1.2 Trillion Dollars, US

[thenark]

1. Does anyone find it ironic that so far, the greatest number of US casualties has been caused by one of the US's own soldiers in a mishap with a grenade thrown into a tent housing officers of the 101st airborne?

2. The war has been going strong for 2 days now, but these alleged weapons of mass destruction have yet to rear their ugly heads. And please, dont say he launched scuds, because those are all products of world war II research and development, and have not hurt anyone.

3. Has anyone else seemed to notice that what were peaceful demonstrations only turned violent after the police got over zealous in their LAPD-rodney king idea of crowd control?

4. 1.2 trillion dollars, If a car cost 50000 dollars US, lets say a BMW for instance, you could buy 24 Million of them, or in other terms, you could buy about 6 billion buckets of fried chicken. (popeyes or kfc or whatever you buy chicken from in the states)

5. Attrition seems to be taking a bigger toll on american forces than the Iraqi's, helicopter crashes, and disgruntled soldiers throwing grenades at their own team. Yet the news still claims they died defending america. Defending it from what? I dont think any country in the middle east has the resources or manpower to even contemplate invading the US.

6. There are dozens of countries that commit attrocities on their prople, many of these countries also have, and it is proven that they have, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction, to quote your beloved president, yet america only sees fit to go after Iraq. I could name 10 countries that are commiting far worse attrocities right now than saddam ever has, yet you only focus on Iraq, who has no weapons of mass destruction at all.

1.2 trillion dollars on a war that is not even going to accomplish anything. I'm just glad that I'm not an american tax payer

suckers

[Jimsween]

At 3/22/03 11:43 PM, thenark wrote: 1. Does anyone find it ironic that so far, the greatest number of US casualties has been caused by one of the US's own soldiers in a mishap with a grenade thrown into a tent housing officers of the 101st airborne?

Nobody died from that yet

2. The war has been going strong for 2 days now, but these alleged weapons of mass destruction have yet to rear their ugly heads. And please, dont say he launched scuds, because those are all products of world war II research and development, and have not hurt anyone.

If he shoots the weapons than he has to face all the countries because they have no reason to get inot the war

3. Has anyone else seemed to notice that what were peaceful demonstrations only turned violent after the police got over zealous in their LAPD-rodney king idea of crowd control?

The police were not the provokers, tear gas can be avoided by running away from it you dont have to attack the police officers

4. 1.2 trillion dollars, If a car cost 50000 dollars US, lets say a BMW for instance, you could buy 24 Million of them, or in other terms, you could buy about 6 billion buckets of fried chicken. (popeyes or kfc or whatever you buy chicken from in the states)

the war will cost 80 billion if it lasts a month and if your using the messed up brithsh system your still wrong

5. Attrition seems to be taking a bigger toll on american forces than the Iraqi's, helicopter crashes, and disgruntled soldiers throwing grenades at their own team. Yet the news still claims they died defending america. Defending it from what? I dont think any country in the middle east has the resources or manpower to even contemplate invading the US.

Yeah they would never do anything to hurt us, Cough911cough

6. There are dozens of countries that commit attrocities on their prople, many of these countries also have, and it is proven that they have, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction, to quote your beloved president, yet america only sees fit to go after Iraq. I could name 10 countries that are commiting far worse attrocities right now than saddam ever has, yet you only focus on Iraq, who has no weapons of mass destruction at all.

Saddam killed 2 million of his own people, can you find anyone who did that much?

1.2 trillion dollars on a war that is not even going to accomplish anything. I'm just glad that I'm not an american tax payer

suckers

Youre not an american taxpayer but if americas economy goes down, the whole worlds pays for it

Ha ha, sucker

[Disguy-youknow]

The fact that Saddam terrorizes his people is not the reason we are at war. That is just icing on the cake Bush to convince the uninformed masses. The two main reasons we are at war are Saddam's obmissions in the inspections report and to protect our Mideast allies. We have proof Saddam is hiding something, btu we don't have proof that what he is hiding is weapons of mass destuction. IF he had them and had hid them well, it would take a hell onger than two days for them to be uncovered.

[NJDeadzone]

At 3/22/03 11:43 PM, thenark wrote:: 1. Does anyone find it ironic that so far, the greatest number of US casualties has been caused by one of the US's own soldiers in a mishap with a grenade thrown into a tent housing officers of the 101st airborne?

-actually i heard from CNN that someone threw a grenade in there, and someone started firing on the soldiers as they escaped the tents.
-there have still been more British casualties than Americans

2. The war has been going strong for 2 days now, but these alleged weapons of mass destruction have yet to rear their ugly heads. And please, dont say he launched scuds, because those are all products of world war II research and development, and have not hurt anyone.

-don't jynx...you'll get the fallout too

3. Has anyone else seemed to notice that what were peaceful demonstrations only turned violent after the police got over zealous in their LAPD-rodney king idea of crowd control?

-see my post about demonstrations and how the are irrelevant

4. 1.2 trillion dollars, If a car cost 50000 dollars US, lets say a BMW for instance, you could buy 24 Million of them, or in other terms, you could buy about 6 billion buckets of fried chicken. (popeyes or kfc or whatever you buy chicken from in the states)

-and it would buy Canada, you'd want that wouldn't you

5. Attrition seems to be taking a bigger toll on american forces than the Iraqi's, helicopter crashes, and disgruntled soldiers throwing grenades at their own team. Yet the news still claims they died defending america. Defending it from what? I dont think any country in the middle east has the resources or manpower to even contemplate invading the US.

-attrition doesn't take place after 4 days...and due to the overwhelming news coverage, if a general farted, it would get a 30 minute report.
-We're not fighting to prevent invasion. We're fighting a government and its backward, one religion, one leader, one economy mentality, we're giving Iraq a quick lesson in Westernization

6. There are dozens of countries that commit attrocities on their prople, many of these countries also have, and it is proven that they have, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction, to quote your beloved president, yet america only sees fit to go after Iraq. I could name 10 countries that are commiting far worse attrocities right now than saddam ever has, yet you only focus on Iraq, who has no weapons of mass destruction at all.

-if you speak of NK, the US will use Iraq's deserts as a military base, since turkey didn't wanna share its military zones. Iraq will be used as the US's middle east post, for all future events occuring there, and in Asia
-and we're not the world's babysitter, get that straight!

1.2 trillion dollars on a war that is not even going to accomplish anything. I'm just glad that I'm not an american tax payer

-me too because your vote would counter mine and we can't have that.

you're just ignorant,young, and without the facts. i'm glad i'm still tolerant of the Canadian opinion after listening to what you said.

[thenark]

the war will cost 80 billion if it lasts a month and if your using the messed up brithsh system your still wrong

No, I dont mean since the war started, I meant all of the money he has also spent moving troops into the gulf, housing them and feeding them. If you dont believe me about 1.2 trillion, look it up you ignorant prick.

Yeah they would never do anything to hurt us, Cough911cough

Fuckface, if you can find any concrete evidence that Iraq and Bin Laden are at all connected, and I mean real evidence, not american paranoia, I will rescind my above statement

Saddam killed 2 million of his own people, can you find anyone who did that much?

Again, i question where you get your information. Augusto Pinochet, Ede Amien (who is in exile in libya), and Milosevich, amongst others have done things to make saddam look like an amateur (not to mention Iraq is the most forward thinking arab state in the world) and incidentally, the turks, your glorious allies want to butcher the kurds as badly as the Iraqi's do. Read a book

[NJDeadzone]

At 3/23/03 12:07 AM, thenark wrote:

"you ignorant prick" and "Fuckface" are great ways of defending your credibility and character...

if you can find any concrete evidence that Iraq and Bin Laden are at all connected, and I mean real evidence, not american paranoia, I will rescind my above statement

connected in religion-> Game Over

Iraq is the most forward thinking arab state in the world)

yup that's why they send their soldiers without shoes...

and incidentally, the turks, your glorious allies want to butcher the kurds as badly as the Iraqi's do.

yeah well this isn't a get the kurds in power operation, this is a make sure Iraq is not a threat ever again operation

Read a book

what good is reading when you can't apply any of it...

[thenark]

Ok, so a connected religion? So let me get this straight. By your reasoning, all catholics are a bunch of insane murderers of protestants like the IRA is just because they have the same religion? Your prejudice shows that you are an educated individual.

[Jimsween]

At 3/23/03 12:07 AM, thenark wrote:

the war will cost 80 billion if it lasts a month and if your using the messed up brithsh system your still wrong

No, I dont mean since the war started, I meant all of the money he has also spent moving troops into the gulf, housing them and feeding them. If you dont believe me about 1.2 trillion, look it up you ignorant prick.

Yeah thats already in that, it was on CNN, have you ever even watched the news or do you just take your own word for it.

Yeah they would never do anything to hurt us, Cough911cough

Fuckface, if you can find any concrete evidence that Iraq and Bin Laden are at all connected, and I mean real evidence, not american paranoia, I will rescind my above statement

I never said Saddam would i was replying to what you said; I dont think any country in the middle east has the resources or manpower to even contemplate invading the US.

Saddam killed 2 million of his own people, can you find anyone who did that much?

Again, i question where you get your information. Augusto Pinochet, Ede Amien (who is in exile in libya), and Milosevich, amongst others have done things to make saddam look like an amateur

And it just so happens that niether of them are presidents anymore so why would we invade them now?

:(not to mention Iraq is the most forward thinking arab state in the world)

Your a moron...

and incidentally, the turks, your glorious allies want to butcher the kurds as badly as the Iraqi's do. Read a book
the key word it WANT to, I WANT to smash your testicle in with a baseball bat.

[NJDeadzone]

At 3/23/03 12:19 AM, thenark wrote: Ok, so a connected religion? So let me get this straight. By your reasoning, all catholics are a bunch of insane murderers of protestants like the IRA is just because they have the same religion? Your prejudice shows that you are an educated individual.

you asked if there was any connection...i gave you one. Don't be a sore loser. I never said Islam supported terrorism, you did by your ignorant accusation. And if you need me to cite the Koran to prove your point, why don't you since you're such a good reader.

[mysecondstar]

OUCH!

[thenark]

I said a solid connection, shared religion is not solid, it is american paranoia, your on the top of the pile, and afraid of being knocked off, so you kill anything that looks as if it might cause you a problem.

And for gods sake, is there no one else anti-war on here? or have you all gotten sick of the stubborn, unwilling to see it any way but our's attitude?

[Jimsween]

yeah because the Anti war people are always willing to listen to others opinions...

[thenark]

I think saddam is an evil man, and I believe that he needs to be removed from power, but has anyone here heard of the french revolution? or the one in russia for that matter? no outside power helped them, and they managed to get the dictators out of power. But I suppose no one here has heard of either of those. So I must be wrong.

And incidentally, I'm not anti-war, I'm pro attrition. I think its better to let things happen on their own without one nation becoming the international policeman. I mean, look at the metternich system after napoleon's rule. But hey, I bet none of you have heard of that either. And after all, the US has never been fond of letting things play themselves out. I mean look at the stink you made about the womens sufferage movement and the emancipation proclamation, or blacks getting the vote. The kkk also liked to use violence to stop those who threatened the status quo.

[Jimsween]

The russian revolution turned put just great... besides that whole communism thing which killed more than all wars put together.

[karasz]

At 3/22/03 11:59 PM, jimsween wrote:

6. There are dozens of countries that commit attrocities on their prople, many of these countries also have, and it is proven that they have, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction, to quote your beloved president, yet america only sees fit to go after Iraq. I could name 10 countries that are commiting far worse attrocities right now than saddam ever has, yet you only focus on Iraq, who has no weapons of mass destruction at all.

Saddam killed 2 million of his own people, can you find anyone who did that much?

NO this is fucking irrelevant... the fucking taliban killed women if they were outside... IS THAT WHY WE INVADED AFGHANISTAN? NO, its cuz they had Osama... the US doesnt give a damn if a govt kills its own people... i.e. Turkey kills the Kurds,same people Saddam kills,but its with bullets, so i guess thats ok since they arent using chemical weapons that we gave them (i know we havent given turkey chem weapons...) if dead people mattered we would do more in the israeli-palestinian problem... along with China and its killing of people and any other fucking place that kills people

at the end of the day the US doesnt give a damn about the dead people... just the people doing the killing and whether or not those people are pro-US or not...

[thenark]

2 Things, firstly, stalin is second to only hitler in his evil and cruelty, and secondly, your anti communism paranoia out of this, the only democratic governments that work, that are sprung from autocracies, revolted, and were not helped by outside forces. As I seem to remember it, the United States in fact revolted against an autocrat once. But my american history is a bit rusty, so I'm not sure if there was such a thing as the war of independence.

[NJDeadzone]

At 3/23/03 12:41 AM, thenark wrote: I think saddam is an evil man, and I believe that he needs to be removed from power, but has anyone here heard of the french revolution? or the one in russia for that matter? no outside power helped them, and they managed to get the dictators out of power. But I suppose no one here has heard of either of those. So I must be wrong.

you are just too out of context. French had the politiques, and the enlightenment thinkers during that time. In Russia, intellengentsia played a substantial impact in their revolution. What's wrong with this picture in Iraq? Number one, they never evolved from the agricultural revolution. They're partying like it's 1599. Number two, as a result of number one there is no intellegent and aspiring middle class to create such a revolution. The Kurds would be successful if they weren't a bunch of warlords. You expect a nation that might as well be in africa to get to a level from french or russian revolution?

I mean, look at the metternich system after napoleon's rule. But hey, I bet none of you have heard of that either. And after all, the US has never been fond of letting things play themselves out.

The metternich system is the worst possible system for the globe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We are in the information revolution. The world is global and must allow for the sovereignty of the peoples, not dictators or monarchs. The reason it failed 3 centuries ago, espcially in Austria, the country in which it was developed, was because of the monumental diversity in the nation. Now you compare Austria to the world, you couldn't make a more accurate description that disproves your theory.

[Jimsween]

At 3/23/03 12:51 AM, thenark wrote: But my american history is a bit rusty, so I'm not sure if there was such a thing as the war of independence.

There was, and we had help from spain and france.

[TheShrike]

At 3/23/03 12:26 AM, thenark wrote: And for gods sake, is there no one else anti-war on here? or have you all gotten sick of the stubborn, unwilling to see it any way but our's attitude?

I am anti-war....

But I'd rather no-one drew an association between you and I.

We're anti-war for different reasons. And I try to argue my point rather than jumping straight to 'fuckface' and 'ignorant prick'

I've said it a billion times... pre-emptive war... ugh.

That's my main reason for being anti-war. I don't agree with Bush, but I try and make my own informed descisions.

I'll never believe war is a good thing. But I will admit that sometimes it is needed.

I think this war is happening under the wrong circumstances. I think the try for a diplomatic/military solution involving the UN was half-hearted. Now it's OUR war. No matter the good intentions, this war and it's consequences will be ours.

BTW... they used Al fatah missiles. The kind banned by the UN. Oh... It's being speculated that Iraqi troops outside baghdad have been issued artillery with bio/chem. So I become more pro-war with every move Iraqi leadership makes.

[karasz]

im anti-war, anti-saddam, and anti-bitching about either side... i am personally sick and tired of the talking about: war, reasons for it, bush sexuality, saddam and his towel-headed friends; its all a bunch of useless shit, i cant think of reading one post that honestly meant it when they said 'well u changed my opinion i agree with u'

this whole forum is basically set up in 2 groups, morons that bitch and morons that rationally,calmly bitch about the topic... and neither side gains any ground, cuz at the end of the day what happens... same people talking walk away from the post with the same thoughts and ideas they had when they left...

basically im waiting for the war to be over, i would like to see what the forum is like when there is no war to talk about...

[Jimsween]

I thought it was Al Samoud missles

[TheShrike]

At 3/23/03 12:41 AM, thenark wrote: I mean look at the stink you made about the womens sufferage movement and the emancipation proclamation, or blacks getting the vote. The kkk also liked to use violence to stop those who threatened the status quo.

And Canada has always been this Utopian country?

The point is that we know our governent isn't working properly, and we've been working on the problem for 200+ years. It would be different had there been no sufferage or emancipation.

[TheShrike]

I read it in the Washington Post... It may have been Samoud... I don't have the paper here beside me.

[thenark]

Fuck it, theres more of you than me, so I'll start posting again when this whole war bit is over.

[TheShrike]

At 3/23/03 12:58 AM, karasz wrote: basically im waiting for the war to be over, i would like to see what the forum is like when there is no war to talk about...

White America was fun. But then again, that was mostly everyone agreeing then bashing the idiots who came in and said something reaaally stupid.

Sadly, though... even after this war, people will still be talking about it. But I agree with your sickness of discussing it ad nauseam.

[TheEvilOne]

At 3/22/03 11:43 PM, thenark wrote: 1. Does anyone find it ironic that so far, the greatest number of US casualties has been caused by one of the US's own soldiers in a mishap with a grenade thrown into a tent housing officers of the 101st airborne?

Let me say this... accidents happen. And when not only are more people being killed in accidents than are being killed by the enemy, but it makes headlines whenever we have any casualties whatsoever, I'd say we're doing a pretty good job.

2. The war has been going strong for 2 days now, but these alleged weapons of mass destruction have yet to rear their ugly heads. And please, dont say he launched scuds, because those are all products of world war II research and development, and have not hurt anyone.

First of all, I don't give a crap what you think about the Scuds. The bottom line is that they were forbidden under the UN resolutions. Just wait till the troops roll into Baghdad... that's when we'll probably start uncovering vast amounts of the forbidden weapons.

3. Has anyone else seemed to notice that what were peaceful demonstrations only turned violent after the police got over zealous in their LAPD-rodney king idea of crowd control?

They may not have been particularly violent at first, but they sure are disruptive, blocking roads and such. Suppose that, say, terrorists struck somewhere (just an example, other disasters could happen too). Suppose that emergency vehicles that needed to be at the scene couldn't get through because these protesters were blocking the road. That would be a problem, wouldn't it? They have the right to protest, but when they start disrupting things, they've crossed the line, and police should use whatever means necessary to disperse them.

5. Attrition seems to be taking a bigger toll on american forces than the Iraqi's, helicopter crashes, and disgruntled soldiers throwing grenades at their own team. Yet the news still claims they died defending america. Defending it from what? I dont think any country in the middle east has the resources or manpower to even contemplate invading the US.

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that someone like, oh, say, Saddam Hussein, wouldn't be crazy enough to try. A few weapons sold to terrorists and brought into the states could really cause a lot of problems.

6. There are dozens of countries that commit attrocities on their prople, many of these countries also have, and it is proven that they have, nuclear weapons, and other weapons of mass destruction, to quote your beloved president, yet america only sees fit to go after Iraq. I could name 10 countries that are commiting far worse attrocities right now than saddam ever has, yet you only focus on Iraq, who has no weapons of mass destruction at all.

First of all, quit denying that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. There were weapons that the inspectors found and ordered destroyed, and there is evidence that Saddam has more weapons. You sound like you're saying you'd trust Saddam before you'd trust the US. As for these other countries... all in due time. After we finish up in Iraq, we'll probably turn our attention to North Korea.

1.2 trillion dollars on a war that is not even going to accomplish anything. I'm just glad that I'm not an american tax payer

I haven't heard anything about it costing THAT much. What is your source? Waging war is expensive, but to disarm Saddam (who I think is already dead) and free the Iraqi people, I think it is well worth the cost. Oh, by the way, Bush is giving us another round of tax cuts.

[NJDeadzone]

TheEvilOne, you're all right :-)

[TheShrike]

Estimated cost of this war is actually around 80 billion dollars. And that includes post-war rebuilding.

[NJDeadzone]

isn't it about a million dollars per 30 minutes spent in Iraq

[bumcheekcity]

At 3/23/03 03:04 PM, TheShrike wrote: Estimated cost of this war is actually around 80 billion dollars. And that includes post-war rebuilding.

80 BILLION DOLLARS??? thats enough to make sure half the poor countries in Africa have water for years