ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:00 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2003 11:26 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
Wrong,pryo.
It's like you said.Totally different situations.

First,the afghan war against the soviets.Of course we would have never given a nuke to the afghans.We were never under the threat of invasion for one thing.

However in saddams case he is under the threat of being invaded and getting overthrown.Bin laden on the other hand just got his ass kicked in afghanstan,is regrouping slowly and is being hounded by just about every intellegence agency in the world.

So it is very reasonable to see saddam handing a nuke over to al queada.Saddam would want some body to take the focus off him and quick.Bin laden would want to prove that they are still a big threat and in a big way.

EDIT:P51,I think we have done enough damage to these two groups to make them look beyond their hatred and go after the common foe.


_________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.And when you look long into the abyss,the abyss also looks into you.
-Friedrich Nietzche,Beyond Good and evil.
Precentor of the Cult of Conquest

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Barghest on 2003-01-11 22:28 ]</font>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 12:30 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1012
Location: Illinois, US
Barghest, I think not. Iraq, if I remember correctly, is a secular state. Whereas Bin Laden is a religious fanatic nut who would like to see religious states.
Having such a reactive topic, religion, between them and seeing as one of them also happens to be a religious fanatic...
I see the likelihood of them working together as "not bloody likely".

_________________
...a figure emerges from the shadows.

"No one says a novel has to be one thing. It can be anything it wants to be, a vaudeville show, the six o'clock news, the mumblings of wild men saddled by demons." -Ishmael Reed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 1:20 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
But doesn't america hold the universal title of the great satan in the middle east?

While I think it's possible in the long run saddam and bin laden could be enemies(if they are around that long)they are never truely going to be real enemies as long as America is still around.I mean come on if Al queada started attacking baghdad.....
Damn,Then the middle east would get really confusing.

_________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.And when you look long into the abyss,the abyss also looks into you.
-Friedrich Nietzche,Beyond Good and evil.
Precentor of the Cult of Conquest

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Barghest on 2003-01-12 00:20 ]</font>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 1:46 am 
Offline
Native

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 903
Quote:
On 2003-01-11 22:26, Barghest wrote:
Bin laden on the other hand...is regrouping slowly


Highly unlikely. When one is blown into fragments, you don't typically regroup.

Bin Laden is almost certainly dead. First, we have it on the word of some of his followers that he was killed when his cave was bombed in Tora Bora.

Second, we have the fact that Bin Laden is a propaganda leader, not a strategist. He best serves his cause by being out in the open, inspiring his jihadis to go out and kill, not hiding in an undisclosed location. Since he is not, that is strong evidence that he is dead.

Third, the tape released that supposedly was created by Bin Laden is almost certainly a forgery. A Swiss analysis company is 95% sure that the voice on the tape is not that of Bin Laden, and when you compare the actual text to his earlier ones the message is completely changed (griping about the U.S.'s failure to join the Kyoto treaty? That's a standard leftist complaint, not one you'd hear from an Islamic hardliner).

Bin Laden's various pieces are going to have a very hard time regrouping themselves, much less regrouping Al-Qaeda. That is not to say that Al-Qaeda is not being regrouped, because they are definitely still a threat; they simply no longer have their spiritual leader and most recognized member.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 1:58 am 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 30
Location: ...
What's interesting about all of this is that when all this talk of revenge on Al Qaeda when really the beef is with Saddam and his forces... I mean, look at this - Bush Sr. is in office, Persian Gulf happens. Then we have Bill Clinton, who's only controversy is his jizz on Ms. Lewinsky's dress, and then Bush Jr. is in office and then it's back to Iraq with the good old war campaign.
Do I notice something of a pattern? I don't know. Just seems to me like something fishy is up. I don't have the information to back up this or any validity to it, but a gut feeling that something just ain't right and that it's just going to be the fight of a year that'll take the lives of thousands, whether innocents or not.

I'm worried.

_________________
<i><font size="1">Where there is light there is shadow<br>
Where there is pain there is happiness<br>
Where there is death there is life<br>
When one rose dies, another blooms<br>
To take its place<br>
Balance is the only way.<br>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 3:35 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
Kylaer while I want to believe you we have to always assume the worst.

First,can you believe what his followers are telling us?There is a good chance they are just BSing us so to give bin laden a head start.

Second,just because he isn't out in the open doesn't mean he is dead.Right now being out in the open is a bad idea with just about every looking for him.He could just probably laying low till they find a secure base.

However the tape thing is just plain confusing.I mean if he was dead and his followers were trying to make it seem like he was still alive how don't you think they would have some grasp on his ideals and what he would say?

LIR,A gut feeling is not a real good way to prove your points on a subject.

_________________
It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations.
Sir Winston Churchill, My Early Life, 1930


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 3:47 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1012
Location: Illinois, US
Well, the tape doesn't necessarily have to be made by his followers...

Think, who would benefit from the fear of Bin Laden still being around?
Hrm, perhaps some government people who have been playing up the "War against Terrorism" (declaring war on a concept....) and want some more fear around?

The more afraid people are the less they question things.... Well, most people anyways.

Frankly, I don't really know who made the video, but there's possibilities....

_________________
...a figure emerges from the shadows.

"No one says a novel has to be one thing. It can be anything it wants to be, a vaudeville show, the six o'clock news, the mumblings of wild men saddled by demons." -Ishmael Reed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 3:50 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
I really don't see how the tape could cause any fear.I think most people have already written it off as somebody's form of a sick joke.

Also it wasn't a video it was a audio tape.

EDIT:Damnit,it's a tape!
_________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.And when you look long into the abyss,the abyss also looks into you.
-Friedrich Nietzche,Beyond Good and evil.
Precentor of the Cult of Conquest

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Barghest on 2003-01-12 02:50 ]</font>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 5:32 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3246
Location: Frigid/boiling midwest.
Quote:
On 2003-01-11 00:26, Barghest wrote:
The enemy of my enemy is my friend ring a bell?





Following that tainted logic, Al-Qaeda's Hussein's enemy, and therefore our friend.

Also, I know I'm sticking my oar in at a late moment, but any claims that US action in Iraq have anything to do with the UN is bullshit. As KC has said many a time before, america doesn't give a shit about the UN.

Also, it the US is meant to be the police force of the world, how come it refuses to have anything to do with the court of the world? The USA is one of the only countries that refuses to have any involvment with the ICC, thus making it a possible refuge for international terrorists. Unlikely as it is that they would get into the country, it's still a possiblity.

_________________
n(people that love you) - n(your mum)=0


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 5:50 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 521
Location: California
If you look back into history, Hitler and Stalin, though enemies, did sign a brief non aggression pact that kept them from fighting for a short while. It was sort like an agreement between two bandits where they agree to leave eachother alone until they run out of honest victims to plunder and fight over whats left afterwards. The only thing is that Hitler was so crazy he broke the deal and went after Stalin anyways.

I could see Iraq and Al Qaeda agents collaborating. Religious and philosophical differences aside, they are both murdering butchers after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 2:49 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
P51: Proof? None. Such wild and inflamitory suggestions have no business is a civilized debate. I could, with just as much authority as you have, could say it was really just ap lot by the Illuminati to keep the world in chaos so they can better control the few world leaders not already their lackies.

LIR: No ones cares about your 'gut feelings,' least of all me. In any quasi-important subject, gut feelings can only lead you to try to find information to back it up. You have none- so please be quiet until you do.

Now, how about this? Each of you people who are unsure or against war with Iraq post what information would convince you it is alright. Gold, Barg, whoever else is for war, and myself will try to provide it. Seem fair enough?

-Kills Commies
Goddamn commies...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 4:20 pm 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Elemental plane of naughty touching
I left for one weekend and I'm backed up a whole fuggin' page.

Barghest- I'm going back in time with this, but anyway... North Korea is indeed a good example of a country hopelessly reliant on a WMD program. With its nuke program, NK is essentially all bark and no bite. They aren't going to destroy the United States with their scant few nuclear weapons. You're assuming it's a huge threat because you've been told to. Tell me, what has North Korea done as of late, other than threaten and position? Nada.

Goldstandard- ...but Hussein has nothing to gain from joining forces with groups of radical anti-Western Islamic militants to attack the United States. He has more to lose from doing anything to help groups like al Qaeda-notably, his own ass in the American backlash. He may see himself as some heroic Arab unifier of the region, but his vision of a unified Middle East is philosophically different from the radical Islamic terrorists with the zeal to perform a direct attack on American soil.

EDIT: I keep mixing up the names of the ethnic groups in Iraq. Ugh.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: UncleFilthy on 2003-01-12 16:14 ]</font>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 6:07 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
TMT,don't be foolish.The enemy of my enemy is my friend logic still works because we are the one actively trying to destroy both of them.I think the the threat of death can make people get desperate.

Second,the reason we won't join the world court is because the only thing it is going to be used for is to bring up bullshit charges on american peacekeepers every chance it gets.And just because we arn't a part of the world court doesn't mean the USA is going to become a terrorist haven.If somebody is a terrorist and they are in our country they are going to find themselves on the badside of the FBI.

Filthy,I was trying to show you what could become of iraq if it was allowed to continue with someone like saddam in charge.Besides NK is a threat.Those maniacs are going to start a war soon if they don't stop this hissy fit of theres and realize the world doesn't go around North korea.

_________________
It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations.
Sir Winston Churchill, My Early Life, 1930


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 6:28 pm 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Elemental plane of naughty touching
Barghest-
Bullshit claims on American peacekeepers? Not all of them are bullshit. There are some pretty good reasons for putting Henry Kissinger on trial. That's one of the reasons he doesn't travel out of the country much anymore.

As for NK: please, enlighten me, Barghest. What have they done to start a war, other than positioning and stating that violations of their sovereignty WOULD AMOUNT TO an act of war?

Hell, they don't even have a delivery device for whatever warheads they may have.

EDIT: Correction: they have no delivery device that can reach our shores.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: UncleFilthy on 2003-01-12 19:58 ]</font>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 7:43 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
Filthy,the world court will only serve the purpose of causing problems for the United states.

Second just shut the fuck up about North korea since you seem to know nothing about it.These people may represent a bigger threat then iraq in that they are a erratic militaristic dictator ship that is on the downslide which means they are going to start getting desperate to hold on to power.They have a bad track record in spreading around weapons that terrorist's have wet dreams about.Also HAVE MISSILES that can reach japan and starve millions of people when they take the food that WE send them and give it to their military.So when they start making more nukes you can be pretty damn sure this is a threat that could lead to war without them needing to say anything.

Goddamn it,I see why KC's attitude toward you people is justified now.

_________________
It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations.
Sir Winston Churchill, My Early Life, 1930


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 9:35 pm 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Elemental plane of naughty touching
Yes, Barghest, I could see why making a commitment to international rule of law--in a time when we are trying to punish a few rogue states for defying the UN and dropping out of nuclear non-proliferation treaties--could be nothing but trouble for the United States.

As for the DPRK...
I made a slight error in my last post. I meant that they had no delivery device capable of making it to the states, and according to some estimates, probably won't have such a missile for well over a decade. Don't blow your top over an error.

Had you been paying attention to the problems in the DPRK before the recent controversy, you would have known that efforts have been made between the North and South toward Korean reintegration--even with the North's history of positioning submarines in Southern waters. This engagement policy, as opposed to the US' aggressive containment policy, is known as the Sunshine Plan.

If the North is such a huge threat to the South, why would the president of the ROK propose a normalization plan?

Go read up on it and you'll see why I used it as an example of a nuclear equipped nation falling because of its reliance on non-conventional weapons.

The famine, poverty, and agressive posturing are all just symptoms of a state in decline.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 10:22 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2225
Location: America
The UN lacks the willpower and the firepower to deal with these roguestates.If it was up to them they would be debating on the right method of trying to deal with saddam right up till he was pumping out nukes left and right.


I am also very aware of the South's sun shine policy toward the north even before North korea got into the news.I also think it's also one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard.Those south koreans may have good intentions but all they are doing is opening themselves up to a enemy that would not hesitate to kill them.They seem to have forgotten how easy killing their countryman came to the North koreans.
Sure the north koreans would love to get back with the south.Only problem is they North would have to be in charge and it would have to be a communist system.

The southerners think they are dealing with rational and caring leaders who care about their people.If these people were rational and caring they would have dropped the communist system along time ago.

_________________
It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations.
Sir Winston Churchill, My Early Life, 1930


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 10:38 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Lets not forget- America has been there a long time, and Koreans are getting sick of them, for some good reasons and some bad reasons.

Also, the current pres got in partially on a ticket of 'I hate America.' What better way to illistrate this than to openly go against America's (and common sense's, but hey since when has that mattered?) advice/wishes on North Korea?

-Kills Commies
Goddamn motherfucking commies


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 10:53 pm 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Elemental plane of naughty touching
Barghest- So what? They still recognize the DPRK as a minimal threat to their own security. That's my point--their reliance on their nuclear program never did them any favors, just as it won't help Iraq to take control of the Middle East either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 11:02 pm 
Offline
Tourist

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Elemental plane of naughty touching
KC- Strangely enough, South Korea is currently embroiled in its own fit of anti-Americanism at the moment. According to a little snip in TIME, some South Koreans threw firebombs into a US military compound in Seoul on November 26th.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group