ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:06 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:52 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
The Man In Black wrote:
Where the hell did that come from?


I was just trying to point out that there are more deadly problems in the world than Iraq. You could also pick AIDS or poor driving. Both have killed far more than Saddam Hussein ever did.

But war is much more fun for us to watch on TV.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 2:17 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Ok. I'm glad to see that people doknow whats going on. Next I must work on delivery...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 2:21 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
So we should proportionally fund things based on how many people they kill, rather than the threat they pose to the US and how much good that money will do?

Listen, its been said (and you've apparently ignored) that throwing money at world hunger does nothing to it. First off, the areas in which hunger is most terrible often have so little infrastructure that the money and food often do not get to the people who need it. Secondly, there are often dictators just waiting to grab the food to feed their soldiers and themselves. Money alone cannot solve the problem, military action and infrastructure-building is also needed. But people (I'd hazard to guess people like you) have already dictated that we don't have the backbone to go militarily into a place to help the hunger.

Not to mention just how much is costs to rebuild just 1 country. The US can't just go about willy-nilly and do this alone- and frankly none of the countries willing to do anything in the UN have the money to make the idea feasable. Lets start with possible solutions before we move on to the impossible, hmm?

Oh, and I also constitute peopel that represent a threat (direct or indirect) to the USA as a higher priority target for our govt than something that doesn't. IE, the job of the US govt is party to destroy threats to the US people- this ranks above being nice to people. And frankly, I don't disagree with the priority.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 2:42 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2885
Location: San Antonio
revolutio wrote:
The Man In Black wrote:
Where the hell did that come from?


I was just trying to point out that there are more deadly problems in the world than Iraq. You could also pick AIDS or poor driving. Both have killed far more than Saddam Hussein ever did.

But war is much more fun for us to watch on TV.


Are you just being deliberately obtuse? Hey, why the hell don't we take care of the problems we know we can fix?

Anyway, 90% of the spending in this war has been charity donations to the Military Industrial complex. we are so FUCKING fascinated with "Smart" weapons which do damned little good. Our modern soldier is equipped with 100s of pounds of useless shit and we give them a service rifle made by Mattel with a plincking and varmit cartridge that is inferior to service cartridges invented in 1893!!! We have built a military that is a money sucking upside-down pyramid, where the things that decide conflicts are ignored. This is what you get when military spending decisions are, in-effect made by lobbyists. The U.S. spends more money on its military than all of the next 15 countries combined, and yet , in a land war in China, we'd be fucked up the ass. If I am in an infantry unit, and I shoot at someone, I want them to fall over and be dead, I don't care whether we can blow up their 10,000 radar station with a friggin 2 million dollar cruise missle.

_________________
We used to play for silver, Now we play for life.
One's for sport and one's for blood
At the point of a knife, Now the die is shaken
Now the die must fall,
There ain't a winner in this game
Who don't go home with all, Not with all...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 8:18 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
Yes I know that it is impossible to stop hunger entirely, however spending $300 billion on programs to help those in need would save many more lives than a war in Iraq will. Not to mention the mad PR for America.

I agree that threats have to be dealt with, but we are spending all of our time on a single type of threat. Starvation is much easier to solve than terrorism, we don't have to go right in and try to get at countries with dictators. Why not start with the thousands of people that are starving in North America?

Hey what ever happened to those tobacco lawsuits? Oh yeah...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 4:51 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 82
revolutio wrote:
No longer is our aid going to be accepted so readily, by the people or by most governments.


Riight...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:00 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 82
revolutio wrote:
I agree that threats have to be dealt with, but we are spending all of our time on a single type of threat.


We're not. Just before we hit Iraq we took out some top members of Al Qaeda. In addition, our initial strikes killed an exiled member of the PLO. Those are the only reports I've heard recently, largely because the media has been focused most heavily on Iraq. That doesn't mean the gov't has the same single-mindedness.

Quote:
Starvation is much easier to solve than terrorism, we don't have to go right in and try to get at countries with dictators.


Starvation is inevitably caused by a government because left alone people are quite good at harvesting food. (We've only been doing this for our entire existence...) Almost all famine is *deliberate*, either used to keep the population in check or because the food (including aid) is sold off to pay for the army. If a regime is starving its people and you feed them, you just prop up the regime allowing them to keep the people living at a subsistence level. The only way to end starvation is, say it with me now, regime change!

Quote:
Why not start with the thousands of people that are starving in North America?


Are you talking about rural poverty? You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink... Most of those people refuse to deal with the US gov't. Claiming that we should fix that is like saying we shouldn't allow the Amish to go without modern medicine.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:04 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 82
Clay_Allison wrote:
The U.S. spends more money on its military than all of the next 15 countries combined, and yet , in a land war in China, we'd be fucked up the ass. If I am in an infantry unit, and I shoot at someone, I want them to fall over and be dead, I don't care whether we can blow up their 10,000 radar station with a friggin 2 million dollar cruise missle.


Yeah, so when you consider only a single branch of the US military, it looks pretty weak. That's why it has 4 branches: Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:15 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 82
revolutio wrote:
Repblicans always go against everything democrats do, and vice versa. If you think otherwise you haven't spent much time listening to both sides.


That's complete rubbish. A good example is Pat Moynihan, who died recently. He was a New Deal Democrat, but was also considered one of the first neo-conservatives due to his strong anti-Communism and his criticism of many failed liberal social policies.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:22 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
Sorry about that always it sort of changed the point of the statement. You are right that people often do object to their own parties policies. My point was more that both parties are about equally at each other's throats.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 9:40 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Actually, republicans as a whole supported Clinton's trips to Kosovo and Haiti. Its not the party but the leadership that determines what will happen. There have been politicking bastards in both the republican and democratic parties before. The problem is that it has never before been in a time of war such as this, which is why the dems are getting so much flak.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 12:13 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Anyone else watch tough crowd with colin quinn last night? Dennis Leary was on, and he pretty much summed up my thoughts on the war...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 1:37 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2001 5:00 pm
Posts: 2020
Location: Bon Ami or Something French Like That
krylex wrote:
Anyone else watch tough crowd with colin quinn last night? Dennis Leary was on, and he pretty much summed up my thoughts on the war...


Which are...?

_________________
Clicking this has a 74.6% chance of making you happier.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 4:45 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Well, if you had watched, then you would know. ^_^



What he basically said is this:

Quit bitching about people dieing. Its war, that will happen.

Next he said to the government and news types, You can't have a PC war. The harder you try, the worse it will be.

That and a few other extreme comments are basically what he said, and I agree. Quit whining, it does no good. Quit trying to make the war PC, it does no good.


On another note, I read a non sequiter that had the definition of WAR. Its an age old acronym meaning We Are Right...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 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