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

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Iraq Hits Home
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 80, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/06/2004 11:57:47 PM · #26
Originally posted by gingerbaker:
Originally posted by laurielblack:
we have to respect the fact that those who have been elected by popular vote are the ones in power and are the experts...not us as the armchair quarterbacks.


Umm.. Bill Clinton was our last president actually elected - not selected - and WITH the popular vote.

With all that has come out lately, it has become painfully obvious to me that if he were in fact reelected for a third term, not only would we not be in Iraq, but 9/11 most likely would not have ocurred either. :(


i love all you Americans who stopped caring about the constitution

Message edited by author 2004-04-07 00:09:15.
 04/07/2004 12:01:40 AM · #27
We are all saddened.Maybe one day people will only fight with words and no more violence!Definetly hero's
 04/07/2004 12:50:30 AM · #28
Originally posted by rcrawford:
Originally posted by orussell:
That's sad. Sorry to hear that. And for what? Oil and nothing else. Anyone who doesn't see this is either delusional or in denial. Innocent lives being lost because they have no choice but follow the orders of their leader.


I don't understand. The innocent lives were civilians helping to deliver food and medical supplies, no evil "leader" involved. (at least not on our side)


I meant innocent American soldiers, many of whom probably don't share George Bush's vision. They are bound by duty. (edit - I mean no disrespect to any of the troops or friends and family of the fallen)

Message edited by author 2004-04-07 01:14:47.
 04/09/2004 08:28:30 AM · #29
For all the idiots who think we are in Iraq for oil, let me say I despise you! Turn off your silly TV and go do some real research. Find out all the problems (terrorist acts, etc.) supported by Saddam regime. Then tell me we are over there for the oil.
 04/09/2004 08:36:44 AM · #30
posted by Gingerbaker

With all that has come out lately, it has become painfully obvious to me that if he were in fact reelected for a third term, not only would we not be in Iraq, but 9/11 most likely would not have ocurred either. :(

Gingerbaker, who do think ignored the terrorist problem for 8 years until it festered into what it is today? The world love Bill CLinton because he gave them what they want and allowed the scum of the world to go stronger. They are scared of Bush because he is standing up the the that same scum.
 04/09/2004 08:57:51 AM · #31
wrong thread!!


Message edited by author 2004-04-09 09:00:44.
 04/09/2004 08:59:38 AM · #32
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Umm.. Bill Clinton was our last president actually elected - not selected - and WITH the popular vote.

Not only did more people vote for G. Bush, but a higher percentage of Americans voted for G. Bush than did for Clinton in BOTH of his elections. I believe Clintons highest vote was only ever 43% of total America. Also, this bullshit about selected not elected is pathetic. The only reason the Supreme Court had to step in was because the Florida S.C was breaking the law and changing election law on the fly. I bet you didn't know that Gore NEVER won a recount: this includes the 4 or so before the actual announcment and all of the LEGAL counted votes afterwards. The only way Gore won was to count anything with a dimple in his favor and to throw out a great portion of the Military vote (absentee).

Originally posted by gingerbaker:
With all that has come out lately, it has become painfully obvious to me that if he were in fact reelected for a third term, not only would we not be in Iraq, but 9/11 most likely would not have ocurred either. :(

What a freaking tool you are. How brainwashed and ignorant can someone be. The Terrorists ALL came into this country when Clinton was President, Al Quidia grew to great strength while Clinton was in Office, Almost all of the money sent to America was done when Clinton was in Office, The flight Training that the terrorists did was all done while Clinton was in Office... Do I need to go further?

Well how about we delve into what Clinton did do about Terrorism? Oh wait, he never did anything! Do you realize that while Clinton was in Office hundreds of people died due to Terrorist attacks on American targets and Clintont NEVER DID ANYTHING. The only time he did something was when he blew up some camels and an asprin factory after it was found out that he lied about sticking his cigar up Monica's ****.

9/11 happened because the 4 presidents prior to the Current President Bush completly mis-handled Terrorism. They attacked Terrorism with a Police mentality, this failed miserably and did nothing but enbolden them.

It was because of actions by BILL CLINTON that Osama said we were nothing but a paper dragon and would run if ever challenged. He expected that we would never retaliate for 9/11. If gore was in Office he might have been right, it would have been a symbolic hit back, NOT an all out war on Terrorism.

Thank God a President with BALLS is in office and not some appeasing pussy that cares more about what countries like France think of us than Killing Terrorists.

BTW: Kerry prefers Police action over Military... Maybe a lot of you Kerry supporters should really look into what this guy supports, you'll find he is nothing but an apeaser without a spine!

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 09:09:54.
 04/09/2004 09:21:44 AM · #33
Amen Russell!!!!!!!!!!
 04/09/2004 09:51:37 AM · #34
Again, Rant forum. I don't need to see folks called "tools" and "brainwashed and ignorant" because they don't agree with the administration.
 04/09/2004 10:00:55 AM · #35
I'm not asking anyone to agree with the administration, just to understand the true facts. Maybe I do seem a bit zealous but after 20 plus years serving in the military I really get sick and tired of some people's ignorance of what is really going on in the world. But hey, you know what they say "ignorance is bliss"!
 04/09/2004 10:22:47 AM · #36
Originally posted by jamesdak:
But hey, you know what they say "ignorance is bliss"!

The complete quotation (to provide the correct context (emphasis added):

Yet ah! why should they know their fate,
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies?
Thought would destroy their paradise.
No more; where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise.

Thomas Gray, "On a Distant Prospect of Eton College" 1742

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 10:23:30.
 04/09/2004 10:36:23 AM · #37
I'm not asking anyone to attach their lips to Bush's patut, but I am asking people to actualy use their head.

I am honestly amazed and the things so many of you think are true. Honestly, it's saddening and it makes me angry and frustrated.

There are lots of things I disagree with that Bush has done. The difference is, my reasons are actualy factual. And I'm not saying that all of "yours" are not. BUT I am saying that most of the things I read hear are completly false and have zero facts to back anything up. I mean comon gingerbaker actualy believes that if Bush wasn't resident 9/11 wouldn't have happened? How void of comon sense do you need to be to believe that?
 04/09/2004 10:36:36 AM · #38
Originally posted by jamesdak:
Amen Russell!!!!!!!!!!

How did Saddam get in power anyways??Who originally supported him? Be careful what you do!

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 10:38:11.
 04/09/2004 10:39:43 AM · #39
All I'm asking is two things: move this to the Rant forum, and stop calling people idiots and tools. That's a waste of time.

I can debate against this war with everyone here, and do so in a fashion that would render your pejoratives useless, but I'd rather not even see this crap, cause I come to this site to GET AWAY from the pro-war folks (and yes, the anti-war folks too).
 04/09/2004 10:41:24 AM · #40
Originally posted by Dim7:
Originally posted by jamesdak:
Amen Russell!!!!!!!!!!

How did Saddam get in power anyways??Who originally supported him? Be careful what you do!

Formerly part of the Ottoman Empire, Iraq was occupied by Britain during the course of World War I; in 1920, it was declared a League of Nations mandate under UK administration. In stages over the next dozen years, Iraq attained its independence as a kingdom in 1932. A "republic" was proclaimed in 1958, but in actuality a series of military strongmen have ruled the country since then, the latest being SADDAM Husayn.
--CIA World Factbook (2003)
 04/09/2004 10:46:04 AM · #41
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Dim7:
Originally posted by jamesdak:
Amen Russell!!!!!!!!!!

How did Saddam get in power anyways??Who originally supported him? Be careful what you do!

Formerly part of the Ottoman Empire, Iraq was occupied by Britain during the course of World War I; in 1920, it was declared a League of Nations mandate under UK administration. In stages over the next dozen years, Iraq attained its independence as a kingdom in 1932. A "republic" was proclaimed in 1958, but in actuality a series of military strongmen have ruled the country since then, the latest being SADDAM Husayn.
--CIA World Factbook (2003)

I was under the impression that the CIA SUPPORTED his rise to power many years ago, I bet you wont find that in any printed CIA factbook\

Regardless fighting terrorism is a good thing,which tyrant you support to oust another, what can you do! I think of Saddam as a terrible dictator,Terrorist I don`t know, he certainly terrorized His own people.I am sorry for the loss of life.I think the faster you get out of there and try to let them run their own show, the better it will be for all!
My condolences to those fallen,and their families!

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 11:06:48.
 04/09/2004 10:57:59 AM · #42
It's a well known fact that the US support Saddam in his over throwing of the government. At the time we thought he was better than what was there.

Our goverment supports or doesn't support many people and some times we pick the loosing horse. I'm not sure who was in the White House when this happened though and I'm not really sure who to blame. BUt if we didn't help Saddam it would have been the same guy or someone else doing the same crap.

Also: Just because one administration helped someone gain power or supported his rise doesn't mean the next one can't come in and kick his ass when he steps out of line and kills millions of people!
 04/09/2004 11:01:12 AM · #43
Originally posted by Russell2566:
It's a well known fact that the US support Saddam in his over throwing of the government. At the time we thought he was better than what was there.

Our goverment supports or doesn't support many people and some times we pick the loosing horse. I'm not sure who was in the White House when this happened though and I'm not really sure who to blame. BUt if we didn't help Saddam it would have been the same guy or someone else doing the same crap.

Also: Just because one administration helped someone gain power or supported his rise doesn't mean the next one can't come in and kick his ass when he steps out of line and kills millions of people!

Well said

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 11:02:15.
 04/09/2004 11:01:20 AM · #44
Mainly it was Regan and Donald Rumsfeld, who mostly ignored the use of chemical weapons by Iraq because they were using them against the Iranians and that happened to suit US interests.

//www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Personally, I think the main problem with this is not supporting one side against the other and then switching back and forth, its the meddling in the first place that causes the problems - changing your mind and supporting the other side each time certainly isn't a good way to foster trust and good relationships though. I tend not to trust 'friends' who occasionally stab others in the back either for example. Is that really the foreign policy you consider a good way forward ?

And there are still people in the US that can't understand the hatred in many places around the world that this sort of behaviour has created.

Message edited by author 2004-04-09 11:04:40.
 04/09/2004 11:01:37 AM · #45
Originally posted by Dim7:
I was under the impression that the CIA SUPPORTED his rise to power many years ago, I bet you wont find that in any printed CIA factbook

Probably because it isn't true. While individuals employed by the CIA may have supported his rise to power, the CIA as an organization did not.
For more on how he came to power read THIS ARTICLE from the BBC news.

Note: in fairness, the CIA DID, in fact, support the Ba'ath Party long before Saddam was an influential part of it. At the time, the Ba'ath Party was considered preferable to the pro-Soviet government that was in place. That was in 1963. Saddam didn't become head of the party until 1979. That was the beginning of the reign of terror for the Iraqi people.

1963 - John F. Kennedy was President
1979 - Jimmy Carter was President

Ron
04/09/2004 11:11:46 AM · #46
This thread is out of focus, and has too much noise. It could do with a little cropping, as well. I'm not sure what kind of frame would be best, but I think that might help. I would be interested in seeing it in B&W, too.
 04/09/2004 11:13:14 AM · #47
I thought the shallow DOF was intentional?
 04/09/2004 11:16:59 AM · #48
Originally posted by boomer:
This thread is out of focus, and has too much noise. It could do with a little cropping, as well. I'm not sure what kind of frame would be best, but I think that might help. I would be interested in seeing it in B&W, too.


When cropping, should more be eliminated from the left or the right? When converted to black and white, should the contrast be increased to make it MORE black and white? or decreased to allow for more shades of grey? Once the focus is lost "in camera" I don't know how to get it back in post-processing. Do you think a gaussian blur would help?

Ron
 04/09/2004 11:24:31 AM · #49
I could not resist not to say something. I am from Bosnia you all probably heard of it. USA helped us to find peace here, helped us to stop the agression on our country and we are all wery greatfull for that. But, people in this region and Europe do think that this USA-IRAQ war is wrong. I, do think that World somehow turned upside down since Bush came. Everything was fine when Clinton was there but sudenly all was wrong when Bush came, how's that?
Many inocente lives are lost but I cant see realy for what...oh yes maybe oil?
04/09/2004 12:19:20 PM · #50
OrionS -
Tell us what would honestly happen if all the US troops pulled out of your region right now. Can you honestly say there would be peace? "Everything was fine when Clinton was there" - Wow, do you really believe this?
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 09:14:26 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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 09:14:26 PM EDT.