Goingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 991 times:
One must bear in mind that the "final product" of any film is very heavily edited. You don't actually think that they would put on a person who had a very valid argument, do you? Why that might cause someone to actually THINK - and it can take away from the impact you are hoping to make.
Not just the guys making this one....How much film was on the cutting room floor from Michael Moore's films? He's not going to show something that doesn't portray the object of his films as anything but an oaf. If it works for the "left", why wouldn't it work for the "right"?
Galaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 26 Reply 8, posted (10 years 9 months 23 hours ago) and read 967 times:
Well, GB the guy at the end of the video made sense and if most of the protestors were like him i would be more apt to listen to their views but the fact of the matter is most of them arent, most are like the numbskulls he interviewed. I admit there are some ( a very small amount) of war protestors that have educated and legitimate arguements, what those need to do is distance themselves from the morons.
"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
TechRep From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 9 months 22 hours ago) and read 957 times:
Too many Americans, including many EU countries, have been sheltered for too long, to have any concept of what it is like to live under horrifying threats. Bargain basement martyrs of the “peace” movement who disrupt their fellow Americans’ lives with their moral exhibitionism in the streets know the worst that can happen to them is a slap on the wrist punishment – and most will not even get that.
I see now attacks on American Service Members have begun, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82395,00.html and many public schools are encouraging anti-war rallies and allowing students time off for anti-war demonstrations. A 13 year-old student whose mother was called to the war in Iraq, decided to wear a Pro-War shirt that read, “War in Iraq, Justifiable Homicide”. Along with 5 other students they were all told to remove the shirts so the “peace” protestors didn’t attack them. One boy refused and was suspended.
The blessings we have in this country have been taken for granted for so long by such people, that they have no idea what past sacrifices created these blessings, what present day sacrifices are needed to maintain them, much less what are the prerequisites for continuing to live as free people.
More than ingratitude is involved. Those who do not understand what an ongoing price has to be paid to continuously to remain free are quick to balk at any costs that they have to endure, they are also quick to attribute cheap motives to those who have the responsibility to make the hard decisions required to protect us from the dangers that the blind refuse to acknowledge.
Some of those who blindly lash out, say the real reason American troops are in Iraq is to get control of that countries oil. Do they realize that we had control of Kuwait’s oil during the previous Gulf War – and gave it back to Kuwaitis? Do facts matter to those on the binge of self-righteous?
Does it matter to them that we live in an age where “giving peace a chance” means giving people like Suddam Hussein time to develop nuclear weapons? Does it matter to them that the doctrine of “pre-emption” is not just an abstract issue but, in a nuclear age, can be the difference between life and death for millions of Americans or Europeans?
Surely the time is long overdue to understand that Israel did an enormous favor to the world when its bombers made a pre-emptive strike against Suddam Hussein’s nuclear facility – built by France, by the way. Can you imagine where he would be given two-decades in which to develop nuclear weapons?
Many of the self righteous peaceniks on this forum call me and those like me sheltered. Many here think that the United States has committed an illegal war against Iraq. Had the UN given approval to get rid of Suddam Hussein in first Gulf War would we be here today? We would not be faced with the death of Thousands of Kurds who began to battle Suddam’s forces waiting for the USA to begin an attack on the repressive Regime.
Have you ever considered the reason that Bush was so preemptive was due to the endless discourse that his father was met with in the last Gulf War – Why weren’t we given permission to remove Saddam in Gulf 1? GWB gave the UN plenty of time to make a decision and the UN chose to remain on standard course – which was Saddam’s regime would fall apart.
Many nations have, including the USA, contributed and still contribute to this regime. Many nations still consider the leadership of Iraq a viable organizational body. It’s not important to point fingers anymore we have all contributed to this bully but the time has come to remove this apparition. The time to protest is over the war has begun; protesting now only displaces vital resources and allows Suddam to use the protesting in his favor.
TechRep From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (10 years 9 months 22 hours ago) and read 936 times:
The peaceniks probably have good intentions but the good intentions of the many are being overshadowed by the ulterior motives of the few. I for one support this war or should I say this unfinished war. I support their right to protest but I hope they can keep perspective. Combatants do not make policy they enforce it, protestors should not take out their anger on the Troops.
Goingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (10 years 9 months 22 hours ago) and read 936 times:
What difference does it make? To many, anyone who opposes this war is a moron who should leave the country. Yet when anyone who is for the war is asked to explain the steps leading up to our "intervention" over there, it gets rather polluted. Example:
9/11 - US announces a war on terror - congress approves the use of force to find and bring to justice those responsible for the acts of 9/11
We invade Afghanistan to eliminate the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.
We focus on Saddam Hussein because he "might" be supplying terrorists with chemical weapons. For that matter, so could unemployed Russian scientists, or even a greedy American working with our own program of chemical and biological agents.
We set out to convince the US people that Saddam is a threat because he hasn't abided by the UN resolutions for him to destroy his chemical and biological agents. Despite the fact that there are no links between Iraq and the 9/11 - Saddam must be stopped - and the focus begins shifting away from the events of 9/11...Saddam and 9/11 are now linked via a "six degrees of separation" - Saddam is of Arabic decsent and he is a monster who kills innocent people, just like Osama Bin Laden". Never mind that Hussein and Bin Laden would just as soon kill each other - as far as the war proponets are concerned, they are brothers in arms.
We then focus on his gassing of his own people and the human rights violations as justification for going in (at this point, we have lost sight of the fact that this has nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, but it sounds good and gets more people to support the efforts, so it gets on the front burners).
War proponents point out that Al Qeida leaders are urging others to join Iraq in the fight against the great satan. Now, the odd "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" philosophy is conveniently forgotten - Al Queida and Hussein still hate each other, but they hate the US even more, so they are "brothers". This is used to somehow indicate that Iraq had a hand in the 9/11 attacks.
Finally - it's not just the French, Germans, and Russians who were opposed to this war - and they have been vilified by many for their position - there is one little group that the administration has ignored...a little group called the "Arab League". Now, when "Operation Iraqi Freedom" (still don't understand this naming of wars - and I thought we were at war with terrorism...does the name of this war imply that freeing the Iraqi people is the first step that must be taken to fight terrorism?) is over, how long do you think this group will allow a US installed and back government to exist? When you've got the Arab world solidly AGAINST this action in THEIR own back yard, then you have opened the door for more, not less, terrorism on the shores of the United States.
In a nutshell, this war is wrong because the only thing it will accomplish is an increase in terrorism against the United States...and will still do nothing to bring those responsible for the 9/11 attacks any closer to "justice".
TechRep From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (10 years 9 months 21 hours ago) and read 929 times:
In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into
the US Embassy compound in Beirut. When it explodes, it kills 63 people.
Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps
headquarters in Beirut. 241 US servicemen are killed.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993,
two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in
Langley, Virginia. The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists
are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the
underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six
people are killed and over 1000 are injured.
November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women. A few months later
in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US
military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a
US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12
October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded
killing 17 US Navy Sailors.
And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America. How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran.
Wake up either something is done now or the attacks will continue. To use the argument "terrorism will increase", doesnt take into account that it already has.
Goingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 21 hours ago) and read 925 times:
Techrep - here's the problem I have with the war. Yes, those terrorist attacks were all terrible. How many of them were conducted by the Iraqi's? IMHO, it would be like you having twin sons, Bob and Mike. Bob took your car without permission and wrecked it, so you beat the shit out of Mike to teach them both a lesson. The war is misguided. And if it is misguided, then it is wrong.