• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

Politics in 2004

who are you voting for?

  • liberal/the nationals

    Votes: 18 20.0%

  • labor

    Votes: 20 22.2%

  • the greens

    Votes: 49 54.4%

  • the democrats

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • another minor party

    Votes: 2 2.2%

  • i don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • i don't care

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • i don't vote (non-australian citizen)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    90
how many died wen sadam was in charge they should feel privelegd to have the americans acosting them. no aussies died in the embassy bombing n if dey think dere beatin australia by killin there own then let em go. I also think he meant he's too lazy to fix the environment not to make money.
 
If this thread's just going to turn into a shouting match about who's right and who's wrong, then it might as well be closed. That'd be a shame though, cos up to the point where the results were known this thread has contained some of the most intelligent comments i've seen here (for both sides of the argument). Lets not call each other names and make assumptions.

Not that I really have any say over this, but I reckon there should be a ban from this point onwards on the following things:
  • People saying how fucked up the decision is, without giving (valid) reasons why they think that way
  • Same for people saying how great it's going to be without backing thier claim up with reasons
  • People attacking other people based purely on their political leanings and not on how they argue them
If nobody does any of those things, hopefully this thread will get back to the quality discussion it was a couple of days ago.
 
Why is it that every time I win an argument on this site you bag out my spelling. I already told you I went to a shit school give me a break.
 
It seems like everyones Alias are out in force.

Fuck the liberals yo... im so embarrassed to be an australian.. WAAAAAAAAA
 
There are many people that support the Iraq war...and many oppose it, based on human rights volation, bullying tactics etc. Have to ask yourself do you really know the full story to comment? you are entitled to hate for the war but really...some times even the goodside has to play dirty.
Heck hows the advantage gonna be played if we everything is by the book...The US saw and opportunity to get rid off Saddamn and they took it, one less bad guy to worry about, has Saddamn tortured, raped, murdered people? did he invade Kuwait? Is his henchmen guilty of acts of genocide and other torturous acts...? and here we are arguing abt Weapons off Mass Destruction...and human rights. What the USA did was not pretty but it was right.......and it takes a good leader in Howard and Blair too recognise this....Its a statement that says, the world in which we live is protected by countries that care, care for freedom of others...and dictators that do wrong wont be tolerated.

the only people that can actually comment on how the war has impacted Iraq are the people that this war has effected, the Iraqi people. Did they get liberated ? thats the question......if they did I dont care if there was evidence for Mass weapons of Destruction or not...Saddam had too go.

I congratulate Howard for "kissing the presidents ass" doesnt make him anything but a smart leader and someone that has ideals of a civilized world everywhere...and not just the immediate vicinity in which we live...wats Howards motives anyway for kissing bushs ass if he didnt really believe in the cause ? He doesnt need too think abt that.
 
Tristan Snort said:
It seems like everyones Alias are out in force.

Fuck the liberals yo... im so embarrassed to be an australian.. WAAAAAAAAA
Click to expand...

Backo, there's really no need to be any more of an ass.

I agree with Pleo. This thread has degenerated into a pointless slanging match.

Labor supporters really shouldn't be so melodramatic, and Liberal suporters need to show some sporting good grace.
 
Raving Loony said:
Heads up. No-one was a fan of Saddam's regime.

How can you possibly say we are helping Iraqi's. When you compare the population of Iraq to the USA, Iraqi's are experiencing an equivilent 9/11 twice every month.



Umm, what about the blast at the Australian Embassy in Indonesia. That is Australian soil and that is our first taste of terrorism since 9/11.
Click to expand...


whilst not being a fan of Saddam's regime, they did get rid of him rather illegaly. if the Iraqi people wanted to revolutionise their country, they should of done it themselves. the Coalition should of stayed well and truly out of it.

and as to the Indonesia embassy bombing, no Australians were killed - only Indonesians. But our government kicked up this whole big "australia" thing about it....
 
Human rights violation is a pretty big thing to write off in the name of doing what's right.

The question pro war people should be asking themselves is how they would feel if someone did that to us. If someone decided we needed liberating, and innocent Australian children, women and men were killed and seriously injured in the name of war. If Australian children had their limbs blown off and were lying bleeding in hospitals with fairly simple medical facilities. If Australians were facing an uncertain future, mentally and physically traumatised by war and having whole families wiped out. Not only is that hard to comprehend for most people, given the opportunities we have in this country, I also get the feeling its considered not quite as bad when non-western people die in the name of war. But maybe I'm being cynical.

I don't see anyone as being liberated. Not one bit. In as much as pre war, people were tortured and killed, I don't see that anything has changed. That's the problem.
 
WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE DRUGS!!!

Sadly, harm reduction has always been irrelevant to most people in this forum. A vote for the Greens was a vote for the bluelight nation.

Election time should be called the silly season. Anybody who believed anything said by the 2 major parties after the Budget was announced (and responded to), will be sorely dissapointed.

as for me, ill be moving to holland or spain as soon as financially feasible .. where myself and other bluelighters that actually care about harm reduction will enjoy our excellent drug laws and "liberal" lifestyle.
 
i disagree, res[ecfiully, diego. whilst i agree that drugs is an issue that hasn't been often raised here, ithink it's more bwxuae bpeoiple tka it as a "given". look at the poll - at the moment it stands with greens at 57.9 petrcent. surely that is indicitave of the bluelight populartions' support fo the g\reens' drug policies?

anyway, i will add something meainful later ;)
 
the greens have too many silly policies though, sure they have good ones, but they also have some really bloody silly ones.


legalise heroin and ecstacy and sell it from licensed vendors?

(iu beleive that aws one of their things this time )(
 
Charlie Brown said:
wats Howards motives anyway for kissing bushs ass if he didnt really believe in the cause ? He doesnt need too think abt that.
Click to expand...

hate to see this thread turn into an iraq debate but...

in response to your question, free trade agreement comes to mind.

my question to you is why not go after north korea instead? i mean here is a regime boasting about their weapons capability and their hatred of the usa is well known and constantly expressed.
 
Originally posted by keystroke
the greens have too many silly policies though, sure they have good ones, but they also have some really bloody silly ones.


legalise heroin and ecstacy and sell it from licensed vendors?

(iu beleive that aws one of their things this time )(
Click to expand...

^^^
what's wrong with that?

i'd rather junkies be able to get their drug at an affordable price in an environment where they have exposure to medical staff who can offer support and/or treatment than have them break into my house or rob me as i walk down the street so they can get a fix.

if i was to take ecstasy it would be nice to be able to know exactly what was in the pill and how much of it.

peace keystroke
 
nothing wrong with the policy but I'm saying things like that won't attract votes from many families or older voters....

younger people perhaps, but I'd say the majority of older people will never vote for policies as strong as that...
 
but how important is that? the election is now over, so what kind of debate ware weh aving? an ideologicla one, opr a vote- cathcing one? because yes, like you say ks, a dtrug policy like that won't get votes. but per hjspa if they work on the iedolgies for long enough it will start to get voests/ i donm't know; m,y brain doesn't work anyewmo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top