a thought about that hurricane

[Valbrandr]

I think your Assistant Professor of Geography missed the part where we asked the Taliban to turn over Bin Ladin and they refused. We prety much had the blessing of the western world on that one, maybe with out Dr. Zoltan Grossman, or you, but most of the country was for taking out the Taliban, not talking to them.

And why were we for it?  I would really say we were brainwashed in a way... we were reeling from 9/11 and George Bush was completely misleading us (especially the next step).    And if so many other countries were for it... how many troops were sent to afghanistan by all the other countries besides the US.. just about  the same ratio that we have in Iraq.. America 90% everyone else 10%.  Because these were OUR wars.. it wasnt about liberating anyone.. but luckily it could be a byproduct of one of the actions (Iraq) if America doesnt mind spending 10+ years in Iraq.  

And the reason the Taliban wouldnt/couldnt deliver Osama to us.. is because they would not have been able to find him either.  A country with as much military technology in the world has not been able to find him in over 4 years now starting from Sept 11, 2001.  How would warlords have a chance of finding him ever?

Edit: Ramlambmoo:  Very good link there.. a great .edu site.  I have seen that list before of interventions... its quite mind boggling,

[derwoodly]

A professor in Geography publishes what is public knowledge (look at the sighted sources) and you think it is some great discovery?  Heck most of that stuff is on the news every night and in the paper.  The only mind boggling thing about it is the conclusions he draws at the end.

When a plain old citizen blows up a government building or shoots doctors that person is labeled a monster is hunted down, given a speedy trial, and killed.  And everyone is happy.  When that person is a Muslim terrorist you think they should get the Nobel peace prize.  Your logic is hypocritical, and I grow tiered of the debate.

If you have something intelligent that you think will honestly convince me that we deserve to have our children blown up.  Then post it.  Otherwise I am done with this thread.

[ramlambmoo]

A professor in Geography publishes what is public knowledge (look at the sighted sources) and you think it is some great discovery? Heck most of that stuff is on the news every night and in the paper. The only mind boggling thing about it is the conclusions he draws at the end.  

You asked for reasons why people say you invited the terrorist attacks.  That is why I gave you the link.  138 military interventions in 114 years.  One hundred and Thirty Eight seperate instances of the U.S using its miltary to coerce people to its own will, on a large scale.  It is not a great discovery, because educated people have known this all along.  That the US has aggresivly pursued its agenda by militaristic means is not a revelation to alot of us.  You didnt even mention the main part.  You can say what you want about the conclusions, but the facts remains.  What do you have to say about the facts here?  Do you think even a half, or a quarter of those interventions were just and qualified?  Do you think the innocent people that died because of them justified the ends they did (or, in alot of cases, ultimatly didnt) acheive?

When a plain old citizen blows up a government building or shoots doctors that person is labeled a monster is hunted down, given a speedy trial, and killed. And everyone is happy. When that person is a Muslim terrorist you think they should get the Nobel peace prize.

Where has anybody said that?  You bring subjective, inncorrect assumptions into the discussion to divert the attention from the facts we present.  

Your logic is hypocritical, and I grow tiered of the debate.  

Your logic is non existant, and you grow tired because we do not stoop to your level of mud slinging.  Someone who only has subjective and emotional arguements tires quickly against a logical arguement.

If you have something intelligent that you think will honestly convince me that we deserve to have our children blown up. Then post it. Otherwise I am done with this thread.

If you were really looking for reasons why the rest of the world, in particular muslims, might not be pleasant towards the U.S, you would have seen them by now.  Alas, as Caeser once said, Men will readily believe whatever they want to believe.  If you do not want to discuss the topic and learn something, but only argue it and try to \"win\" for your side, then no amount of facts or logic will sway your persuasion.  Go back to the list I provided to you and read every single military intervention.  Imagine the men and women killed in each.  Look at what was acheived for each of them.  Look at the war in iraq, look at the people killed, look at what was achieved.  If you can do all that with an impartial and unbiased mind, and still not comprehend while some people dislike the U.S, well then its pointless discussing any further.

[Xordan]

Believing that terrorists attack us because we attacked them first and committed all kinds of crimes against them just makes you seem gullible. If a terrorist blew himself up killing a bunch of people, and then a statment was released on TV saying that it\'s because of the crimes we commit towards the flying spaghetti monster then would you believe that?

[leji]

Xordan: Of course I would !
Btw, when will we see Pseudocode lesson 2 ?

[fken]

Originally posted by steuben
i was thinking about this earlier today.

that hurricane was a little bit convient. it is exactly what the bush government needed to distracted the populace from the quagemire that is iraq. the us military spawned that storm. the then directed it to a plausible, but rarely hit, location.

presto, instant distraction. americans are no longer thinking about iraq. they now see bush and the republicans as rescuers that helped to rebuild new orleans and the area.

*removes tin foil hat*

Wou... really ? What I heard here in France is that B Clinton ask to Bush government to explain why it reacts so slowly... I saw a letter of M Moore who was very aggressive throught Bush and his government... I heard british news (by a \"the guardian\" reporter) which said that the reaction of Bush government was a shame and that USA react like a third world country...

Steuben, are you confirming that USA citizens are thinking Bush government reacted correctly? (I am not saying you are wrong or not  ; i just wanna have your point of view and other americans one)

By the way, I hope people from new orleans and others states will not suffer anymore from Katrina effects...

[Induane]

Xordan: Pfffttt lol hahahahhahha

Derwoodly: I understand your perspective a bit, but I\'m an unsure as to from where you draw your assumptions on things however.  There is a difference between understanding why the US is viewed as it is by other countries and saying we diserved what we got.  I don\'t believe in the killing of any innocents anywhere, which is why I hate war in general. Not because I\'m  a pacifist, but because war has changed into an entity that is without real honor.  (this isn\'t to say no one in any army is honorable or noble).  Guns caused this, and is amplified by larger war machines, Planes, Ships, Tanks, etc.  killing with these allows a person to detach themselves from the killing more than in a simple sword fight, or other hand to hand combat (again this isn\'t always true, just that it makes it possible). We enter into wars with countries, and the innocents are the ones who suffer.  We now operate with an \"End justifies the means\" attitude, which in the long run may actually be better, but I can\'t use that to justify the suffering of the innocent of the present. One can\'t always live for the future, as they\'ll stumble over their own feet. The US has done many terrible things to people over its short life span, but this is not abnormal for any country.  No one thing is perfect, or even close, but it is amplified by the fact that we are the dominate superpower, as well as by the fact that we exercise our military as we do on a much more regular basis.  

I think its important to understand the reason we are being attacked instead of automatically assuming that they are worse people than we are.  They are probabily only just as bad as internally they are beliving that what they are doing is for the greater good.  Its a perspective thing, and its their perspective that we dislike.

[fken]

the true problem is that people speaks about USA. USA is a country. A country cant wage a war...

Speaking about USA as an entity means that every usa inhabitants have the same opinion. They havent.

But when a bomb explodes, the victims are inhabitants. Some are b*stards some are kind. So anyway terrorism is a bad choice as long as its fighting against randomized people. Look whats happen in Palestinia : in one side you have suffering people who become terrorists to fight for their freedom and their territory and in other side you have people who lives there since a lot of time but are suffering because of terrorist attack. Angers increase in each sides
BUT :
each time a bomb explose, a lot of peaceful innocents are killed and each time the other side strike back, you could be sure that their military operations will annoy/kill people that have nothing to deals with terrorism.
AND :
who is winning ?
The spiritual masters of the intergrists arent touched by the israelian attacks
The israelian leaders arent touched by the terrorism

Who has something to earn here ?

Its like a videogame : you are a leader and you have the power to send people to the death, to create a war or kill people just because you felt aggressed...

Personally, when I have trouble with a guy, I fight for my ideas or my convictions or i shut up and go away. The leaders cant because they are allowed to use their fabulous military strike or terrorism...

And you think its a shame! you think Palestinians must contradict their leaders.

but if you think that, you must think that israelians must contradicts their leaders too.

Its the same issue for every countries : USA for example. People think that Muslims must fight against terrorism but they cant think about fighting against their own government choice.

Induane, you are like me and almost everyone else : you are for the peace, you dislike war... but you shut up because you think your ideas arent important relatively to the government.

[pwxyzg]

in an effort to correct a common misconception during the time which seems to be flourshing.. e.g.

derwoody quote/
\"..we asked the Taliban to turn over Bin Ladin and they refused..\"
/endquote


actually.. in sept of 2002..

\"The Taliban offers to turn over bin Laden if presented with evidence of his guilt. They also suggest that they will allow him to be tried by Muslim clerics.\"
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban-time.html

so really, the usOFa declined to tun over any evidence, and attacked in an act of agression instead.

[Xordan]

I remember the BBC reporting that we asked for them to hand him over and they refused, and the BBC are usually pretty accurate in what they report.

[derwoodly]

Originally posted by pwxyzg
actually.. in sept of 2002..

\"The Taliban offers to turn over bin Laden if presented with evidence of his guilt. They also suggest that they will allow him to be tried by Muslim clerics.\"
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban-time.html

so really, the usOFa declined to tun over any evidence, and attacked in an act of agression instead.

Please do not rewrite history.  This was only 4 years ago, we all know what happened.  You should check your date.  It was 2001.

Most of my posts were dirrected at Val so he could have some understanding as to why 51% of the USA voted for Bush in the last election.  What I was trying to show was that there is so much misinformation out there it is hard to see what the truth is.  Maybe I was fooled, but when compare what both sides are saying and then apply my own memory as to what happened 4, 5, 10, 20 years ago, I find myself siding more with the Pro Bush side than the Anti-bush side.

[Valbrandr]

Most of my posts were dirrected at Val so he could have some understanding as to why 51% of the USA voted for Bush in the last election.

I have no idea.  People are idiots.

Maybe I was fooled, but when compare what both sides are saying and then apply my own memory as to what happened 4, 5, 10, 20 years ago, I find myself siding more with the Pro Bush side than the Anti-bush side.

Well, he must have brainwashed you as well.. but you likely dont remember that .

[fken]

Originally posted by Valbrandr
I have no idea.  People are idiots.

The most of the time I had to realize that people think each others are idiots... but i think the real idiot is the one who ignore his own ignorance (and then the one who everytime think he is more intelligent than the others).
so the big question now is \"are you thinking you are more intelligent than the others

Seriously, dont think people are idiots... you could be surprised. A lot of very intelligent people are totally conditionned and manipulated. A lot of other people may seems to be dumb and at the same time they are able to react more logically than the others (only because they arent endoctrinated or manipulated).

Moreover the one  who looks dumb has a big advantage : he could surprise you. Its like a card game : if you have good cards, dont show them to everyone before beeing sure the others havent better cards.

[Valbrandr]

so the big question now is \"are you thinking you are more intelligent than the others  

yes I would say the 49 million that voted for Kerry were definately not as big of idiots.. while the others who allowed themselves to be manipulated were 100% idiots (that includes anyone who voted for Nader btw).  But no need to get into why certain groups voted for certain people.

I have a friend who voted for Bush... she is a Democrat and very liberal.  But her brother just joined the army.  And when Kerry made the statement \"wrong place, wrong war, wrong time\" she said there was no way that she could vote for him.  Yeah she is educated but still an idiot.  

I know other idiots that would not vote for Kerry because of certain people coming out trying to tarnish his military career.  Let me just remind you that during Vietnam Bush never left the state of Texas though he was in the Airforce.  He valiantly defended Texas from the Vietcong.. that is almost as brave as actually being there fighting in a war.  Hmm plenty of other idiots and so little time.. Ill get some sleep for now and finish this later.

[fken]

Is a good president forced to kill someone to be considerated like a good president in USA?

If you wanna know who has his place at the White house you just have to think about who could lead at best. For example, Marilyn Manson voted for Bush... and he said its only for an economical reason: as long as the president let him earn the most money he can earn, he is enjoying. He dont care about USA image in the world or other way of life. No ideologies. No good act. No ... . only because he has more to win by voting for bush. And i think a lot of people thought like that.

Moreover, who said you voting is so important? Do you really think its important? What would change in your life if Kerry is president? Surely nothing. And the guy who voted for the first he was able to remember because he believes that voting isnt really important... maybe this guy is more intelligent than what you think. I think voting is important but in fact, today, I believe one president or another one would not change my life: there will still have nuclear testing in Mururoa the day the militaries will think its important to test our nuke, there will still have lost money which will arrived (thanks to god will) in the pocket of our ministers, Ill keep on beeing against the educational system and the environmental policy and the economical system will continue to increase slavery in foreigner countries. So maybe the guy who vote something randomly is more intelligent than me because he doesnt waste his time for nothing...