At 11/14/02 04:47 PM, seanbonner wrote: I'm usually not one to jump on the bandwagon and pat celebs on the back when they decide to speak up for one cause or another. As far as I'm concerned just because some can act or write a catchy song doesn't mean they know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to politics. Obvious exceptions to the ones that do. However Sean Penn wrote a letter and paid an assload to get it published in The Washington Post. I think it's a really good letter but close to no one is even taking note. It's kind of long and I didn't want to clog up the front page with it so I posted it here for everyone to check out. I'd like to hear what you all think about it...

Sean Penn is a left-wing liberal. Iraq is guilty of numberable war crimes. The U.S. is taking justified actions against a country that poses a severe threat to humanity. President Bush is doing a great job; he will probably get my vote in 2004.

Thank you for posting Mr. Penn's letter. It gives me faith that there ARE some Americans out there who aren't willing to support meaningless destruction in order to find a means of 'revenge' for Sept. 11. The only remaining question I have is, why are the only meaningful responses that are posted on Newgrounds by people admitting to be Canadian? Can't any of you see that Mr. Penn has a valid point and isn't 'against' you?

Sean Penn is just another celeb who thinks himself an expert on political and world affairs.

I personaly have no use for a "war" in Iraq as it stands now. If Saddam invades Kuwait or attacks Isreal I would think it nessary to throw down and blow his ass away.

Libbies are still pissed they got disembowled in the last election.

holy butt sex! i think im the 100th post! give me a cucumber!

He sounded like he knew what he was talking about when writing that letter.........thats pretty rare for an actor!

I thought the letter was concise, well-written, and thought out; it's a good piece of work and actually makes a good point, BUT... what good will it do? 1 person with one opinion isn't going to change to mind of Bush or anyone in power... the opinions of 70% of the people might, but again; unless impeachment was an issue; probably not.

I'm all for attacking Iraq. The people there live in poverty and depite what you or anyone else says, they are bred to hate the rest of the world. Sure, they hate the Baath party that is screwing them over a little bit more, but what about the rest of the world? As far as they've been taught, we're oppressing them without cause; they are the military geniuses, they control everything... this is what the people are bred to think and act upon. Saddam and his terrorist allies are actively seeking Weapons of Mass Destruction; there's no doubt about this at all.

Now, the real point of this post. Dubya is going about this all wrong. He's focusing on his popularity rating and outlasting his father and what looks good on the top. This is all a sugar coating tho, because there are other, more real dangers out there.... sometimes I wonder what the American people would do if 9/11 was in 2000, not 2001... and before the election.

Man, he sure makes George Dubya look evil.

At 11/16/02 06:04 PM, JeremyFox_Hounder wrote: Sean Penn is just another celeb who thinks himself an expert on political and world affairs.

I personaly have no use for a "war" in Iraq as it stands now. If Saddam invades Kuwait or attacks Isreal I would think it nessary to throw down and blow his ass away.

Libbies are still pissed they got disembowled in the last election.

Sure.. Sean Penn publicly displays his opinion so he must think he's an expert.. I mean that's just obvious! You obviously think yourself a mind reader..

Wade.. you're so american.. go eat a big mac and suck back an ice cold coke.. you know you can't beat the feeling.

yea thats all well and good but who the hell is sean penn?

after 9-11, , the gloves are off, , , kill all the terrorist bastards.And if anyone disagrees, , they can take their lips, , and lick my balls with them bitches.So sean, fuck you,fuck them,and fuck everybody that has a problem with the u.s. and our 55 gallon drum of ass-whoppin' we have and will continue to dish out!

At 11/16/02 08:56 PM, Baby_Has_DownsCS wrote: yea thats all well and good but who the hell is sean penn?

yeah i was reading the posts and i was wondering who sean penn is

I was reading this forum in a pretty sour mood looking at all the idiots who don't understand shit about why America is going to war...
(What can I really expect from a bunch of 15 year olds who sit around playing counter strike and everquest all day, Many of which are Canadians and Europeans in the first place! Like THEIR opinion matters!...)
and then I saw Mr. Wade Fulp's post... Thank you so much for having a voice of reason here... Its good to know that while there are many idiots on this site, at least the people who run it know what they are talking about !

To be honest I think the president had I hand in the 9-11 tragedy. Why? Think about it. As a president he was doing badly. People who voted for him in the first place regretted it later on. As time passed his popularity was sinking and fast. So what does he do? He allows a national tragedy to happen then he steps in and is called a great man. I mean he did what he needed to do so that when his term ends in office he can go down in history as one of the many presidents who stood tall in a time of war. But in real life he is a dummy. Listen to him speak. Half the time he doesn’t even know what he is saying. Now I know some of you are think “He wouldn’t do that he is the president.” Well let me ask you. If you were a person with a strong moral sense. (Stealing is wrong, never ht a woman, give to the homeless.) If you lived on the street and you saw bread in a store and the owner turned his back. Would you steal it and eat or starve to death? Of course you would eat it. In the president’s case, he was a bad president who needed to do something to that people would get behind him. Really think about it. Well that’s all. Remember this is just my opinion on this subject. If you are going to reply to this please write something that actually has some thought put in to it.

Ok... no...
If you were starving and a store owner turned his back then yes, you would steal the bread instead of starve to death, even if you were a moral person...
The difference is, this is in no way analgous to the september 11th tragedy...
If it were to be a proper analogy then the starving person would wait for the store owner to turn his back, at that point the starving person would attack the store owner, kill him and his family, and then leave with the bread. September 11th was not a last ditch effort by a group of starving people to get some food, it was a cold blooded and calculated attack to make Americans afraid to leave their houses.

If the president wanted to boost approval ratings to save his presidency, he would have been more likely to lead a different campaign than one that not only killed thousands of Americans, but also hurt the American economy.

You know, kissing ass doesn't get you experience. I may be Canadian, and I may be 17, but I still know enough about the world to know that fighting Iraq will accomplish nothing. If they get Sadam, then someone else will take over. The only way Iraq will stop being a threat is if Bush nukes Iraq until it becomes a crater.

Actually, you dont know anything about the world. The citizens of Iraq are good people ruled by a dictator under a totalitarian military regime. The United States is planning on reinstalling a new government altogether in Iraq, not just killing Sadam and leaving. Its not necessary to nuke the entire country to hell to get what we want done. It is not a country made up of terrorists, they just have one who happens to be in charge. Once that regime falls it will never be a threat again.

At 11/14/02 04:47 PM, seanbonner wrote: I'm usually not one to jump on the bandwagon and pat celebs on the back when they decide to speak up for one cause or another. As far as I'm concerned just because some can act or write a catchy song doesn't mean they know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to politics. Obvious exceptions to the ones that do. However Sean Penn wrote a letter and paid an assload to get it published in The Washington Post. I think it's a really good letter but close to no one is even taking note. It's kind of long and I didn't want to clog up the front page with it so I posted it here for everyone to check out. I'd like to hear what you all think about it...

i dont know

Sean who?

At 11/16/02 08:35 PM, Mini-Me666 wrote: Wade.. you're so american.. go eat a big mac and suck back an ice cold coke.. you know you can't beat the feeling.

I hate McDonalds and Coke. I prefer water and meat I cook myself so I know it's really meat.

At 11/16/02 11:57 PM, Dobio wrote:

At 11/16/02 11:35 PM, Taxman2A wrote:

You know, kissing ass doesn't get you experience. I may be Canadian, and I may be 17, but I still know enough about the world to know that fighting Iraq will accomplish nothing. If they get Sadam, then someone else will take over. The only way Iraq will stop being a threat is if Bush nukes Iraq until it becomes a crater.

Actually, you dont know anything about the world. The citizens of Iraq are good people ruled by a dictator under a totalitarian military regime. The United States is planning on reinstalling a new government altogether in Iraq, not just killing Sadam and leaving. Its not necessary to nuke the entire country to hell to get what we want done. It is not a country made up of terrorists, they just have one who happens to be in charge. Once that regime falls it will never be a threat again.

Personally, I think Iraq would fall apart completely without a dictator and would go into a depression after the war, this is assuming the States won. Iraq is one of those countries where dictators reign supreme because the people don't want to have to make decisions. The after effects of this war will be very interesting, especially if Nuclear weapons come into effect. We'll see though, we'll see.

Many of the Iraqi people are well educated and could do well for themselves if given the chance, but under Saddam they will never have that chance. I don't know why you keep brining up nukes. If anyone uses a nuke it would be Saddam, and if he did I don't think anyone would nuke him back, except maybe Isreal. If Saddam launches a nuke on Israel... That could be bad news, but other than that I don't think there is any chance of nukes being used. We want to liberate the people of Iraq, not incinerate them.

Iraq is one of those countries where dictators reign supreme because the people don't want to have to make decisions.

You honestly are so bigoted a person that you think that the people of Iraq need a dictator because they can't make decisions for themselves?! I don't have any way to refute this fascist comment, because it refutes itself. I would, however, like to thank you for revealing the true european/canadian/ultra-liberal philosophy which shows the way you people think... "Make Government BIGGER! Let other people make decisions for other people! I don't believe in freedom!"

heh heh dude you said "bush" LoL

Yeah, but you know what? Continuing to maintain support of the common American viewpoint that "We are the most powerful nation in the world, fuck eberybody else" is going to result in the U.S getting the living fuck bombed out of it, and millions if not billions of innocent lives being lost out of the developing American tyranny. True, it isn't that bad yet, but look what happened after Sept. 11. Although it was an extremely tragic event, almost all people in the nation took to finding the first group available to blame in order to justify the attack and maintain the secure belief that Uncle Sam will pull our sorry asses out of the fire because "we've got the bombs." Sorry to say, people, but if this keeps up, the U.S.A. will be the instigator of WW III, not Al-Qaeda, not Iraq, not Germany.

Yeah, but you know what? Continuing to maintain support of the common American viewpoint that "We are the most powerful nation in the world, fuck eberybody else" is going to result in the U.S getting the living fuck bombed out of it, and millions if not billions of innocent lives being lost out of the developing American tyranny. True, it isn't that bad yet, but look what happened after Sept. 11. Although it was an extremely tragic event, almost all people in the nation took to finding the first group available to blame in order to justify the attack and maintain the secure belief that Uncle Sam will pull our sorry asses out of the fire because "we've got the bombs." Sorry to say, people, but if this keeps up, the U.S.A. will be the instigator of WW III, not Al-Qaeda, not Iraq, and of course, not Germany.

For the Canadian posters, can I point out that your country and ours has the longest undefended border in the WORLD. The last invasion by either country goes back to the 1700's(French/Indian War). If we were the biggest assholes on the planet wouldn't we just absorb your country?

I am a student of history. Once again the United States IS NOT a perfect country. There has NEVER been a perfect country. As "super powers" go through out history we are the most benevolent. May I point out to two points of evidence.

Germany: A nation run by the most despicaple group in human history. After defeating it, with our ALLIES, we rebuilt the nation, punished those AND ONLY THOSE who committed or let attrocities against innocents(Jews, Russians, Poles, Czechs, and everyone else that got tossed in the ethnic cleansing game) How is Germany doing today as a sovereign nation? I would bet it is the strongest it has ever been as a society.

Japan: A nation that had the archaic thought that it's leader was a "god on earth." AT THE TIME, a nation that would fight to the last, that had never been conquered in known history. A nation that attacked the United States/Britain/China/Australia/etc..., committed attrocities to civilians and prisoners the like of their Nazi counterparts. This is a nation that told it's own people the allies were canibles. When Okinawa was invaded women were tossing themselves from cliffs with their children rather than be captured. They almost didn't surrender after being overwhelmed by two nuclear bombs. How are they doing as a nation? We are so oppressive that General Douglas MacArthur, allied supreme commander, is referred to as "kind father." They were horrified that he was fired by Truman during MacArthur's arrogant defiance of the president.

Once again we are not a perfect nation. Saddam is this generations Hitler. There is no two ways about it. Look at his track record with his neighbors. (Iran, Kuwait, Saudia Arabia, the Kurds, etc....) I believe with the help of the free world Iraq can be rebuilt and be as strong a sovereign nation as Japan and Germany and HOPEFULLY, a stabilizing force for a region that has been embroiled in hell for 50+ years.

The citizens of Iraq are good people ruled by a dictator under a totalitarian military regime. The United States is planning on reinstalling a new government altogether in Iraq, not just killing Sadam and leaving. Its not necessary to nuke the entire country to hell to get what we want done. It is not a country made up of terrorists, they just have one who happens to be in charge. Once that regime falls it will never be a threat again.

Didn't the US try this before? Vietnam springs to mind and we all know what a resounding success that was.

Many of which are Canadians and Europeans in the first place! Like THEIR opinion matters!...)

What a twat.

Ya ok........ Im Not Goona Waste My Time Reading All Of That Shit!

Wade, I love you! Your intelligence turns me on ;)

.......another drug seasoned madonna-fucker who is clueless, actually sean and bush are both idiots.......

At 11/17/02 08:26 AM, Madgoose wrote: For the Canadian posters, can I point out that your country and ours has the longest undefended border in the WORLD. The last invasion by either country goes back to the 1700's(French/Indian War). If we were the biggest assholes on the planet wouldn't we just absorb your country?

I am a student of history. Once again the United States IS NOT a perfect country. There has NEVER been a perfect country. As "super powers" go through out history we are the most benevolent. May I point out to two points of evidence.

Germany: A nation run by the most despicaple group in human history. After defeating it, with our ALLIES, we rebuilt the nation, punished those AND ONLY THOSE who committed or let attrocities against innocents(Jews, Russians, Poles, Czechs, and everyone else that got tossed in the ethnic cleansing game) How is Germany doing today as a sovereign nation? I would bet it is the strongest it has ever been as a society.

Japan: A nation that had the archaic thought that it's leader was a "god on earth." AT THE TIME, a nation that would fight to the last, that had never been conquered in known history. A nation that attacked the United States/Britain/China/Australia/etc..., committed attrocities to civilians and prisoners the like of their Nazi counterparts. This is a nation that told it's own people the allies were canibles. When Okinawa was invaded women were tossing themselves from cliffs with their children rather than be captured. They almost didn't surrender after being overwhelmed by two nuclear bombs. How are they doing as a nation? We are so oppressive that General Douglas MacArthur, allied supreme commander, is referred to as "kind father." They were horrified that he was fired by Truman during MacArthur's arrogant defiance of the president.

Once again we are not a perfect nation. Saddam is this generations Hitler. There is no two ways about it. Look at his track record with his neighbors. (Iran, Kuwait, Saudia Arabia, the Kurds, etc....) I believe with the help of the free world Iraq can be rebuilt and be as strong a sovereign nation as Japan and Germany and HOPEFULLY, a stabilizing force for a region that has been embroiled in hell for 50+ years.

- If you were a student of history, you'd know that the last border invasion was actually in 1812, when the U.S. Army tried (and failed) to take the Canadian colonies by force.
- As for Germany, it has regained much strength as an independent society, but a lot of people would also say that Germany was at its best during the pre WWII era, when Hitler was slowly generating large amounts of support from free-willed citizens. True, his approval rating in 1932 was only about 33%, but that rose by incredible amounts in just 5 years until he had almost 90% support in a vote BEFORE he imposed terror on his country.
- I don't point out these mistakes to be an asshole, but rather to use these examples to have you look at the current situation in a different light.
- There is no question in my mind that Saddam is an evil man. Using his people as human shields and so forth does not make a leader. But the arrogance of George Dubya is absolutely baffling. He refuses to accept the conditional surrender and unconditional weapons inspections offered by Saddam to the UN, opting to call it a 'stalling tactic.' While Hussein is and may very well be a maniacal villain in the futire, it seems to me that the man about to cross the line and become this generation's Hitler is none other than Bush himself. I mean, this guy is willing to nuke anybody that shows the slightest possibility of a possibility that they will not support the United States' rulings of other nations. If this continues, he could jeopardize the entire world as we know it.
- I agree with Mr. Penn in that Bush should take a page out of JFK's book and offer an olive branch of peace rather than threaten with an iron-clad fist.

At 11/16/02 04:52 AM, Daxson wrote: Frankly, I dun give a damn...Plus, i didnt read that stupid article cuz IT WUZ TOO LONG!!!
Why couldnt you just have made a summary for those who have better things to do than waste time reading that article???

I don't have a problem with DBZ but how is that more inportant then bombing ppl?