View post (While the 'civilized world' looked elsewhere...)

View thread

Registered User
Joined: 10/31/01
Posts: 611
Registered User
Joined: 10/31/01
Posts: 611
02/20/2003 10:57 pm
Originally posted by Lordathestrings
sadly misguided people who would invevitably protest any Western attempts to contain him. He called them "useful idiots". They still exist today.

Excuse me but a lot of highly intelligent, critically thinking people fall into your "useful idiot" pigeonhole. Most of the protesters I know are politics/International relations students.
Assuming Saddam has Chemical/biological weapons this is how we will find out; by retaliation. All you need to do to create support for terrorism is to break a people by bombing them and their families.

Last weekend, the streets were filled with them, howling with outrage that the US would dare to use its military power against Saddam Hussein. Jeez, the nerve of some countries! :rolleyes:

Since when was war against one person? Many innocent people will die lots more will loose their innocence and die thereafter. Saddam is an evil bastard, no mistake but there are tons of evil bastards all over the world and nobody cares what they do to their people unless they can make some financial gain by "liberating" them, look at all the wars in Africa, who cared?

I don't know what the Canadian press is like but if it's anything like the American's its focus is tunnel-visioned and myopic.

Where are all the painfully sincere peaceniks that were so adamantly demanding that America must "Give Peace A Chance"?

SHOVE Y0UR STEREOTYPES WHERE THE SUN DOESN'T SHINE. Lots of very normal people have been protesting in Britain, close on 2 million out of the 60 or so million. Public opinion in the UK and the US is against war not backed by the UN. I really begrudge the stereotype of tree-hugging, dope-smoking hippies with childish-naive attitudes. These stereotypes are perpetuated partially by the desire of individuals involved to be recognised as belonging to a group of people who have solidarity and can probably trust one another (allowing short-cuts to be taken in establishing new friendships) and partly by right-wing press reports which like to suggest that opposition to government policy is largely the product of some people's large drug intakes and not a well-considered, legitimate response to bad policy. True, whatever a government does will come under scrutiny and you can't make everyone happy all of the time but if people don't protest other people will not take the time to evaluate the information available and form their own opinions.

If a regime change has to happen in an oil-producing country I dont' trust a load of ex-oil, motor car and weapons building industrialists who repeatedly de-regulate restrictions designed to protect the environment, work force and poor people from exploitation to do so.

Meanwhile, a week ago, before the anti-US protests happened, India expelled Jalil Abbas Jilani, acting High Commissioner from Pakistan, along with four other Pakistani High Commission staff members. Pakistan gave 48 hours notice to India's acting High Commissioner, Sudhir Vyas, and four of his colleagues, expelled for alleged "involvement in activities incompatible with their status".
These two countries are this close to war, possibly nuclear war, and I have yet to see or hear of any protests in the streets of Europe or North America. This conflict has much more potential to cause World War III than another Gulf War does.

Protests about what? What are our governments (Canadian and British respectively in our cases) doing to involve themselves in this dispute? I don't bloody know! Maybe you're right that this is a more serious problem but frankly my current nightmares are American in origin.
I'd be interested to know more about this issue but I don't see why knowing about it should change a thing about my own personal feelings about USA inc. and a British gov. that allows Americans to base missile "defence systems" in our country making us an obvious target if America decides to pick a fight with someone really dangerous.
If you were a dangerous megalomaniac with a nuke would you use it on your immediate neighbour?
The effects of their own weapons would totally screw their environment and poison a whole heap of their own people. This is before we consider an actual nuclear RESPONSE.

... or is it politically correct for neighbors to nuke each other, as long as they don't have any, like, ulterior motives, y'know?

P.C. or not it's insane. It's terrorists and not governments who might not care if EVERYBODY dies for their crazy cause.
If I couldn't laugh at myself how could I laugh at someone less ridiculous?