has never been hit with a Terrorist attack, and that's why we won't.

Terrorists don't "hate America's freedom", as the Bush Administration keeps preaching. Terrorists hate foreign Countires funding revolutions in their homeland. If the U.S. ever got a clue and realized that giving guns & money to rebel factions doesn't work long term, then there would be a hell of a lot less distate (and hate) towards the U.S. in the Middle East and elsewhere in the World.

Oh dear sweet mother of all things holy I hope your joking because that is the biggest load of bull I've ever had anyone try to force feed down my throat other then the guy who tried to convince me he was having bigfoots baby.

A.) Canada is not worth being hit by a terrorist attack to a terrorist organization because as renegade pointed out so well THEY HAVE an ity bitty tiny population that is not as centralized as the average US big city nor are they as nationally diverse so blowing up a building in Canada would only kill Canadians and most likely far fewer dead (the terrorists were attempting to knock the towers over not make them collapse, estimated body count was nearly 100,000 dead had the towers fallen while rescue personnel were on scene and while the other buildings and streets below were crowded as their fall would have lead to a chain reaction for multiple blocks and killed so many people it's scary), in canada you just couldn't kill that many people that easily unless you dropped a nuke so less body count means less publicity which means not worth it.
And as for Canadians themselves being morally superior because they never fund rebel Groups or anything, uh THEY'RE TOOO POOR buddy! Hand a blue Canadian dollar to a middle easterner he'd use it for toilet paper and then laugh at you (heck he might give it back in the mail)so of course your not funding terrorist Groups.

Ahem TERRORISTS HATE EVERYONE OF A DIFFERENT RELGION look at their doctrines, they hated us for soo many reasons you can't DARE simplify it as a "oooh big bad americans made dumb mistakes during the cold war" crap and th soviet union funded rebels to are they going after Russia.........NO so that blows that theory right clean out of the water buddy.
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 12:31 AM

Renegade 13 said:

Starhawk said:

Gandalf Parker said:

Oh and Canada has a military so weak it can barely defend it's own country and relies on allies for everything (not an insult here I'm just saying) so they couldn't go about any serious wars if they wanted too.

WHAT?!? What in the world do you base that on? The fact that they dont defend their southern border and rely on us to do it? You realize of course that we dont defend our northern border and rely on them to do it. In fact, most of the missile shield and radar services for the US is Canadian. Is it the fact that there has never been a Canadian war for Canadian reasons? They DO show up for every world war. They DO show up for every UN action in some very nasty places. Their forces are juast as capable and equiped as anyones.

Now if you wanted to say something like "all your decent war equipment comes from research an manufacturing of the US" then that would probably be true. But of course thats true of most of the world and Im not sure its anything I would want to brag about.

Crap I misworded it again I'm sorry to Canadians everywhere lol I did not meant to imply their soldiers were incompetent ro their technology inferior I meant NUMBERS wise they are by far no true military power and can't fight a "serious war" on their own....as it would probobly bankrupt them....sorry again.

Once again you are right Starhawk. We have a very small standing military force, as it would most definitely bankrupt us. However, we were in both world wars, and performed very well in them. IIRC, we had 1 million people serve in WW2, and we performed in many operations, and were some of the best sharp-shooters in the entire war. Still are actually. Snipers. We could not start a war if we wanted to, at least not without a whole hell of a lot of extra spending and armament. But maybe that's a good thing.

I'm sorry if lots of this has been said before, but I'm working my way back through the Posts, without reading the most recent ones http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

What can say you Canadians like practicing your shooting.....does it have anything to do with hockey or is Canadian squrrel that tasty? (heh sorry I'm just kidding)

AMF

October 24th, 2004, 12:36 AM

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the rest of the world calls Americans arrogant.

Starhawk said:
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

narf poit chez BOOM

October 24th, 2004, 12:44 AM

Next time you're in Canada, try looking up a show called 'Talking To Americans'. They talk to university and college students as well as political candidates including presidential candidates when they can. I'm not sure if they are still running it, but if you can catch a show called 'This hour has 22 minutes' they'll have re-runs. Then, you can talk about the differences between Canada and the US.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 12:54 AM

alarikf said:
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the rest of the world calls Americans arrogant.

Starhawk said:
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

Actually if you pay attention to the wording it is hardly arrogant, Americans have been everyhwere and usually it's in large numbers.
As others have pointed out so politely Canadians don't much go to other countries (em masse) so go ahead and ask an Afghani child if they know who Canada is I doubt theyd know.

How is that possibly arrogant or even insulting? It's just a matter of where your nation goes en masse vs where "private citizens" go and let's face it there are countries we here in the industrialized west don't know about (i'm talking on a citzen basis NOT government) and they probobly on average don't know much about north America so what are you claimimg i'm being arrogant by saying there are places in the world that your average joe on the street of a 3rd world country don't know about?

I mean damn man if you take everything an American says expecting it to sound arrogant and rude your going to find a way to twist it in your mind to sound arrogant and rude no?

Anyway Renegade as to what happened to my friend it was actually funny, he was stuck in Canada for two days before being "deported" (can't remember what they actually called it at the moment) to the US. basically they just sent him home because his passport was not entirely in order even after all the beurocratic stuff that took 2 days to find out what was wrong lol. but he hadn't done anything illegal so it was no big deal but it's not like the RCMP gave him a lawyer when they questioned him for the 4 hours.
Either way he thought it was funny because of the fact that his parents made a goof and he got to stay in Canada for two more days of vacation while the mess was sorted out. You know he never did tell me what was wrong with the passport heh.

Katchoo

October 24th, 2004, 01:19 AM

Starhawk said:A.) Canada is not worth being hit by a terrorist attack to a terrorist organization because as renegade pointed out so well THEY HAVE an ity bitty tiny population that is not as centralized as the average US big city nor are they as nationally diverse so blowing up a building in Canada would only kill Canadians and most likely far fewer dead (the terrorists were attempting to knock the towers over not make them collapse, estimated body count was nearly 100,000 dead had the towers fallen while rescue personnel were on scene and while the other buildings and streets below were crowded as their fall would have lead to a chain reaction for multiple blocks and killed so many people it's scary), in canada you just couldn't kill that many people that easily unless you dropped a nuke so less body count means less publicity which means not worth it.

"Tried to knock it down"??? If you want to tip over a building, you take out the supports. Ever watch a controlled building demolition? You don't see Engineers toppling a building blowing it from the top floors. Terrorists are a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. If they were stupid they would have been caught at the Airport.

This is the first time I've heard your explanation. Sounds like more "fear propoganda" to keep Bush's base controlled & paranoid.

And as for Canadians themselves being morally superior because they never fund rebel Groups or anything, uh THEY'RE TOOO POOR buddy! Hand a blue Canadian dollar to a middle easterner he'd use it for toilet paper and then laugh at you (heck he might give it back in the mail)so of course your not funding terrorist Groups.

So you're, what, saying that it's all right to fund terrorist Groups and start rebellions? I think it's time you put aside your copy of SE:IV and smelled the coffee.

As for knocking our currency, well, have at it all you want. Poke all the fun you want at our Military too. At the end of the day our Soldiers will still be alive (and mostly home) while your Men & Women are off getting ripped apart in Iraq. The joke's on you, and I wish it weren't.

Ahem TERRORISTS HATE EVERYONE OF A DIFFERENT RELGION look at their doctrines, they hated us for soo many reasons you can't DARE simplify it as a "oooh big bad americans made dumb mistakes during the cold war" crap and th soviet union funded rebels to are they going after Russia.........NO so that blows that theory right clean out of the water buddy.

Who's talking about the Cold War. I specifically mentioned the Taliban. Had the United States not supplied funding & weapons to Bin Laden during the 80's & 90's the 9/11 attack may not have happened.

Terrorists have no problems with other Religions, as long you don't try to impose another Religion on to them. Unfortunately the U.S. likes to go around shoving Christianity down foreign throats, and that, young man, doesn't help your Country.

Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

An ignorant comment from a waste of space.

Fyron

October 24th, 2004, 01:30 AM

This is going nowhere... perhaps all involved should take the night off to cool down.

TerranC

October 24th, 2004, 01:35 AM

Katchoo said:
Terrorists have no problems with other Religions, as long you don't try to impose another Religion on to them. Unfortunately the U.S. likes to go around shoving Christianity down foreign throats, and that, young man, doesn't help your Country.

I would have to say I disagree with you here Katchoo on both of your statements: Islam itself have no problems with other religions, and some "islamic" "terrorist" indeed take "care" in choosing their targets, but quite frankly, you cannot expect a group of men that follow a man who wants to establish a pan-arabic islamic sheikdom that "will" destroy jews, judaism, christianity, christians, and others that walk amongst "pure muslims who must pretend tolerance but deep down hate them (those belonging to other than their brand of islam) for what they are" that was sheltered by a radical militant group that shot women on sight for showing their ankles and bazooka-ed priceless peices of human heritage because they saw it as an affront to the Quran religious tolerance.

And the US government has never, ever, imposed christianity onto other nations. American missionaries are indeed numerous in many nations, and more go abroad each day, but they do it for their own beliefs, not for some political-religious agenda. And Countries can always reject these missionaries; whether they are accepted or rejected, that is a matter for the populace of the nations that are being evangelized to decide.

Edit: I agree with Fyron. This thread is IMHO becoming degrading, in both senses of the word. Let's all take a moment to calm down and if anyone should want to restart the discussion, be civil in doing so.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 01:37 AM

Katchoo said:

Starhawk said:A.) Canada is not worth being hit by a terrorist attack to a terrorist organization because as renegade pointed out so well THEY HAVE an ity bitty tiny population that is not as centralized as the average US big city nor are they as nationally diverse so blowing up a building in Canada would only kill Canadians and most likely far fewer dead (the terrorists were attempting to knock the towers over not make them collapse, estimated body count was nearly 100,000 dead had the towers fallen while rescue personnel were on scene and while the other buildings and streets below were crowded as their fall would have lead to a chain reaction for multiple blocks and killed so many people it's scary), in canada you just couldn't kill that many people that easily unless you dropped a nuke so less body count means less publicity which means not worth it.

"Tried to knock it down"??? If you want to tip over a building, you take out the supports. Ever watch a controlled building demolition? You don't see Engineers toppling a building blowing it from the top floors. Terrorists are a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. If they were stupid they would have been caught at the Airport.

This is the first time I've heard your explanation. Sounds like more "fear propoganda" to keep Bush's base controlled & paranoid.

Well it's hard to fly a plane I'm sure and aiming it probobly also hard so stupidity doesn't have anything to do with it.....they hit mid towers NOT the upper floor if they had hit a little lower they could have knocked it over look at the way it happened. Even the engineers say that's what would have likely happened if they had hit it lower. It's hard to fly a several ton aircraft into support beams......gaw.

And as for Canadians themselves being morally superior because they never fund rebel Groups or anything, uh THEY'RE TOOO POOR buddy! Hand a blue Canadian dollar to a middle easterner he'd use it for toilet paper and then laugh at you (heck he might give it back in the mail)so of course your not funding terrorist Groups.

So you're, what, saying that it's all right to fund terrorist Groups and start rebellions? I think it's time you put aside your copy of SE:IV and smelled the coffee.

As for knocking our currency, well, have at it all you want. Poke all the fun you want at our Military too. At the end of the day our Soldiers will still be alive (and mostly home) while your Men & Women are off getting ripped apart in Iraq. The joke's on you, and I wish it weren't.

No I'm just saying you can't judge when you couldn't do it if you wanted too so pay attention.

AND you are an insensitive *** for that other comment as if you had paid attention to what I said earlier so I won't even give you a response to that stupid comment that makes you seem like a damned fool. Especially because I was not joking your military in any way I was just saying it's small as has everyon else here so pay attention or don't comment.

Ahem TERRORISTS HATE EVERYONE OF A DIFFERENT RELGION look at their doctrines, they hated us for soo many reasons you can't DARE simplify it as a "oooh big bad americans made dumb mistakes during the cold war" crap and th soviet union funded rebels to are they going after Russia.........NO so that blows that theory right clean out of the water buddy.

Who's talking about the Cold War. I specifically mentioned the Taliban. Had the United States not supplied funding & weapons to Bin Laden during the 80's & 90's the 9/11 attack may not have happened.

Uh....LOOK AT WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN THE 80's FOOL it was coming to the closing stages OF THE DAMN COLD WAR and the Taliban was funded to DRIVE OUT SOVIET FORCSE God you don't pay attention do you?
And Bin Laden is an oil millionaire so uh he doesn't need our money.

Terrorists have no problems with other Religions, as long you don't try to impose another Religion on to them. Unfortunately the U.S. likes to go around shoving Christianity down foreign throats, and that, young man, doesn't help your Country.

Again good lord your an *** if you beleive that, damnit man these damned terrorists torture OTHER MUSLIMS OF DIFFERENT SECTS and let's not mention SERBS, Jews and anyone else that does not share their views of the Corran.

And what on EARTH are you talking about MY NATION liking to SHOVE CHRISTIANITY down everyon'es throat? If you havn't noticed my government is leaning more towards the anti-religious aspects in recent history right down to banning the ten commandments in a public place so you are a fool if you think the US is actually out their on a crusade or crap like that.

Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

An ignorant comment from a waste of space.

Not ignorant again pay attention to the Posts above yours and actually read on commentary made by others many of the folks here agree with what I've been saying about some national politics.

You need to read some history books my friend and when you do then I'll come back and reply to you. I mean I made mistakes but most of that was fatigue what is your excuse for not even knowing when the Cold War was going on?

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 01:44 AM

Yeah I'm sure my friend would have just loved him commenting on her boyfriend being torn apart in Iraq....that's just the mental picture she'd like in he rmind of her boyfriends Last moments.

Oh and I just love the way you basically said he died fighting in some sort of crusade....yeah she'd love you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif

Katchoo

October 24th, 2004, 02:41 AM

Imperator Fyron said:
This is going nowhere... perhaps all involved should take the night off to cool down.

Frankly I can't be bothered to hang around here any longer. This place is going downhill while waiting for the next Release.

I'll see you all after SE:V comes out.

Read ya later.

Krsqk

October 24th, 2004, 02:47 AM

Gandalf Parker said:
Im thinking maybe you werent around then from that. Vietnam wasnt a war you did because you thought war was fine. There was a draft on. You were pretty much GOING to go to war when your country called you. Either that or leave the country and lose your citizenship. There were various sidestepping actions you could work real hard to do but of course it wouldnt work if everyone did it so go to vietnam or go to some other country was pretty much the choice for us.

I understand the draft, but I'm not talking about his participation in Vietnam. I'm talking about his apparent desire to depict himself as the hero in Vietnam. The way it was done, it looks like he used the situation of the war as long as it was useful to him (the films), then got back and decided his films wouldn't be worth as much as the anti-war crowd. I realize there were plenty of people in combat who disagreed with the whole thing, but most of them weren't playing war in front of cameras in their spare time.

I guess I can see how that might be confusing. All I can say is that its not confusing at all to me. I was, and am still proud of being a VietVet. Instead of ducking out of the country I plowed right in and volunteered. On the other hand Im not proud of that war, or what was done there by many. Im not glad that the US fought it.

And technically, unless a military man specifically signed a secrecy statement about a particular mission, then it IS his military duty to speak up about atrocities when he returns.

But you never took part in any of what Kerry and VVAW were accusing the US of. Kerry said he did--and now says he's proud of his service. That doesn't seem to match up to me, unless he has an easier time dropping off to sleep at night than I do.

alarik:

The statement most quoted seems to come from an appearance by Kerry on Meet the Press on April 18, 1971:

John Kerry said:
There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

Links would include http://hnn.us/articles/3552.html and www.wintersoldier.com (http://www.wintersoldier.com) (redirects to another site).

And, although I must reserve comment on it since I haven't checked it out yet, I guess I should post this link in case anyone hasn't heard of it yet: www.stolenhonor.com. (http://www.stolenhonor.com.)

To briefly respond to the rest of what you said: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
- I think the films don't necessarily show that he supported the war, but they do show that he thought it was a good enough opportunity to promote himself. My reply to GP would go here, too.

- Whether or not he was allowed to speak up about atrocities while in Vietnam, he did not need to take part in them. Note that I am not saying that would have been the easy route--it's not easy under any circumstances to stand up to a superior. But what would have happened? His CO can't just shoot him on the spot. Throw him in the brig? Court-martial him? Any retaliation against him would have made it more likely for the truth to come out. The fact that he didn't is admittedly less of a reflection on him than on the moral fiber of the average American of the time (and of this time, truth be told). As for reporting atrocities causing problems among one's unit, what about continually being subjected to seeing them committed, or even being ordered to? It seems that would be worse for morale than getting bad COs or non-coms removed.

And just as a completely unrelated side note, I found it interesting that a young F. Lee Bailey was involved in the trials for My Lai 4--for the defense. Always new tidbits of information out there that I never knew. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

eddieballgame

October 24th, 2004, 02:53 AM

[quote]
Starhawk said:
"No....though for some of them I'll say sorry.....I'm tired so I'm a litle testy...sorry......cept for my remarks toward Ed those stand.

Meaning? --- I will always take great offense to anyone who speaks ill of this imperfect yet GREAT & GIVING country of mine. I am moved by your passion.

Fyron

October 24th, 2004, 05:08 AM

Will

October 24th, 2004, 06:09 AM

For all, but specifically Starhawk:

If you haven't already, pick up a copy of "The Ugly American" by William J. Lederer and Eugene Burdick at your local library. It focuses on the arrogance that was prevalent in the 1950's and 1960's era policies in southeast Asia, and how it helped the Soviets gain an even larger foothold in the area because of the unbelievable ignorance and arrogance of American foreign policy. In its time, it turned around American policy, and probably helped the US win the Cold War. Today, you can make very good parallels with the American foreign policy worldwide under the Bush Administration, and see how Islamic terrorist Jihad organizations are utilizing the same mistakes to take advantage of our position, and possibly bring us down through guerilla warfare (not to mention through pissing off the rest of the world).

If you have read the book, I suggest reading through it again to see the parallels. In my personal opinion, the countries of the Middle East were screwed up by the territory borders drawn up after the World Wars by Britain, France, the US, and the Allies, and are not yet ready for a democratic style of government (for the nitpickers, republican style of government, there is no true democracy on Earth at the moment AFAIK). But if we are going to install such a style of government, we do it through the work of aid workers, who facilitate the creation of businesses in the area and instill the social values of elections, fair judicial systems, and human rights, etc. The way is not through a military invasion followed by the creation of what is essentially a puppet government and an election process that will inevitably degenerate into complete failure. A democratic system will not work unless the citizens of the area want to make it work, and we're not making that happen right now.

Gandalf Parker

October 24th, 2004, 11:06 AM

Krsqk said:
I understand the draft, but I'm not talking about his participation in Vietnam. I'm talking about his apparent desire to depict himself as the hero in Vietnam. The way it was done, it looks like he used the situation of the war as long as it was useful to him (the films), then got back and decided his films wouldn't be worth as much as the anti-war crowd. I realize there were plenty of people in combat who disagreed with the whole thing, but most of them weren't playing war in front of cameras in their spare time.

You make it sound like a weekend event. Its like saying you can either be proud of making the honor roll in school, or ashamed of some of the things you did in school, but not both. You cant say "I earned a letter in track" and also say "I beat up a kid for being for the other team" at the same time?

If he got a purple heart then he got a purple heart. Now if he had gotten a silver star SPECIFICALLY for what he felt at the time was an atrocity and tried to claim both at the same time then I could see it being hypocritical.

Gandalf Parker

October 24th, 2004, 11:12 AM

Starhawk said:
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here

Too much to respond to in all that.

This is embearrassing. Either you are an excellent troll or the best example of an american stereotype Ive met in a long time. Please... join something and visit the real world outside of the US.

Gandalf Parker

October 24th, 2004, 11:43 AM

alarikf said:What I really should have said was this: in countries where the state religion is Islam, women have a varying degree of structural, insituational and cultural hurdles to overcome. In some cases, these can be extremely oppressive, in others, almost non-existent.

Right. Its very different in Indonesia, Algeria, Albania, Bandladesh, Malaysia, Morocco, Somalia, Turkey, Nigeria. The countries with the largest muslim populations arent even in the arabian desert.

What we see are really a few women who feel they should not have to follow the local customs. It makes big news because their action agrees with our customs and rights. Im not saying they shouldnt have that right but its not some huge revolution.

They have the same problem looking at our countries. They find it odd that they CANNOT wear their veils whereever they want, Or that american muslims would hear "go back where you came from". To them, the big news would be the american woman who's husband can actually MAKE her get a job, Or can actually kick her out with no support unless she goes to a court and demands money.

Oh, and, hey, you think NY or Boston drivers are agressive? Man, you haven't seen aggressive until you've seen how women in Tehran drive! Seriously.

Do they have "asma Allah" bumper stickers? The will of Allah which actually has legal precedent in their courts.

AMF

October 24th, 2004, 12:51 PM

Gandalf Parker said:
Do they have "asma Allah" bumper stickers? The will of Allah which actually has legal precedent in their courts.

Heh. Didn't see any bumper stickers. Was too busy jumping out of the way usually.

What does 'asma Allah' mean? I know the standard phrases, and I used to know a bit more Farsi and arabic, but now it's just limited to 'humdillah', 'inshalla' and stuff like that...

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 03:28 PM

eddieballgame said:
[quote]
Starhawk said:
"No....though for some of them I'll say sorry.....I'm tired so I'm a litle testy...sorry......cept for my remarks toward Ed those stand.

Meaning? --- I will always take great offense to anyone who speaks ill of this imperfect yet GREAT & GIVING country of mine. I am moved by your passion.

Will again read the whole thing before you post because you sound like you didn't read jack after that line considering the reason I said I dislike Ed is because he is one of those violent we need a revolution nuts not even someone who wants to change things FOR THE BETTER please do learn to pay close attention to every post following that one again......especially because that was waaaaaay back and apparently that's your stop point as far as reading went.

Oh and I'm sorry I'm a little testy because I'm tired means I was tired so I was stressed so I was sorry there is no "reading between the lines" possible anywhere in there. :p

"For all, but specifically Starhawk:

If you haven't already, pick up a copy of "The Ugly American" by William J. Lederer and Eugene Burdick at your local library. It focuses on the arrogance that was prevalent in the 1950's and 1960's era policies in southeast Asia, and how it helped the Soviets gain an even larger foothold in the area because of the unbelievable ignorance and arrogance of American foreign policy. In its time, it turned around American policy, and probably helped the US win the Cold War. Today, you can make very good parallels with the American foreign policy worldwide under the Bush Administration, and see how Islamic terrorist Jihad organizations are utilizing the same mistakes to take advantage of our position, and possibly bring us down through guerilla warfare (not to mention through pissing off the rest of the world).

If you have read the book, I suggest reading through it again to see the parallels. In my personal opinion, the countries of the Middle East were screwed up by the territory borders drawn up after the World Wars by Britain, France, the US, and the Allies, and are not yet ready for a democratic style of government (for the nitpickers, republican style of government, there is no true democracy on Earth at the moment AFAIK). But if we are going to install such a style of government, we do it through the work of aid workers, who facilitate the creation of businesses in the area and instill the social values of elections, fair judicial systems, and human rights, etc. The way is not through a military invasion followed by the creation of what is essentially a puppet government and an election process that will inevitably degenerate into complete failure. A democratic system will not work unless the citizens of the area want to make it work, and we're not making that happen right now. "

Again you obviously havn't read jack squat else of what I posted so I won't even bother to reply to that beyond this line.

Gandalf Parker

October 24th, 2004, 03:50 PM

alarikf said:

Gandalf Parker said:
Do they have "asma Allah" bumper stickers? The will of Allah which actually has legal precedent in their courts.

Heh. Didn't see any bumper stickers. Was too busy jumping out of the way usually.

What does 'asma Allah' mean?

It means "Will of Allah". If they hit you then it was meant to happen. The deeply faithful would put it and would drive as if they fully believed it. Trucks in Turkey had it on their bumpers alot and it basically meant that anyone with that on their bumper had right of way. That was a couple of decades ago but I havent heard that it changed any.

Fyron

October 24th, 2004, 03:59 PM

...I dislike Ed is because he is one of those violent we need a revolution nuts not even someone who wants to change things FOR THE BETTER...

You do realize that the entire goal of a revolution is to change things for the better, right? That is exactly what revolution means, to revolt against an oppressive, harmful government and establish a new, better form... With the current corporate-controlled federal US political system, getting anyone into power other than the Demo-Republicrat flavor of the week is virtually impossible. Alternative view points are silenced, as demonstrated by the events leading up the the arrest of Mr. Badnarik and Mr. Nader. Most (US) people aren't even aware that there are other (US) parties than the 2 big evils, and may have just barely heard of Mr. Nader as some ultra-liberal nutcase (which he is, but that is beside the point). Campaign finance reforms, such as eliminating private donations to election campaigns entirely, instead relying on equal funding for all semi-serious candidates, would go a long way to alleviating this problem. However, those in power benefit directly from the f-ed up system currently in place, so will not be very keen to change it on their own. A constitutional amendment would get the will of the people involved, rather than the will of the entrenched elite. However, it has to start with those entrenched elite approving it to be voted on by the people in the first place... The Demo-Republicrats are not going to change the system that benefits them so well. Hence comments about a revolution... While this is not necessarily a very practical solution, it is not just some nutcase wanting to cause chaos and mayhem, as you seem to think it is.

Will

October 24th, 2004, 04:04 PM

Starhawk:
I did read the entire thread, some parts of it multiple times because I couldn't believe what some people posted. I kindly suggest that you go back and read what Ed actually posted, and see if your comments on him being a "US-hating militant" who is "not interested in positive change" is truly warranted. I'll even quote so it is all in one place:

dogscoff said:
What you americans need is a revolution. You got the guns, now go out and use 'em. Power to the People!

Ed Kolis said in response to dogscoff:
I agree... I'm just not the one to start that kind of thing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Starhawk said in response to all:
Okay first off I'm a boy from the USA so to the God Damn the USA line I have a big UP YOURS!!! from the USA jerkoff (I'm assuming you're referring to Ed at this point) ....especially because if you weren't free your dumbass would be in jail for bashing your government.

... (snip) ...

Edited for unnecessary rudeness

Now, you're taking a comment made by Ed that essentially just agreed with dogscoff saying that the US needs a revolution, and Ed at the same time said he wouldn't start such a thing. You then go on to insult and flame him for wanting a change in the way things are done in his government, because, God forbid, he thinks the two-party duopoly is hurting this country. I'm sorry, but I have very little sympathy to such reactionary drivel, and the ignorance that breeds it is the largest single threat (IMHO) to the US today.

All my Posts have been directed at trying to educate on the facts and opposing opinions on these issues (mainly blind US patriotism, and the vitriol used by extreme Groups to try and get the masses to accept their viewpoint by any means). If you, or anyone else, sees something in my Posts that is derrogatory or insulting to you, then I apologize, and would like you to point them out to me. I certainly don't see anything wrong with my Posts, but my perspective is slightly skewed.

If, after all this, you refuse to accept that it is a good thing that people speak out against the actions of their government, then I cannot help you. I can only hope somewhere along your journey in life you become enlightened to the necessity of a dissenting voice. You seem to be almost there with the comment "imperfect yet GREAT & GIVING country of mine", but the nasty remarks about those who speak up about those imperfections says you have a way to go still.

Pick up the book. While it criticizes, it still does show why America has its strength.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 04:25 PM

Imperator Fyron said:

...I dislike Ed is because he is one of those violent we need a revolution nuts not even someone who wants to change things FOR THE BETTER...

You do realize that the entire goal of a revolution is to change things for the better, right? That is exactly what revolution means, to revolt against an oppressive, harmful government and establish a new, better form... With the current corporate-controlled federal US political system, getting anyone into power other than the Demo-Republicrat flavor of the week is virtually impossible. Alternative view points are silenced, as demonstrated by the events leading up the the arrest of Mr. Badnarik and Mr. Nader. Most (US) people aren't even aware that there are other (US) parties than the 2 big evils, and may have just barely heard of Mr. Nader as some ultra-liberal nutcase (which he is, but that is beside the point). Campaign finance reforms, such as eliminating private donations to election campaigns entirely, instead relying on equal funding for all semi-serious candidates, would go a long way to alleviating this problem. However, those in power benefit directly from the f-ed up system currently in place, so will not be very keen to change it on their own. A constitutional amendment would get the will of the people involved, rather than the will of the entrenched elite. However, it has to start with those entrenched elite approving it to be voted on by the people in the first place... The Demo-Republicrats are not going to change the system that benefits them so well. Hence comments about a revolution... While this is not necessarily a very practical solution, it is not just some nutcase wanting to cause chaos and mayhem, as you seem to think it is.

I'm sorry but violent revolts usually just lead to massive civil bloodshed and wars, do you want to turn this country into a Somolia? Afterall who gets to rule the country when the wars are over? Would there even be a country to rule afterall you honestly think our nations enemies (those that COULD reach us) would just sit back and not take advantage of a massive civil war between MULTIPLE factions?

A revolution today would be impossible for soo many reasons that it'd take all day to list them so this revolution talk is not positive it's destructive.

As I said if you want things changed you have to do it peacefully and intelligently or not at all.

Will as I said I love my country does that mean my government.....heck no but revolution would destroy my country and so revolution is not good. Understand now?

There is a difference between going 'the government is not the best thing" for an American citizen but when foreigners spend their time knocking our government instead of cirticizing their own it just makes no sense to me.
Afterall the problems i have with my government make sense for me but do you see me out there going "UK SUCKS your all idiots"? NO because even if the citizens of the UK thought it sucked (which it doesn't I'm just using an example so don't even start in on this) it's not my place to judge their entire country based on a few old men in power.

Fyron

October 24th, 2004, 04:37 PM

You still don't get it... Dogscoff and Ekolis were not really serious about taking up arms... It was more sarcastic lamenting over the fact that the only way to get the US out of the virtual oligarchy it is in (the corporate Demo-Republicrat group) would be to take up arms and forcibly reform it... The only ones capable of peacefully reforming the system are those that are currently in power. They have no incentive to change the system that works so well for them, and as long as the system is not changed, the same Groups will continue to be elected into power and the cycle continues... A massive public outcry is the only way the current corporate-controlled two-party system will change. Unfortunately, the US public is ignorant and often idiotic, and doesn't even realize that the system is a problem. Go figure.

Also, it is actually a terrible idea to only care about your own government and have no interest in the affairs of other nations.

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 04:43 PM

Well there are a lot of folks i've heard talking (maybe not here) about revolutions and civil wars quite seriously so it erks me sorry, kind of a pet peeve.

Well I do care about other nations it's just not my place to judge whether or not that government "sucks" or not you know what I mean?

Fyron

October 24th, 2004, 04:46 PM

Starhawk said:
Well I do care about other nations it's just not my place to judge whether or not that government "sucks" or not you know what I mean?

No, I do not know what you mean. You have every right to criticize a government, even if it is not your own. What do you think the UN is for?

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 04:52 PM

I may have the right but it just doesn't feel right to me as I am only hearing my governments view on theirs and it's too one sided for me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Krsqk

October 24th, 2004, 05:02 PM

Imperator Fyron said:What do you think the UN is for?

To be criticized. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

AMF

October 24th, 2004, 05:03 PM

Starhawk said:
Afterall the problems i have with my government make sense for me but do you see me out there going "UK SUCKS your all idiots"? NO because even if the citizens of the UK thought it sucked (which it doesn't I'm just using an example so don't even start in on this) it's not my place to judge their entire country based on a few old men in power.

Well, you certainly seem to be implying that about Canada.

By the way, if the US is such a "giving" country, how muhc foreign aid do you think we give out? Where do you think we rank in the world (look up the per capita numbers, as well).

Starhawk, please take this in the spirit of advice, but I think there are at least a couple things you should do: wait until you know more about the topic at hand (ex: are you a scholar of revolutions? What about the American Revolution?), and read some Noam Chomsky and look at some opposing viewpoints...and travel to a foriegn country or two...then you can be an expert on what foriegners think and say and do...and what America's *real* place in the world is...

I, too, was once 17 and knew eveything and I was right about everything and I wasn't annoying either.

I learned there is a lot more to the world then what I was being fed...

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 05:14 PM

How did I imply canada sucked? Heck I said it's a lovley country with nice people http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif it's got a small military and a small population that's a fact not an insult http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

And I know a lot of foreigners don't like this government because a bunch of them here said it :p (not an insult by calling people foreigners either as to me they are and I am to them)
And because I've met more then a few people from other nations too and I've met many that like this country, the government and the people, others that don't and some that just don't care so I know America is not always seen as the best nation the world has to offer lol.

Oh and I never made any comments about how giving we are or aren't http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

AMF

October 24th, 2004, 05:19 PM

EDIT: deleted double post

AMF

October 24th, 2004, 05:23 PM

Gandalf Parker

October 24th, 2004, 05:30 PM

Starhawk said:
How did I imply canada sucked? Heck I said it's a lovley country with nice people http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif it's got a small military and a small population that's a fact not an insult http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Thats kindof the point. Your "facts" about them, and other nations, and other religions, are wrong and insulting. Or at best they are opinions, and insulting.

Most of them have just been too much to bother correcting but just as an example... your "facts" about Canadas size in military and population. Dont you see that as an opinion? The other side of that mirror would be for someone to say that its a "fact" that the US has too much military for a nation no longer in a cold war, and too much population if it cannot support them without commerce. Im sure you would argue those "facts"

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 06:07 PM

How is that possibly an insult since the Renegade even said Canada has a small population? I'm sorry but a population of 30 million is small fine it's an opinion sorry http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Oh and dear lord they do have a small military that's not bad either as their military is sufficient for the size of their country and for it's defense they don't want a bigger military and Renegade even said they couldn't afford one so it's no insult to say their military is rather small. So what the US military is small compared to the Chinese miltiary are you now saying I'm insulting the US?

Sorry but I really don't mean any of that as an insult and taking it as such is kind of strange.

Now if I said Canada's army was puny or that their population was soooo small as to be the buttcrack of the world then I could understand being insulted but I didn't say anything of the sort :p

Anyhoo I'm outta here as I'm sick of peopel taking every little thing as an insult.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif

Renegade 13

October 24th, 2004, 07:54 PM

Starhawk said:Oh dear sweet mother of all things holy I hope your joking because that is the biggest load of bull I've ever had anyone try to force feed down my throat other then the guy who tried to convince me he was having bigfoots baby.

A.) Canada is not worth being hit by a terrorist attack to a terrorist organization because as renegade pointed out so well THEY HAVE an ity bitty tiny population that is not as centralized as the average US big city nor are they as nationally diverse so blowing up a building in Canada would only kill Canadians and most likely far fewer dead (the terrorists were attempting to knock the towers over not make them collapse, estimated body count was nearly 100,000 dead had the towers fallen while rescue personnel were on scene and while the other buildings and streets below were crowded as their fall would have lead to a chain reaction for multiple blocks and killed so many people it's scary), in canada you just couldn't kill that many people that easily unless you dropped a nuke so less body count means less publicity which means not worth it.
And as for Canadians themselves being morally superior because they never fund rebel Groups or anything, uh THEY'RE TOOO POOR buddy! Hand a blue Canadian dollar to a middle easterner he'd use it for toilet paper and then laugh at you (heck he might give it back in the mail)so of course your not funding terrorist Groups.

Ahem TERRORISTS HATE EVERYONE OF A DIFFERENT RELGION look at their doctrines, they hated us for soo many reasons you can't DARE simplify it as a "oooh big bad americans made dumb mistakes during the cold war" crap and th soviet union funded rebels to are they going after Russia.........NO so that blows that theory right clean out of the water buddy.
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

Actually, Canada is probably MORE ethnically diverse than the US is. We have a huge amount of immigration, without it, our population would actually be decreasing. We're every bit as ethnically diverse as you are. Also, we don't have dollar bills here. We have dollar coins. Closest thing we have to a dollar bill is a $5 bill, and yep, its blue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif But its worth more and more over time compared to the American dollar. Ours is rising, yours if falling in value.

Oh, and by the way, as for "that huge ol' country the United States"....Canada is bigger.

In order of landmass, starting with the largest:

-Russia
-Canada
-US
-China
-Brazil (I think...)

Renegade 13

October 24th, 2004, 07:59 PM

Starhawk said:

alarikf said:
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the rest of the world calls Americans arrogant.

Starhawk said:
Oh and no offense to any Canadians here, I hear it's a lovley country with polite people but lets face it in the grand world scheme of things most of the 3rd world nations probobly don't know what Canada is while 99.999% of the world knows of that huge ol' country the United States.

Actually if you pay attention to the wording it is hardly arrogant, Americans have been everyhwere and usually it's in large numbers.
As others have pointed out so politely Canadians don't much go to other countries (em masse) so go ahead and ask an Afghani child if they know who Canada is I doubt theyd know.

And Afghani would know, since Canadians are one of the largest (if not the largest) peace keeping forces in Afghanistan, since the US decided to pull out and concentrate on Iraq.

Renegade 13

October 24th, 2004, 08:06 PM

Katchoo said:

Frankly I can't be bothered to hang around here any longer. This place is going downhill while waiting for the next Release.

I'll see you all after SE:V comes out.

Read ya later.

Come on Katchoo, dont' go! Just avoid the political threads, such as this one. I don't think the community as a whole has gone downhill, although this thread could be said to have become inflammatory, with people calling other people "damn fools" etc, and so on, on both sides of the arguement. But please, there's no need to abandon this place simply due to one thing, such as this.

Anyways, hope you change your mind. If you don't, see you when SEV comes out http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Starhawk

October 24th, 2004, 08:11 PM

Actually we are still there it's just we have military presence as apposed to a "peacekeeper" contingent like Canada http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Don't peacekeepers wear the UN symbols on their uniforms and not those of their homeland? hmmm I always forget that as I don't see many pictures of UN Peacekeeper contingents.

I meant huge as in the american government tends to but into alot more national affairs then canada (yes I said butt in in a bad way) that's all I meant by just about everyone knows who we are.

Anyway I'm out of this thread as I'm buisy working on my mod so have fun all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Possum

October 24th, 2004, 08:16 PM

Goodness gracious!

Things certainly got heated in here.

But isn't the right to hold our own opinions, the right to publicly debate and question the policies of our elected leaders, in essence aren't these the things the Founding Fathers specifically safeguarded our right to do?

Why do any of you become angry over the opinions of the other?

It's obvious that you are all profoundly patriotic, in your separate ways. I'm sure you all support the First Amendment right to free speech. Why the anger?

Renegade 13

October 24th, 2004, 08:26 PM

Starhawk said:
Actually we are still there it's just we have military presence as apposed to a "peacekeeper" contingent like Canada http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Don't peacekeepers wear the UN symbols on their uniforms and not those of their homeland? hmmm I always forget that as I don't see many pictures of UN Peacekeeper contingents.

I meant huge as in the american government tends to but into alot more national affairs then canada (yes I said butt in in a bad way) that's all I meant by just about everyone knows who we are.

Anyway I'm out of this thread as I'm buisy working on my mod so have fun all http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I know that's what you meant about "just about everyone knowing who the USA is". I was purposely being obtuse http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif I do that lots, and was just trying to interject a little humor into the situation. I know, it was pathetic, but I just needed to try http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Anywho, I (speaking as a Canadian) did not take any offense to what Starhawk said about Canada. Small population we have. Personally, I like it that way. If you want to live in the middle of nowhere, or in the middle of a metropolitan, modern city, or anywhere in between, you can. Its great. As for the small military....its true! And I know many Canadians would like us to have a larger military presence, but many would also like us to keep it just as it is. My opinion officially doesn't matter, since I'm not yet of voting age http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif But I should be by the time the next federal and provincial elections come along.

I think we all need to take a small step back, and not become so incensed over what other people say. Everyone has different opinions, and though those opinions may clash, it tells just how free we all are. That we can voice our opinions, even though they may be anti-government, etc. Anyways, I guess you can call this just a plea to calm down, and discuss things in a more rational and...well...calm manner.

I'm outta here for today, hope next time I pop into this thread, things are a little more reasonable....

Also, I'm sorry if my opinion has insulted anyone, that has not been my intention. I haven't been insulted by anyone elses opinions...at times I've shaken my head at the apparent ignorance of some people, but then again, maybe I'm ignorant and missing something obvious.

Ed Kolis

October 25th, 2004, 01:43 PM

Hey everybody... sorry for starting this whole mess, but I'm glad it got us all thinking! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif
As any good psychotherapist would say, "let's let it rest for now at this stable point, we'll talk about it some more later", hmm? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Starhawk

October 25th, 2004, 05:49 PM

I KNOW WHAT IT IS NOW!!!

It's all a Canadian Conspiracy!

That whole "we're courteous" is just a show in reality they are a facist state hidden under the niceguy look we all beleive canadians to have!
Half of Toronto's population is the ARMY!

The reason that the Canadian dollar is on the rise is because they put hypnotic materials in their pretty blue money! and the Dollar has a chemical on it that makes you happy to be holding a Canadian dollar! and the more dollars you hold the happier you are yet you must give up the "buzz" dollar for food but you must work to get more! And thus other nations have heard of the lovely canadian money and they all want to get their hands on it no matter what!

Canada wants to rule the world I say! those mounties they are really an elite special forces unit disguised as a bunch of helpful policemen! Anyone who goes to Canada and runs into a Mounty is turned into a Sleeper! a mindless drone for the Canadian cause!

This MUST BE STOPPED (sounds of canadians breaking down the door with hockey sticks) IT MUST STOP!!!! (sceram thump repeated beating noises heard)

Hey ah Yah Canada is great ay I mean they are lovely people and you didn't read any of this okay ay.

Raging Deadstar

October 25th, 2004, 05:57 PM

However, as punishment for this conspiracy, any Canadian working on anything of worth will mysteriously have their hard drive crash inexplicably http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

TerranC

October 25th, 2004, 06:44 PM

Raging Deadstar said:
However, as punishment for this conspiracy, any Canadian working on anything of worth will mysteriously have their hard drive crash inexplicably http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

You don't really want that to happen, do you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Ruatha

October 25th, 2004, 07:04 PM

Just read the entire thread and here's some comments for several Posts, might not make much sense if you haven't just read it all Posts at once...

I think the french revolution lead to something good eventually..

Peacekeepers are mostly military, and they have their national symbols on their uniforms, usually national uniforms.

We in sweden, a relative small country of 9 million people, have personel in international service in 15 places right now (Kosovo (KFOR), Bosnia (SFOR), Balkan (EUMM), Liberia (UNMIL), Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL), Eritrea/Etiopia (UNMEE), Kongo (MONUC), Sudan (JMM/JMC), Georgia (UNOMIG), Georgia (OSCE), Middle east (UNTSO), Afganistan (ISAF), Kashmir (UNMOGIP), Korea (NNSC), East timor (UNMISET).

We are planning on sending the airforce abroad on peacekeeping missions aswell, as we have one of the best multi-purpose jets in service today (SAAB JAS-39 Gripen), I think the plan was Kongo, where we've had the airforce on peace keeping missions before.

The US dollar is at an 7 year low right now.

Just becourse we critize aspects of the US doesn't mean we don't critize our own countries and goverments.. It's just that not many people on this forum are intersted in the internal politics in Sweden I think, but there seems to be an interest in the US politics, which is understandable as it has a global effect in a way Swedish (and other small countries) politcs doesn't have.

Why can't people see that some countries (France, Russia etc) might have thought the war against Iraq was a bad idea, just as the US thought it was agood idea? Does it have to be a bad motive only?
Sure there where several things taken into consideration but ultimately I belive the decisions both in US and France was heavily influenced becourse the leaders thought their decisions where the "best" for the people in Iraq. (I know I'm naive..)

So, totally random comments, can you see where they fit in?

Raging Deadstar

October 25th, 2004, 07:10 PM

TerranC said:

Raging Deadstar said:
However, as punishment for this conspiracy, any Canadian working on anything of worth will mysteriously have their hard drive crash inexplicably http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

You don't really want that to happen, do you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

It's true already. Kwok and the Star Trek Mod, SJ several times, I've seen a few other Canadians have major projects lost in hard drive failiures (Deathstalker I think for sure has).

Fyron

October 25th, 2004, 07:46 PM

Raging Deadstar said:
It's true already. Kwok and the Star Trek Mod, SJ several times, I've seen a few other Canadians have major projects lost in hard drive failiures (Deathstalker I think for sure has).

That's because it is too cold for hard drives in Canada. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Captain Kwok

October 25th, 2004, 07:52 PM

Yeah guys, thanks for bringing up that pain again. /threads/images/Graemlins/Cold.gif

Renegade 13

October 25th, 2004, 09:35 PM

Imperator Fyron said:

Raging Deadstar said:
It's true already. Kwok and the Star Trek Mod, SJ several times, I've seen a few other Canadians have major projects lost in hard drive failiures (Deathstalker I think for sure has).

That's because it is too cold for hard drives in Canada. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Nah, its just that our hard drives are overheating, trying to stay warm in this frigid country http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif And speaking of overheating...that's what my hard drive is doing...I'm Canadian...ITS GONNA CRASH!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif Lol, don't worry, I'm taking steps to cool it down.

Renegade 13

October 25th, 2004, 09:37 PM

Starhawk said:
I KNOW WHAT IT IS NOW!!!

It's all a Canadian Conspiracy!

That whole "we're courteous" is just a show in reality they are a facist state hidden under the niceguy look we all beleive canadians to have!
Half of Toronto's population is the ARMY!

The reason that the Canadian dollar is on the rise is because they put hypnotic materials in their pretty blue money! and the Dollar has a chemical on it that makes you happy to be holding a Canadian dollar! and the more dollars you hold the happier you are yet you must give up the "buzz" dollar for food but you must work to get more! And thus other nations have heard of the lovely canadian money and they all want to get their hands on it no matter what!

Canada wants to rule the world I say! those mounties they are really an elite special forces unit disguised as a bunch of helpful policemen! Anyone who goes to Canada and runs into a Mounty is turned into a Sleeper! a mindless drone for the Canadian cause!

This MUST BE STOPPED (sounds of canadians breaking down the door with hockey sticks) IT MUST STOP!!!! (sceram thump repeated beating noises heard)

Hey ah Yah Canada is great ay I mean they are lovely people and you didn't read any of this okay ay.

Damn, you've discovered our secret plot! Grr...now we have to hunt you down, and brainwash you with our Canadian money. Get you hooked on it, so you are dependant on us for your daily fix, and will therefore not dare to try to expose us in our heinous conspiracy to take over the world! Muahhahahahah!

PS: The timetable has now been moved up, due to this unmasking of our conspiracy. Prepare to be conquered! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

tesco samoa

October 25th, 2004, 10:55 PM

yea we all have our lorne greene cards...

who knows what a chesterfield is ...

and who says roof anyways its ruf. which is above the foy-errr

I tell you what. the colour scheme is the same http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

p.s. I tell you what is not used up here in the great white north... also

Ask Atrocities how far south I am.... He was shocked http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Starhawk

October 25th, 2004, 11:09 PM

Renegade 13 said:

Imperator Fyron said:

Raging Deadstar said:
It's true already. Kwok and the Star Trek Mod, SJ several times, I've seen a few other Canadians have major projects lost in hard drive failiures (Deathstalker I think for sure has).

That's because it is too cold for hard drives in Canada. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Nah, its just that our hard drives are overheating, trying to stay warm in this frigid country http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif And speaking of overheating...that's what my hard drive is doing...I'm Canadian...ITS GONNA CRASH!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif Lol, don't worry, I'm taking steps to cool it down.

Don't pee on it too much man it'll freeze lol :p

oooooh canadian moooooney preeeeeety http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Renegade 13

October 26th, 2004, 02:07 AM

Starhawk said:
Don't pee on it too much man it'll freeze lol :p

oooooh canadian moooooney preeeeeety http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

LOL!

And yet its still so easy to forge...oops, did I say that out loud?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

(PS, I don't counterfeit money, just in case you were wondering! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif )

Hey Tesco, so how far south DO you live?? I'm about at the 54� North Latitude, how about you?

Ruatha

October 26th, 2004, 02:54 AM

Renegade 13 said:

Starhawk said:
Don't pee on it too much man it'll freeze lol :p

oooooh canadian moooooney preeeeeety http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

LOL!

And yet its still so easy to forge...oops, did I say that out loud?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

(PS, I don't counterfeit money, just in case you were wondering! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif )

Hey Tesco, so how far south DO you live?? I'm about at the 54� North Latitude, how about you?

I used to live at 65 north until I was 26, now I've taken up residence far south at 59 north.
The climate is much warmer, here I can still cut the lawn but up at my parents house they're out driving snow mobiles.

tesco samoa

October 26th, 2004, 08:30 AM

43.40

if I was in France that would be Nice. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

I should move to Pelee Island

Then I would be on par with Napa Valley

Renegade 13

October 26th, 2004, 11:52 AM

tesco samoa said:
43.40

if I was in France that would be Nice. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

I should move to Pelee Island

Then I would be on par with Napa Valley

Wow, Tesco, you probably barely even get snow that far south!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

Ruatha, due to the prevailing air currents, Scandinavian countries (If I remember correctly) get a bit warmer weather than similar latitudes in Canada. Your 59 North is probably equal to my 54 North. Do you get temperatures down to at least -40 degrees Celcius every year, at least once? That should be a fairly accurate guage of relative temperatures http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

tesco samoa

October 26th, 2004, 12:12 PM

-40 where in bc do you live ???

Will

October 26th, 2004, 02:40 PM

The cold part? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

dogscoff

October 26th, 2004, 04:44 PM

Hmmm... returning to tyhis thread after a few weeks' absence (haven't checked it since my Last post) and it seems i kicked off a bit of a storm. Sorry everyone for kicking all this off and then disappearing. Too much has been said (and the heat has died down too much for me to want to stir things up again) for me respond to any comment or person individually but I'll say the following:

Fyron has pretty accurately summed up the mood of my flippant "revolution" comment. You need to break the two-party system, and neither of the two parties are likely to do that without a gun against their head. I'm not seriously suggesting you literally put a gun against anyone's head, but there are more kinds of revolution than up-against-the-wall civil wars. Any major and fundamental change in the way things are done is, by definition, a revolution, and that is exactly what you guys need.

If Katchoo has seriously left the Boards as an indirect result of what I said, then I am truly sorry to everyone, because Katchoo is (was?) a major asset to this community. I will email him and humbly ask him to come back. I would ask anyone else who feels they may have participated in his decision to leave to do the same.

I personally believe the war on Iraq is a crusade. Bush and- more importantly- the neocon puppetmasters behind him, really seem to believe that they are perfectly justified in imposing their values on the rest of the world. Just read the NPAC if you don't believe me. I can't be arsed to dig around for the precise quote right now but Bush has also made some very scary comments and references that imply that he does believe he's on a "mission from God" (said in Best Blues Brothers impersonation) to cleanse the middle East of heathens. He's certainly said on several occasions that God has told him to do stuff. ("God told me to strike at Saddam" etc)
I'm sorry if that's not what you want to hear Starhawk, and I'm sorry for your berieved friend, but the people who should be even sorrier are all the bastards with the power and will to pay for their own goals in other peoples' blood.

Finally, I want to say that I've met a lot of Canadians and they were almost all very nice people.