Originally posted by Snrub:
i read your post.
im assuming by 'it' you mean people harping on about how immoral the war on iraq is (otherwise youd be off topic)
in which case i still maintain you can use petroleum products but be against going to war with iraq. im sure iraq would rather avoid war and go about their business selling oil to the west at inflated prices. we dont have to go to war to maintain our oil supples. ergo... it is not hypocritical to oppose war but use petroleum.
opposing war but whinging about petrol prices is a different story. :D
but somehow i get the feeling thats not what you meant.
You are right. Sorta. The only flaw with that line of reasoning is that you are assuming only one of many possible outcomes will occur. But yes, I do agree with you that is most likely the case.
Also, I would think alot of these people who whinge about going to war would be the very people who will whinge about petrol prices too. Again, just my opinion.
My problem with all this is that while the ends may not necessarily justify the means, it seems people are crying bloody murder over the ends, not just the means.
KaNaBus >
What is so bad about Australia being filled with Asians? You make it sound like European blood is somehow superior or was even here first.
-
-
AADD Moderators: andyturbo
Should we go to war with Iraq?
- Thread starter jakoz
- Start date
SupaDiscoBreaka
Bluelighter
I can't believe the goverment isn't letting the populations vote on whether they want to go to war. It disgusts me.
----
NUH!
----
NUH!
"id rather be orderd around by the usa then some fucked up asian or middle eastern country."
wow! to see such comments made by an educated person (i'm assuming?), in a civilised sociaty is quite painful.
No country should be orderd around by another country. No country should think they can order around the rest of the world as they please. No country should be so ignorant as to say 'you are either with us or against us'.
We need to learn to work together. Sadam is an evil man? fine, get rid of him. But starting up a war should not be our first choice, since it's only caused more problems in the past.
wow! to see such comments made by an educated person (i'm assuming?), in a civilised sociaty is quite painful.
No country should be orderd around by another country. No country should think they can order around the rest of the world as they please. No country should be so ignorant as to say 'you are either with us or against us'.
We need to learn to work together. Sadam is an evil man? fine, get rid of him. But starting up a war should not be our first choice, since it's only caused more problems in the past.
MíkeySåmmy
Bluelighter
Tony Parkinson made a good comment in The Age today, in an article named Invitation to war... by default (18th Feb). I recommend it as a simple opinion that gets back to basics of the issue at a time when things seem to be becoming more desperate.
essentially we need to remember what the central issue is here. hussein is a terrible and corrupt man who for a long time has been playing games and has been as uncooperative as he can in regards to the chemical weapons and getting rid of them. in 1991 saddam was told to give up his chemical weapons and he has only lied and stuffed around in the 11 years or so since then.
its very simplistic to speculate as to the real motives behind the rambo style push of the american administration et al. sure there are issues involved such as oil and the world trade center incident and crazy american world domination and choose-your-own-conspiracy-theory. but we as the public have to accept that we will only ever know little about what is really going on behind the closed doors of government and intelligence offices around the world and we may not know what is really at stake.
obviously we dont want a war. i dont think anyone really wants a war. it would be sad to know that innocent people are being blown apart by an unstoppable imposing force, especially a force that includes us as aussies. so to see public support for peace is good on one hand but on the other there seems to be little suggestion as to what we should do instead. because we certainly cant just do nothing. i would hope that peace-lovers the world over and especially in places such as australia do not feel that this whole thing is not relevant to them because its all on the other side of the world and we arent in any real danger and so we should just stay out of it. if you feel that way then shame on you.
public opinion is very easily swayed. people are easily influenced. so voting on the issue isnt really going to mean the right decision is made.
for those that oppose intervention by means of force, whats your better idea? do we wait until saddam unleashes chemical weapons on his own people, on his arab neighbours, or on israel, and then say 'oh ok now that thousands have died, now we should stop the bastard'? i dont think there would be much of a peace rally once it became completely clear that saddam is now causing massive casualties. and if he wasnt planning on using those weapons i am sure he would not have played so many games and avoided giving them up for this long.
essentially we need to remember what the central issue is here. hussein is a terrible and corrupt man who for a long time has been playing games and has been as uncooperative as he can in regards to the chemical weapons and getting rid of them. in 1991 saddam was told to give up his chemical weapons and he has only lied and stuffed around in the 11 years or so since then.
its very simplistic to speculate as to the real motives behind the rambo style push of the american administration et al. sure there are issues involved such as oil and the world trade center incident and crazy american world domination and choose-your-own-conspiracy-theory. but we as the public have to accept that we will only ever know little about what is really going on behind the closed doors of government and intelligence offices around the world and we may not know what is really at stake.
obviously we dont want a war. i dont think anyone really wants a war. it would be sad to know that innocent people are being blown apart by an unstoppable imposing force, especially a force that includes us as aussies. so to see public support for peace is good on one hand but on the other there seems to be little suggestion as to what we should do instead. because we certainly cant just do nothing. i would hope that peace-lovers the world over and especially in places such as australia do not feel that this whole thing is not relevant to them because its all on the other side of the world and we arent in any real danger and so we should just stay out of it. if you feel that way then shame on you.
public opinion is very easily swayed. people are easily influenced. so voting on the issue isnt really going to mean the right decision is made.
for those that oppose intervention by means of force, whats your better idea? do we wait until saddam unleashes chemical weapons on his own people, on his arab neighbours, or on israel, and then say 'oh ok now that thousands have died, now we should stop the bastard'? i dont think there would be much of a peace rally once it became completely clear that saddam is now causing massive casualties. and if he wasnt planning on using those weapons i am sure he would not have played so many games and avoided giving them up for this long.
The_Fuel
Bluelighter
The_Fuel
Bluelighter
Originally posted by sydkiwi:
Alot of people who would of loved to of marched like myself had other commitments. If i wasnt there it doesnt mean to say i support the war either..
You missed my point, my point was regarding people trying to justify a no war arguement by saying the majority of australians dont want it (sighting the protests as proof). Of course i realise that a sum of people may not have come because of this or that, but i was more stating that people MAY ALSO not have come due to the fact that they are happy with the governments actions so far.
Originally posted by sydkiwi:
I dont support the war. why? dont get me wrong suddam is a evil man. But then the USA has a lot to be accounted for themselves.
Agreed, i would think that everyone here knows that War is not a good thing, and that America has done fucked up shit in the past (as per prev post)
Originally posted by sydkiwi:
And I believe we are making our country a target by blindly following the us to war. I mean what do we have to gain from this? better trade deals? cheaper oil prices? .
Yes we are making ourselves a target i guess... but we have allies to keep, and regretably the US is a good ally....also i rather our country have a stance rathar than one like the French who have proven to be the biggest bunch of cowards in the world, even though their ass needed saving in WW2
unfortunatly i didn't really want to express my point of view on the topic becuase i feel it is pointless...but have been dragged into itbah fuck it
CHiLD-0F-THE-BEAT
Bluelighter
*sunflower*
Bluelighter
I think you mean fervently.
I don’t feel it’s a valid reason to go to war simply because people can't think of anything else to do. A war is not just about a group of soldiers shooting and killing each other, it never has been - children are burned, lose limbs and people exposed to dangerous chemicals often get cancer and other medical conditions further down the track, sometimes years after. Not to mention the psychological scars that occur as a result that are far reaching, often moving from generation to generation. It’s easy to brush aside the not-so-glamorous aspects of war when we're all sitting on our comfy couches at home watching the news. Imagine if it was your little brother or sister? Not so easy when we live in this great country of ours.
I just don't think the U.S. government has any credibility accusing people of being liars and being evil when they themselves in the past (and present) have lied, used propaganda and committed many atrocities in the name of war.
I am proud to say I marched for peace with 100,000 people in Brisbane last w/e. Nothing, and I mean nothing will ever convince me that war is an option.
I don’t feel it’s a valid reason to go to war simply because people can't think of anything else to do. A war is not just about a group of soldiers shooting and killing each other, it never has been - children are burned, lose limbs and people exposed to dangerous chemicals often get cancer and other medical conditions further down the track, sometimes years after. Not to mention the psychological scars that occur as a result that are far reaching, often moving from generation to generation. It’s easy to brush aside the not-so-glamorous aspects of war when we're all sitting on our comfy couches at home watching the news. Imagine if it was your little brother or sister? Not so easy when we live in this great country of ours.
I just don't think the U.S. government has any credibility accusing people of being liars and being evil when they themselves in the past (and present) have lied, used propaganda and committed many atrocities in the name of war.
I am proud to say I marched for peace with 100,000 people in Brisbane last w/e. Nothing, and I mean nothing will ever convince me that war is an option.
shakra
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 271
War is not a solution for ANYTHING.
All it does is turn humanity against each other.
And it is all a huge ploy by world governments to make all us little fish that tad bit easier to control.. fear is the one thing that creates that energy that assists in goverments having mind control over masses of people..
Try banning television in your home.. and see how long you can go without it... bet you cant go too long if you watch TV daily.. as your mind begins to crave its daily dose of subliminal messanging..
War is just the same thing, on a global scale... get us thinking on a certain frequency, providing energy for the Illuminati to go ahead with their hidden agenda.
Shame.. but it is true.
All it does is turn humanity against each other.
And it is all a huge ploy by world governments to make all us little fish that tad bit easier to control.. fear is the one thing that creates that energy that assists in goverments having mind control over masses of people..
Try banning television in your home.. and see how long you can go without it... bet you cant go too long if you watch TV daily.. as your mind begins to crave its daily dose of subliminal messanging..
War is just the same thing, on a global scale... get us thinking on a certain frequency, providing energy for the Illuminati to go ahead with their hidden agenda.
Shame.. but it is true.
onetwothreefour
Bluelight Crew
something i found on usenet, which i figure speaks much better than me i have a tendency to not put my arguments across too well!
and i know, obviously, that this omits certain things, because of course it's trying to convince us of one side, but it's still worth reading and thinking about...
Quiz Time
Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq?
*********************************
1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have?
A: 6%
2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have?
A: 50%
3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
A: Saudi Arabia
4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves?
A: Iraq
5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide?
A: $900+ billion
6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
A: 50%
7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the
essentials of life to everyone in the world, according to the UN?
A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount of funding initially
requested to fund the US retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).
8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?
A: 86 million
9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons?
A: Since the early 1980's.
10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological weapons on their
own?
A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US
government, along with Britain and private corporations.
11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare
against Iran?
A: No
12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the
Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?
A: 5,000
13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time?
A: 0
14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America use in Vietnam?
A: 17million.
15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and September 11th
terrorist attack?
A: No
16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War?
A: 35,000
17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the
western forces during the Gulf War ?
A: 0
18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S.
tanks with ploughs mounted on the front?
A: 6,000
19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait
after the Gulf War?
A: 40 tons
20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in
Iraq between 1991 and 1994?
A: 700%
21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had
destroyed in 1991?
A: 80%
22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for
anything other than deterrence and self defense?
A: No
23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10
years ago?
A: No
24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted in the
event of an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
A: 10,000
25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
A: Over 50%
26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq?
A: 11 years
27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998
and September 1999?
A: No
28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between
December 1998 and September 1999?
A: 20 million
29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing
strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
A: 12 years
30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000
births)?
A: 38
31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per
1,000 births)?
A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as
a result of UN sanctions?
A: 1.5 million
33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to
sanctions since 1997?
A: 750,000
34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
A: No
35. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998?
A: 300
36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
A: 5
37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party
HQ?
A: Yes
38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in fact, been
disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history."
A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief
39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991 capacity to develop
weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to
have discovered and dismantled?
A: 90%
40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in ?
A: Yes
41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992?
A: Over 65
42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between
1972 and 1990?
A: 30+
44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons?
A: 8
45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?
A: 0
46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?
A: over 10,000
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?
A: the US
48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
A: Over 400
50. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent
about things that matter"?
A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
*********************************
Charles Sheketoff, Executive Director Oregon Center for Public Policy
PO Box 7, Silverton, OR 97381
The United States Government will spend more on the military in
fiscal year 2003, than all the rest of the countries on Earth
combined. Current expenditures are 437 billion and our past
obligations are 339 billion, this equals 776 billion. 46% of our
Taxes go to the Military Industrial Complex
http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm This figure doesn't even
begin to account for all of the off-budget, black projects, homeland
security nor the 40+ billion the United States Government will spend
on intelligence in 2003.
i have a tendency to not put my arguments across too well!and i know, obviously, that this omits certain things, because of course it's trying to convince us of one side, but it's still worth reading and thinking about...
Quiz Time
Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq?
*********************************
1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have?
A: 6%
2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have?
A: 50%
3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
A: Saudi Arabia
4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves?
A: Iraq
5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide?
A: $900+ billion
6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
A: 50%
7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the
essentials of life to everyone in the world, according to the UN?
A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount of funding initially
requested to fund the US retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).
8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?
A: 86 million
9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons?
A: Since the early 1980's.
10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological weapons on their
own?
A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US
government, along with Britain and private corporations.
11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare
against Iran?
A: No
12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the
Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?
A: 5,000
13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time?
A: 0
14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America use in Vietnam?
A: 17million.
15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and September 11th
terrorist attack?
A: No
16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War?
A: 35,000
17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the
western forces during the Gulf War ?
A: 0
18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S.
tanks with ploughs mounted on the front?
A: 6,000
19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait
after the Gulf War?
A: 40 tons
20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in
Iraq between 1991 and 1994?
A: 700%
21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had
destroyed in 1991?
A: 80%
22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for
anything other than deterrence and self defense?
A: No
23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10
years ago?
A: No
24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted in the
event of an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
A: 10,000
25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
A: Over 50%
26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq?
A: 11 years
27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998
and September 1999?
A: No
28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between
December 1998 and September 1999?
A: 20 million
29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing
strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
A: 12 years
30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000
births)?
A: 38
31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per
1,000 births)?
A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as
a result of UN sanctions?
A: 1.5 million
33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to
sanctions since 1997?
A: 750,000
34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
A: No
35. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998?
A: 300
36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
A: 5
37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party
HQ?
A: Yes
38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in fact, been
disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history."
A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief
39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991 capacity to develop
weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to
have discovered and dismantled?
A: 90%
40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in ?
A: Yes
41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992?
A: Over 65
42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between
1972 and 1990?
A: 30+
44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons?
A: 8
45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?
A: 0
46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?
A: over 10,000
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?
A: the US
48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
A: Over 400
50. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent
about things that matter"?
A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
*********************************
Charles Sheketoff, Executive Director Oregon Center for Public Policy
PO Box 7, Silverton, OR 97381
The United States Government will spend more on the military in
fiscal year 2003, than all the rest of the countries on Earth
combined. Current expenditures are 437 billion and our past
obligations are 339 billion, this equals 776 billion. 46% of our
Taxes go to the Military Industrial Complex
http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm This figure doesn't even
begin to account for all of the off-budget, black projects, homeland
security nor the 40+ billion the United States Government will spend
on intelligence in 2003.
![[MuNtEd]](/community/data/avatars/m/21/21073.jpg?1554214537){kind=avatar}
-Thoth
Bluelight Crew
Arrgh! 'Tis the time of the chain letters. That Q&A is full of innacuracies and falsehoods... Fair enough, the war sucks, but don't rely on forwarded emails to give you the facts!
Try banning television in your home.. and see how long you can go without it... bet you cant go too long if you watch TV daily.. as your mind begins to crave its daily dose of subliminal messanging..
It's been 4 years since I last sat down and watched TV. Worked for me. Even though I am considering buying a tv this year, just so I can watch DVDs but I'm not rushing out to get one just yet. Plasma tv's cost a lot
Raving Loony
Bluelighter
TV for me invloves Jackass, BBC World and the odd bit of soccer there. Living without the rest is easy because it is mainly crap!
Lord_c3
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2003
- Messages
- 5
Although people are starting to understand that the war is prodominantly about OIL, much of the comments ive read on this thread are unfortunately on the wrong track... A family member of mine is a reporter for a major network in Aus, and i am privileged enough to gain access to info that the general public may not. The most powerful weapon of war is of course "PROPAGANDA" (for those unsure = Media control). Its unfortunate that we only see the USA's view on the war.
The war in Iraq is of course over OIL, not because we're running out, or inflated prices. In fact its quite the contrary... 60 minutes delved into this topic very lightly a few weeks ago. At the moment Iraq is the 2nd highest producer of OIL outside of Saudi Arabia. Currently its OIL drilling contracts are with China and Russia, and if the war proceeds and Sadam is taken out of power, these contracts negotiated under his regime will be up for review and will be given to the highest bidder. This is why Russia and China are quietly opposed to the war, and the USA is hell bent on overturning Sadam. What is this war really about?? well it should be obvious by know that its about Control and Power... Can you imagine how much power the USA would have over the world if they control the just under 40% of the worlds OIL. You may say that how can the USA control Iraq's OIL? Well these drilling contracts are like leasing contracts in a sense, eg. If a clothing manufacturer leases a factory building of the owner to produce a clothing line, the owner of the building does not control how the product is produced, how much of it is distributed, or who in fact gets the product. Much the same with the OIL contracts, Iraq does not control the who, what, why, where or when, it is merely paid healthy for these rights of control though an initial lump sum injection into the economy and a commission of what ever is sold.
On the other hand many of us through the use of propaganda are lead to believe the war is over weapons of mass destruction. Well its hard to believe that the USA is now worried about chemical and biological weapons Iraq has been developing since the 1980's. The recent act of destroying of missiles that are used to carry the chemical weapons, without the yield of the USA and allied forces, has just proven that the war is not about the weapons, and is just a matter of time before it begins.
Although the Sadam regime is not the type of Government I would like to live under, far from it. However, in my view the Bush Administration is not far from behind... It is time America realised the world belongs to the people and NOT the all-mighty USA.
The war in Iraq is of course over OIL, not because we're running out, or inflated prices. In fact its quite the contrary... 60 minutes delved into this topic very lightly a few weeks ago. At the moment Iraq is the 2nd highest producer of OIL outside of Saudi Arabia. Currently its OIL drilling contracts are with China and Russia, and if the war proceeds and Sadam is taken out of power, these contracts negotiated under his regime will be up for review and will be given to the highest bidder. This is why Russia and China are quietly opposed to the war, and the USA is hell bent on overturning Sadam. What is this war really about?? well it should be obvious by know that its about Control and Power... Can you imagine how much power the USA would have over the world if they control the just under 40% of the worlds OIL. You may say that how can the USA control Iraq's OIL? Well these drilling contracts are like leasing contracts in a sense, eg. If a clothing manufacturer leases a factory building of the owner to produce a clothing line, the owner of the building does not control how the product is produced, how much of it is distributed, or who in fact gets the product. Much the same with the OIL contracts, Iraq does not control the who, what, why, where or when, it is merely paid healthy for these rights of control though an initial lump sum injection into the economy and a commission of what ever is sold.
On the other hand many of us through the use of propaganda are lead to believe the war is over weapons of mass destruction. Well its hard to believe that the USA is now worried about chemical and biological weapons Iraq has been developing since the 1980's. The recent act of destroying of missiles that are used to carry the chemical weapons, without the yield of the USA and allied forces, has just proven that the war is not about the weapons, and is just a matter of time before it begins.
Although the Sadam regime is not the type of Government I would like to live under, far from it. However, in my view the Bush Administration is not far from behind... It is time America realised the world belongs to the people and NOT the all-mighty USA.