Personal rant...

[Iron Chef]

Well, this just plain sux... Here we are on the brink of war and as an American citizen who has voted in every major election and considers himself very vocal on certain issues, I am powerless to do anything except sit idly by and watch the downward spiral...

Don't get me wrong, I am as patriotic as "mom's apple pie and the game of baseball" so to speak, but the issue here is not one of patriotism-rather it is one of our current administration carrying out it's own personal agenda all in the name of safety and security despite mass public outcry (myself included).

It's really quite depressing actually from my side of the fence so to speak to watch this whole episode unfurl before my very eyes. From the constant French-bashing because of their dissenting opinion to the "Let's go kick Saddam's arse!" sentiment so many uninformed fellow Americans seem to be expressing lately, things can only get worse...

Oh well, i've said my peace and I thank you for bearing with me. Just wanted to vent a little before the pay-per-view like coverage frenzy begins of America's next great blunder.

Note: The following pic shows a demonstration in my hometown recently. Despite the obviously inclement weather, we still had just over 200 people show up that day. It was a great show of solidarity that day and we were glad for the blizzard-like conditions because it only further demonstrated the strength of our convictions. Anyone can demonstrate indoors or during summerlike temperatures but try protesting in that weather. 8-p

[thomas]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Gus. I know that a lot of Americans do not support their administration in this regard, and it's sad to see that peace supporters are denounced as being "unpatriotic".

I really don't understand the French-bashing ("Freedom fries"), as France's stance towards the intervention in Iraq gave the war alliance exactly the excuse they needed to attack without further a-do, namely without UN support (thus seriously damaging the role of the UN in future - besides, there are other countries ignoring UN resolutions since decades without serious consequences). I also doubt that the U.S. administration aims at ensuring security and safety (although I'm sure Mr. Bush believes that). Oil, military-industrial complex, global hegemony, crusade for peace and freedom, well, whatever! Probably it would have been more patriotic to focus on urgent domestic issues such as unemployment, social welfare, environment - but heck, is there anything more beautiful than the coloured chains of anti-aircraft fire in the nightly skies over Baghdad?

Thanks for letting me rant too, lol. Who could ignore a message like the one below?

[Iron Chef]

LOL Now THAT is what I call a protest, sign me up!!! 8-p

Yeah, your're absolutely right about the current administration's lack of focus on domestic affairs. Granted, Bush has an already shaky history re: his environmental policies yet aside from the recent 24/7 Elizabeth Smart coverage (which has all but dwindled), there has been very little in coverage except for discussions of terrorism here on the homefront and bringing the war to Saddam. It saddens me to know that soon we will have to deal with inevitable fallout from this course of action and needless to say it won't be a pretty sight... 8-( At any rate, good to vent once in a while even if in the grand scheme of things it accounts for very little. Thanx for that great pic too lol. If we could orchestrate something like that here, i'm sure we'd have a MUCH higher turnout 8-p

[den4]

hee hee hee.....people still having the delusion that their votes really have an effect, when both parties spend more time fighting each other than actually passing policies for the nation...this is not to poke fun at any person, but the one fact is, in the US, people vigorously attempt to cure the symptoms rather than finding the solution to the actual problem...and people are pacified by watching tv, where the intelligence level of the shows continual its slide into the abyss on an hourly basis.. well, ok...talk show radio does an even better job bringing out the morons that attempt to comment against the radio show host who is always in charge of them shows with a push of the "hang up" button....

in a lighter vein of the modern comedy of errors, check out these sites to lower your blood pressure...

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=46223
http://titaniumcounter.com/temp/emergency/

and, Iron Chef, before you go back to the Kitchen Stadium, perhaps you should check these out, too.... :P

http://winstars.free.fr/english/bush.html

personally, I don't think much of any of the previous administrations since the last century....especially within the last 4 decades, where partisan politics appear to be the job, and handling actual issues is just an appetizer, to be nibbled at with feigned interest, then tossed aside and ignored as the main dish of political bickering arrives....then collect their daily salary for a hard day's work at doing absolutely nothing useful....least of all their real job...

but that's my take on that issue..

it's to laugh, as Daffy Duck used to say....

[Iron Chef]

Heheheheh... those links are great but that last site with the mock-up posters and photos is absolutely hilarious! I haven't laughed out loud like that in some time heh. Thnx for the great links, it's just what I needed 8-)

[den4]

no prob...dude...amazing what people come up with when they have too much time.....

[Vicidian]

Yes, war sucks. Something you should all be admiting to yourself is Saddam has brought on this war. Twelve years of evading UN reolutions; twelve years of deciet; twelve years of a growing threat. Granted I'm as ignorant as any other average Joe in the world, I feel I have enough information to form a genuine opinion.

The French have been cowards for a long time. Which is quite amazing considering their earlier history. They used to be great fighters. Something changed in teh WW era, though. Now, they are not just cowards, but also liars and morons. They have commercial ties with Saddam, and they are responsible for giving Iraq their first nuclear abilities. That is what the deal with bashing them is.

[Iron Chef]

C'mon man... labelling the French "cowards, liars, and morons" across the board simply because they don't agree with the current course of action is a bit crass don't you think? I try to stay away from using such broad generalizing statements as they tend to be a slippery slope often leading to further inflammatory statements. And although we may disagree on what the proper course of action should be in this case, I don't think it's constructive to resort to name-calling. At any rate, everyone is entitled to their own opinion--that's the beauty of free speech. 8-p

[thomas]

Originally posted by Vicidian
The French have been cowards for a long time. Which is quite amazing considering their earlier history. They used to be great fighters. Something changed in teh WW era, though. Now, they are not just cowards, but also liars and *****s. They have commercial ties with Saddam, and they are responsible for giving Iraq their first nuclear abilities. That is what the deal with bashing them is.

I'd also plead for refraining from generalisations and strong words. If favouring peaceful resolutions over military aggression is considered cowardice, then I'm guilty of being a coward too. As for commercial and military contacts, support for dictatorships and global subversion: I suggest we better avoid getting into a "quid pro quo" game here.

[Vicidian]

No, I wouldn't generalize you as a *****. There has to come a time when you realize that somone is not going to follow in diplomatic resolutions. I too prefer peace to war, but this is one time peace won't protect anyone.

When I say the "French," I mean their government. Saddam and his son Uday have both threatened (and now attacked) other American allies who have no troops commited in this war. He's threatened to use biological warrfare and the French think "He has no WoMD." Then in the last minute they say they'll help, but only after some of the most deadly weapons have been used. If that isn't cowardice, the word has no meaning.

So, if we didn't start this war Saddam's stockpile would just grow. The only reason UN inspectors thought that it was working was because Saddam has much more experience hiding then they do finding.

And also, for those who think I just hate people whodon't support this war, you're wrong. I may have lost respect for other nations, but I have hated the French(gov) for a long time. Notice how they are the only ones I "bash."

[kirei_na_me]

To any of you that think George Dubya and the rest of his gang are just regular good guys, I just hate to tell you, but they're not. This war is about greed and nothing more. It's about protecting our main interest there--oil. That's all it is. Why can't anyone see that? We think we can overpower everyone. What gives us that right, anyway? Don't you think it's a waste of precious human life to go over there and die for oil? It's not about gaining freedom.

And the French are cowards because they want to abide by the UN's rules? Americans have never known suffering. We have never seen a war on the mainland United States(9/11 does not count and it can't be compared to the American Revolution or Civil War, either). We haven't seen our cities leveled by fire bombs and we haven't seen thousands of our innocent children killed like most of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East have. That's why we think nothing of going over to some tiny country(compared to us) like Iraq and blowing them to smithereens.

I don't know why I'm taking the time to post this, because it's really pointless.

Just know that there's another American that absolutely does not agree with this war.

[den4]

What time is it?
it's time for:
http://www.funforwards.com/flash/september02/saddam.swf

also, I think our mass media and certain vendors and representatives have gone overboard in renaming french fries to freedom fries, french toast to freedom toast.....etc.....what? Are we now gonna rename the Statue of Liberty to Statue of Freedom, just because the French made it and gave it to us? This trend is stupid.....people need to chill out on this bashing thing....just makes us look stoopid in the international community (may not affect us immediately, but as economical ties progress in the future, would you do business with some raging, ranting ***** that will change your product name just because your government fails to live up to your expectation?) As they say in Japan, in some proverb that probably came from China, "To lose your cool now will cost you later...."

I agree that saddam needs to get taken out, just like the other bastard, ol' Kimmy Jong ill-in-da-head, but bashing potential allies isn't cool, and is bad form, regardless of our personal feelings about it....The Frenchies do have problems, but scapegoating them as the source of all problems is pathetically petty and does not become a nation that wants to promote freedom and democracy. Yes, the Frenchies have done some dumb things, but like most dumb people, their views should be taken into consideration and disregarded, and this name calling needs to stop because we're better than that....

[Vicidian]

Kirei, it's called propaganda. Your minds have been affected by it from Liberals and Conservatives. You don't KNOW that this war is about oil. Truth is, you don't know much of anything as to the polictical motives of this war. Same for me. However, I feel so amazingly strong about this war being righteous. I am an American, and I am a Texan. I've met President Bush several times while he was still our governor. I do not see that man disobeying the U.N. security council, risking the lives of his own troops and the Iraqi civilians for oil. For one, if this was about his own personal motives he wouldn't have started this war. You know how many more people hate him?

[Iron Chef]

"...I feel so amazingly strong about this war being righteous. "

Hmm... slippery slope indeed. That's a very dangerous attitude to adopt don't you think? Human history has proven this time and again in various conflicts throughout the world. At any rate, I did not start this thread to "justify" why we should or should not go to war with Iraq. Rather, my point was to simply express my frustrations that in this day and age when diplomacy fails we inevitably resort to military aggression and as an American with a dissenting opinion I feel powerless in the process (despite my best efforts). The issues involved here are certainly not black and white and could be probably be debated ad nauseum but I get enough of that just watching the 24/7 news coverage now. 8-p

[Vicidian]

That's a very dangerous attitude to adopt don't you think? Human history has proven this time and again in various conflicts throughout the world.

History has also proven it to be the only attitude to adobt at times.

Anyway, I expressed my opinions of the French and why they were being bashed. Someone brought the war into this and i felt a need to defend Bush.

[Twisted]

Originally posted by Vicidian
History has also proven it to be the only attitude to adobt at times.

Apparently, history has taught us nothing...

[thomas]

Since the dawn of mankind the caveman with the biggest club had the final say, no matter what had been previously decided by the United Caves or by international caveman law. I just decided to boycott Caveman News Network reports until the show is over and withdraw into my secluded cave. Hail to the Flintstones.

[Chipi]

This whole USA-Iraq-France thing makes me (and I believe also my fellow people here in Finland) so unbelievably angry and frustrated. I canｴt believe what Iｴm hearing and seeing- can people still really be this _stupid_? And, at the same time I know that human is the most stupid thing ever invented.
Iｴm happy that thereｴs still some reasonable americans (such as Iron Chef based on his comments), for if there wasnｴt, the hatred against USA would be inormous...
For now I myself donｴt judge the citizens of america, but I do "judge" Bush, and his government...However, I do wonder, do Americans really think of Bush as an excellent president and a good leader? He might be a nice guy in person, but Iｴm sorry to say, his impression on tv etc. is everything else.I wouldnｴt want him to be my leader, on any price.. (donｴt kill me for this, pleaseplease )

[mdchachi]

My two yen:

You don't KNOW that this war is about oil. Truth is, you don't know much of anything as to the polictical motives of this war.

Yes, we don't know. We do however know that there has been many despotic dictators in the world -- in the past and currently. We also know that the U.S. generally turns a blind eye to genocide and evil regimes in places where they have no economic interests. One doesn't need to believe in UFO's or conspiracies to see that oil plays a not insignificant role here.

However we also have to recognize that the situation is different in the sense that after 9/11 the U.S. feels more vulnerable to dictators and terrorists who would like to see us harmed.

My own belief is that Bush feels that this is the right thing to do -- to neutralize a threat to the U.S. and liberate the Iraqi people. PLUS, hey, if he and his friends can get some nice oil contracts out of it too then it's a win-win-win situation.

After the war is over and if/when we see Iraqis rejoicing in the streets on TV and as Iraqi scientists reveal the weapons programs they were secretly working on, I believe world opinion (at least in the Western world) will quickly shift. I just hope we can pull it off.

As for France, I think it's important to recognize that France's actions have nothing to do with following a higher moral path. It is simply in the government's interest domestically and economically to oppose the U.S. and keep the status quo. Many leaders including Bush would probably do the same were they in their shoes. I also think this business of renaming french fries and french toast clearly shows how really, really useless and ignorant some of our lawmakers are. Especially considering that they are doing France a favor because french fries are not something the French want to be associated with in the first place.

I do wonder, do Americans really think of Bush as an excellent president and a good leader?

Most Americans are apathetic and ambivalent about Bush and politics in general. When he was elected, 24.1% voted for Bush, 24.4% voted for Gore, 1.9% voted for somebody else and roughly 49.6% didn't vote at all*. I suspect the numbers wouldn't be all that much different today. Same goes for the war. Yes you see protestors on TV and you see other people claiming that it's a "righteous" war; as sad as it may sound I believe most people don't believe strongly one way or the other. I think it's a failure on Bush's part that he couldn't resolve this issue diplomatically. But, then, Clinton couldn't either.

For one, if this was about his own personal motives he wouldn't have started this war.

I definitely disagree with this. History is full of examples of leaders making decisions based on their own personal agenda. Doing something for the good of the people or the world is the exception. Why would anybody care how many people hate them if they could redeem their father's mistakes and enrich themselves and all of their friends. I'm not claiming that this is necessarily the case but I don't discount the possibility.


* election numbers from http://www.uselectionatlas.org/

[den4]

I am just hoping this isn't being made into a holy war, where some radical Christian right, wanting to make sure of self-fulfilling prophecies, isn't trying to tweak current events to make sure their vision of the coming days follows "their" version of how the world will turn out. This is not a bashing against Christianity, but I do have problems with any radical extremist group that believes in their delusion that they are acting on behalf of God, when their actions closely fit better with the Evil Ones.....and by radical extremist religious groups, scenes from the aftermath of Jonestown, Waco, Texas, the subway in Tokyo and all the doomsday cult groups come to mind....
Before Bush supporters get on their soap boxes, I did not say that Bush, himself, believes in this, but from hearing the rants on the various radio talk shows (possibly a pressure valve for the folks that believe the talk show host isn't manipulating the audience, so they can rant and rave their opinions for pro or con of various topics, usually with the quality of the tabloids---for those in other countries that don't enjoy these "quality" shows), the conservatives do seem to believe it is the will of God that Saddam is taken down, and the liberals, well, they have their usual rants, too...

so, I also do believe that the oil is merely a good focus point for the media, but the agenda appears to be different.....

of course, as with all things shown in the media, from around the world, it is difficult to know what is going on these days....I suppose we'll all read about it in the years to come after the victors write their version of history....

[den4]

wonderful run-on sentences, yes?

[kirei_na_me]

I agree with you, den4. Even though I do still believe the war is mostly about money/oil and revenge, I still think it has something to do with Christians believing their way is the only way, too. And not only Christians, of course. I mean, so many wars have been fought in the name of religion, right? It's just so ironic and hypocritical. Another thing that most people just can't seem to think about and understand...

Speaking of religious fundamentalists, I have Jerry Falwell practically living just down the road from me. Isn't that a scary thought?!

[kirei_na_me]

Have any of you seen this letter composed by Michael Moore(of Bowling for Columbine fame)? I thought it was pretty good.... http://www.michaelmoore.com/index.php

[Vicidian]

It's blatantly biased. For one, we know he was WoMD now. He's already used scud missles he should not have. Bush is not "gung-ho" on war. If this were the case, he would not be in office. He claims he speaks for the general public of America and the world. Who the hell is he? I don't know him so he damn sure doesn't speak for me.

[thomas]

Just a little technicality: while Saddam's possession of Scuds constitutes a material breach of U.N. resolution [insert #] - as its range exceeds 150km - there is still no evidence that Iraq possesses WMD. The Scud itself is a ballistic missile, but no WMD. Mr. Bush should have listened more closely to Hans Blix before pulling the trigger. Of course, we are all aware of the fact that there was no real interest in a peaceful resolution.