DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Discover Freedom
Pages:   ... ...
Showing posts 176 - 200 of 1247, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/10/2003 12:47:04 PM · #176
Originally posted by rcrawford:

they also found a new style of bomb that was designed to break up into smaller bomblets and disperse chemical or biological crap over a wide area...

This is called a cluster-bomb, and the ten or so percent of "bomblets" which remain unexploded are a continuing hazard to children in places like Vietnam, Afghanistan, the Balkans, and other places where they (like "leftover" land mines) continue to maim and kill hundreds (if not thousands) yearly.
03/10/2003 06:38:26 PM · #177
oh, Sh*t. I'm watching the national nightly news and It looks like you'll get your wish achiral.

God be with those civilians and soldigers.

Message edited by author 2003-03-10 18:38:59.
03/10/2003 06:48:15 PM · #178
Originally posted by Geocide:

oh, Sh*t. I'm watching the national nightly news and It looks like you'll get your wish achiral.

God be with those civilians and soldigers.


ok, for the last time, i don't want war. but i see no evidence against it either. besides the theoretical arguments that have been put forth in this thread by opposition viewpoints, rcrawford layed it out very nicely. the whole security council unanimously voted on 1441. saddam still hasn't accounted for 50 scud-b missiles, thousands of litres of chem and bio weapons, of which lisae pointed out at least half is probably worthless to saddam because of its age. now the new evidence about the drone plane. it's as plain as it gets. what is germany, france, russia, and china's point? they agreed to 1441, but not to the new resolution which is essentially impossible for them to disagree with considering their positive vote on 1441. their intentions are finally coming forth.
03/10/2003 07:03:46 PM · #179
also, if you think chirac is some great idealist who has it all right, can someone explain why sending thousands of troops unilaterally to the ivory coast to protect france's interests in the area is any different than what is going on in the gulf region. he says one thing and does another. he just realizes that being anti-american is the only thing that will keep him in favor with the people so that's what he has chosen to do.
03/10/2003 08:16:27 PM · #180
My last statment was porly worded. Sorry. I mean that it does indeed look like we will go to war. I was holding out hope, but it seems as though my administration, rather, will have it's way. Surly every option hasn't been exausted. I hope everyone keeps in mind that france and russia won't support a resolution that will directly lead to war, they don't love saddam or anything of the sort, they want to give the instectors the full amount of time they require, rather than jumping to conclusions. If we would just wait till then, there would be that same unatimus UN vote that was present in resolution 1441.
03/10/2003 09:18:29 PM · #181
Take a quick look at France's, Russia's, and Germany's dealings with Iraq. They're not doing this out of a sense of idealism, they're doing it out of self interest.
03/10/2003 09:20:08 PM · #182
Originally posted by Geocide:

My last statment was porly worded. Sorry. I mean that it does indeed look like we will go to war. I was holding out hope, but it seems as though my administration, rather, will have it's way. Surly every option hasn't been exausted. I hope everyone keeps in mind that france and russia won't support a resolution that will directly lead to war, they don't love saddam or anything of the sort, they want to give the instectors the full amount of time they require, rather than jumping to conclusions. If we would just wait till then, there would be that same unatimus UN vote that was present in resolution 1441.


umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh
03/10/2003 09:38:27 PM · #183
Originally posted by Geocide:

Surly every option hasn't been exausted...

Surely if they weren't all so surly we'd be out of this mess peacably...
03/10/2003 09:41:34 PM · #184
Originally posted by Anachronite:

umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh

55 years and who knows how many UN resolutions...when will the "Palestinians" and the Syrians and the Iraqis and the rest of the feudal oil states and countless terrorist "organizations" recognize Israel's right to exist?
03/10/2003 09:47:31 PM · #185
//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/10/opinion/polls/main543446.shtml

Message edited by author 2003-03-10 21:47:48.
03/10/2003 10:26:30 PM · #186
Originally posted by achiral:

//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/10/opinion/polls/main543446.shtml

In the opinion of 1010 individuals...over half still say no to war without UN approval.
03/10/2003 11:21:08 PM · #187
haha, so when the polls are in your favor it doesn't matter how many individuals there are? i'm referring to a previous post in this thread. statisticians would consider that a representative sample, without a census, it's impossible to know, but when done right polls tend to be correct plus or minus the margin of error.

and you got it backwards, over half favor without un approval

and if you are going to discount a poll, what point is it to try to use part of that poll that was declared invalid to make a point.

Message edited by author 2003-03-10 23:24:21.
03/10/2003 11:27:40 PM · #188
//www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=682

some other interesting stuff in here. interesting to see that support for bush goes down as support for war goes up. kinda thought that wasn't possible, but i guess if we make quick work of the war that will rise again
03/10/2003 11:40:22 PM · #189
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Anachronite:

umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh

55 years and who knows how many UN resolutions...when will the "Palestinians" and the Syrians and the Iraqis and the rest of the feudal oil states and countless terrorist "organizations" recognize Israel's right to exist?


The Palestinians recognised Israel's right to exist in 1993.
03/11/2003 12:12:04 AM · #190
Originally posted by lisae:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Anachronite:

umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh

55 years and who knows how many UN resolutions...when will the "Palestinians" and the Syrians and the Iraqis and the rest of the feudal oil states and countless terrorist "organizations" recognize Israel's right to exist?


The Palestinians recognised Israel's right to exist in 1993.


Glad to see someone else finding facts before posting things they hear on the media or from someone else.
03/11/2003 12:33:54 AM · #191
Originally posted by lisae:

The Palestinians recognised Israel's right to exist in 1993.


LOL, isn't that "big" of them [the Palestinians]. You know, just after 9-11 I had some wacked arab/muslim supporters told me that "the Jews were behind the 9-11 attacks." I swear it I'm telling the truth... not just 1 or 2 but several stated this. What do you make of that?! Just more arab lies? I've noticed they will say anything no matter how outragous the lie. It's unbelievable.

Message edited by author 2003-03-11 00:41:57.
03/11/2003 12:48:49 AM · #192
Originally posted by zadore:

Originally posted by lisae:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Anachronite:

umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh

55 years and who knows how many UN resolutions...when will the "Palestinians" and the Syrians and the Iraqis and the rest of the feudal oil states and countless terrorist "organizations" recognize Israel's right to exist?


The Palestinians recognised Israel's right to exist in 1993.


Glad to see someone else finding facts before posting things they hear on the media or from someone else.


still waiting for you to join in. you should go read your previous posts and "sources" from the media and other people, then you will realize that you have just become irrelevant. nice try

Message edited by author 2003-03-11 00:51:23.
03/11/2003 02:31:52 AM · #193
Originally posted by lisae:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Anachronite:

umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh

55 years and who knows how many UN resolutions...when will the "Palestinians" and the Syrians and the Iraqis and the rest of the feudal oil states and countless terrorist "organizations" recognize Israel's right to exist?


The Palestinians recognised Israel's right to exist in 1993.

I thought they implied as much as a result of one of the sets of "peace" talks, but it was my impression that the actual Palestinian Charter had yet to be amended to remove the offending sections. And I'd still say that their overall collective behavior has still failed to acknowledge Israel's right to exist in peace and security.

And, I do know that Israel infringes on the rights of Palestinians...funny, but in much the same way (and with the same rationale) that the US is starting to restrict its citizen's freedoms.
Can you imagine Mr. Ashcroft's (papa of the US "Patriot Act") response if there was a bus full of kids or a supermarket being blown up here every couple of days?

I was in Israel about 12 years ago. It takes a whole different mind-set to feel relieved and more relaxed when a bunch of teenagers with machine guns get on the bus. On every elementary school field trip the teachers have to carry Uzis, one at the front and one at the back of the group. But I suppose none of that is necessary since Mr. Arafat's change of heart...
03/11/2003 03:07:32 AM · #194
Originally posted by GeneralE:


I thought they implied as much as a result of one of the sets of "peace" talks, but it was my impression that the actual Palestinian Charter had yet to be amended to remove the offending sections. And I'd still say that their overall collective behavior has still failed to acknowledge Israel's right to exist in peace and security.


No, the Palestinian National Council voted to cancel the articles in the charter that are contrary to Israel's right to exist. They also voted to amend the charter, but that may never have been done (you can imagine the administrative difficulties they have faced in this time). You can read the sections that were cancelled by that vote here.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

And, I do know that Israel infringes on the rights of Palestinians...funny, but in much the same way (and with the same rationale) that the US is starting to restrict its citizen's freedoms.


I haven't heard of any curfews in the US yet, or the demolition of buildings, stealing water resources for illegal settlements, building a wall outside the US's recognised borders (within territory recognised by the UN to be occupied) and requiring everyone to have their documents checked at checkpoints between towns that are 20 minutes apart (thus making it impossible for people to work, or even get to a hospital in time to give birth, etc.).

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Can you imagine Mr. Ashcroft's (papa of the US "Patriot Act") response if there was a bus full of kids or a supermarket being blown up here every couple of days?

I was in Israel about 12 years ago. It takes a whole different mind-set to feel relieved and more relaxed when a bunch of teenagers with machine guns get on the bus. On every elementary school field trip the teachers have to carry Uzis, one at the front and one at the back of the group. But I suppose none of that is necessary since Mr. Arafat's change of heart...


Unfortunately, through the whole process of the British mandate over Palestine after WWI, it was found again and again that the establishment of a Jewish national home (it was never intended to be an independent state back then) would cause intense conflict. As time went on, and more Jewish immigrants arrived, the British came to realise that this area would be in a state of permanent war. While the Nazis were in power, the fate of Israel was sealed - floods of immigrants, most considered by the British to be illegal, created a majority Jewish population in parts of Palestine, an event that the local Arab population had been fearing all along. That was it... a permament state of war began. Israel was established through aggression and it seems it can only exist through continued aggression.

In the current situation, I don't take sides. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians are dominated by extremists who don't want peace and will never let it happen. The people I most agree with are leftist Israel political groups like Meretz, or the refuseniks in the Israeli Defense Forces who will not serve in the occupied territories. It's odd that whenever I get into arguments about Israel, and quote material from Israelis who are in favour of peaceful negotiation, I'm often told I'm "anti-Israeli" or even anti-Semitic! But that's the way it is. The left wing of Israeli politics doesn't get any recognition in our media.

But every argument on Middle East politics turns into a discussion over Israel eventually. Obviously resolving the Israel/Palestine issue is the key to security in that region, but no discussion about it online is ever fruitful. Most people don't know how close Israel was to peace just before Barak lost power, at the Taba talks, so they assume peace is impossible and advocate all kinds of unnecessary solutions. All Sharon has to do is go back to those talks, but he refuses to even recognise that they took place.
03/11/2003 03:49:24 AM · #195
Originally posted by lisae:


I haven't heard of any curfews in the US yet, or the demolition of buildings, stealing water resources for illegal settlements, building a wall outside the US's recognised borders (within territory recognised by the UN to be occupied) and requiring everyone to have their documents checked at checkpoints between towns that are 20 minutes apart (thus making it impossible for people to work, or even get to a hospital in time to give birth, etc.).

Things analogous to this are indeed happening in the US. The Santa Cruz library posted signs today alerting patrons (citizens) that the FBI would be able request records of what books you check out or sites you visit on the public computers...and they are not allowed to tell you that the FBI has requested the info. These requests require no warrant nor justification...
Until last week, trucks were beinging randomly stopped and searched on the Bay Bridge on their way into San Francisco.
But I mostly agree with you that these are oppressive measures certain to elicit resistance and animosity. Like I said though, I bet we'd (US) have more of those measures in place if we were subject to actual violent terrorist attacks with anything like what Israelis endure.

Originally posted by lisae:


In the current situation, I don't take sides. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians are dominated by extremists who don't want peace and will never let it happen...But every argument on Middle East politics turns into a discussion over Israel eventually. Obviously resolving the Israel/Palestine issue is the key to security in that region, but no discussion about it online is ever fruitful...

I've long considered myself an agnostic. I'd be more encouraged to believe if I saw the Children of God (descendents of both Isaac and Ishmael) put in a corner on the "time-out" they've long deserved...
03/11/2003 07:45:27 AM · #196
Originally posted by generale:

Originally posted by lisae:


In the current situation, I don't take sides. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians are dominated by extremists who don't want peace and will never let it happen...But every argument on Middle East politics turns into a discussion over Israel eventually. Obviously resolving the Israel/Palestine issue is the key to security in that region, but no discussion about it online is ever fruitful...

I've long considered myself an agnostic. I'd be more encouraged to believe if I saw the Children of God (descendents of both Isaac and Ishmael) put in a corner on the "time-out" they've long deserved...


i think you said it well general, however i wonder how much islam and judaism really have to do with anything anymore.

Message edited by author 2003-03-11 09:17:41.
03/11/2003 09:24:02 AM · #197
Question for you guys now that we are talking about freedom and the taking away of liberties by the government:

Do you support the right to bear arms in the United States? Many people seem to have no problem wanting to take away that liberty, and there isn't the same kind of public outcry as there is when people find out that library records are being monitored.
03/11/2003 10:32:26 AM · #198
Originally posted by Anachronite:

Originally posted by Geocide:

My last statment was porly worded. Sorry. I mean that it does indeed look like we will go to war. I was holding out hope, but it seems as though my administration, rather, will have it's way. Surly every option hasn't been exausted. I hope everyone keeps in mind that france and russia won't support a resolution that will directly lead to war, they don't love saddam or anything of the sort, they want to give the instectors the full amount of time they require, rather than jumping to conclusions. If we would just wait till then, there would be that same unatimus UN vote that was present in resolution 1441.


umm hello, 12 years and 17 resolutions... if this is not enough time, what is? sheesh


So what does another 2 mmonths matten then?
03/11/2003 10:36:02 AM · #199
Originally posted by achiral:

haha, so when the polls are in your favor it doesn't matter how many individuals there are? i'm referring to a previous post in this thread. statisticians would consider that a representative sample, without a census, it's impossible to know, but when done right polls tend to be correct plus or minus the margin of error.

and you got it backwards, over half favor without un approval

and if you are going to discount a poll, what point is it to try to use part of that poll that was declared invalid to make a point.

We're not just talking about the opinion if AMERICANS...it least i'm not.
03/11/2003 10:47:22 AM · #200
i think you run into problems when you try to create a society where countries aren't allowed to make unilateral decisions because of international bureaucracy and power mongering. the currect crisis is a perfect example of how it doesn't work. the UN in my opinion should have set stricter timelines and standards for the disarmament of Iraq. now there is no way to base any type of timeline to match up with France, China, Russia, Germany's stance. they have offered a solution that isn't a solution at all, more inspections, more inspectors, and more time. but what people fail to realize is that the point of inspectors isn't to run around trying to find saddam's wmd, the point is to obtain a list of weapons programs from Iraq, which it did regardless of things Iraq left out. inspectors will then look at the report and say okay saddam, we just want to make sure everything is ok, show us your weapons, show us that you destroyed your wmd programs, and we will leave you alone. this would have been over a long time ago if Iraq was being truthful. he should welcome inspections if truly nothing is going on, because sanctions would have already been lifted by now if he had presented everything for verification in the beginning.

Message edited by author 2003-03-11 10:49:36.
Pages:   ... ...
Current Server Time: 01/27/2021 03:53:54 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 01/27/2021 03:53:54 PM EST.