|
|
|
|
|
This image has expired.
Final Stats:
| Total Votes |
4 |
| Average Score |
3.25 |
| Verdict |
Good
|
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=18114 |
|
| Comments: 65 (Read/Post) Favorites: 0 (View) |
Submitted
on: 01-29-2003
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Off-topic |
|
|
Description:
State of the Union summary |
Showing page: 1 of 4
[ 1 2 3 4 ]
 |
| #1 |
1-29-2003 @ 06:52:07 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Actually, I remember this exact same thing being posted as a joke editorial in Newsweek. During the first Gulf War.
|
|
| #3 |
1-29-2003 @ 07:06:00 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#2, lets not forget us! Alberta is full of fuckheads and they sure as hell won't give a share oil to lower canada.
|
|
| #5 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:11:41 AM |
| Posted By : tobe82 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#2, If it isn't about the oil, then what is it about?
It's not about the freedom of the people of Iraq, because they will be the only ones to suffer from war and the fuck-up puppet government America will install.
It's not about Al Qaeda, because they hate Saddam as much as we do - he's a secular ruler, but AQ wants Sharia law all across the ME.
It's not about the weapons of mass destruction that America/the UK sold to him (oopsy!), because he has no delivery mechanism.
Of course Europe could survive without ME oil, not only do we have double the average MPG of the USA to begin with, liquid petroleum gas and biological diesel vehicles are available as perfectly viable solutions.
The 'World Economy'? Oh, I see, a whole lot of innocent people have to die (yet again) so that a select few Americans and brown-nosed Brits can prosper. I'm no Communist - but fuck them and fuck your economy.
|
|
| #6 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:26:02 AM |
Posted By : DiRF  |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#5, I'm not even gonna respond to that...*sigh* I have chatted with NUMEROUS Europeans who think it's "cool" to bash W and bash America...
"Oh Nos u canNot b da WoRlds Policemen...Ur acting LikE ur the MoSt powerfUl country in Da wOrld...DaT's arroGant..."
Well tough shit. We ARE the most powerful country in the world (We proved that in WWII, when we saved your country's sorry ass, and France too.), and if we DON'T act like the world's policemen, who the fuck will? Yeah, the problem in Iraq seems small, but if we let all the little problems in the world go unchecked, and given room to grow, and start REALLY threatening the world, who are you gonna cry to THEN?
|
|
| #7 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:30:21 AM |
| Posted By : solid_snake |
Reply | Edit | Del |
all I'm going to say is this:
all the world wars started with what seemed like small issues (to the best of my reconition)
and whenever we try to be the policemen people complain, whenever we keep to ourselfs people complain
|
|
| #8 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:35:24 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I say we should just do whatever can be calculated to be best for us in the long run, and to hell with the rest of the world. Most other countries would do the same for us.
If we feel it's in our best interest to invade Iraq, we should do so, rather than putting up with endless U.N. hand-wringing. So what, even if it is about oil?
However, let's keep in mind that if Iraq has chemical and biological (or nuclear) weapons, it is irrelevant whether they have a means to deliver them. They surely have the ability to deliver payloads into nearby countries, as was shown by the attempted SCUD bombardments during the first Gulf War. And, as has been shown before, if terrorists ever get their hands on chemical or biological weaponry, stuff tends to get bad real fast--remember the Sarin gas incident in the Tokyo subways? By which I mean, even if Iraq lacks the means or intent to deliver their alleged weaponry, they can surely hand it off to someone who can.
[Edited by Lemming on 1-30-2003 @ 10:36:40 AM]
|
|
| #11 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:45:21 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#10, My main complaint is this whole business about the "all for oil" thing. Let's assume for a minute that it is all for oil.
The US gets a large portion of its oil from the Mid-East, but there are other available sources. However, we are NOT the only nation dependent on petroleum-based fuels. Numerous other countries are, as well. Destabilization of the Mid-East means that, even if we do attempt to rely on South America and other sources for our oil, we will be competing with the rest of the world for those resources. Europeans may be able to make some BS argument that they can easily convert to alternative fuel sources, but that's easier said than done. Even if European cars do sip gasoline, they will still require it, and converting to alternative fuels is easier said than done. The fact remains that there are millions of vehicles around the world that, regardless of EU environmentalist posturing, WILL require petroleum.
And everybody's import/export economy will suffer.
|
|
| #12 |
1-30-2003 @ 10:48:45 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#11, Namely OURS.
I'm not saying that there's necessarily some conenction between Iraq and terrorism. Frankly, I don't care. My standard of proof is this (and I'm not saying I've yet been satisfied that war is necessary): Does Iraq present a threat in the Mid-East theatre, and is it likely to have consequences that will negatively impact our economy, either directly or indirectly?
If this is the case, we should go in. If it's not, we shouldn't.
And also, we should attack North Korea regardless. That's something else we didn't do right last time--we satisfied ourselves by simply restoring the borders that existed previously.
|
|
| #13 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:03:53 AM |
| Posted By : kstagger |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#12 - Actually we stopped fighting N. Korea because the Chinese started in on the fighting. We were pushing the North Koreans out... and almost had the whole country until China rushed over the borders and pushed us all the way back to Seoul. McCarthy wanted to use the A-bomb... hey!
But back to Iraq... Saddaam is a bastard. He *may* have dealings with terrorists. W knows something
from our Intelligence network that we may find out on the report to the UN. We have to wait and see. If Saddam is dealing with terrorists, he has to be squashed - no question about it. If we know anything post Sept 11, is that they will do *ANYTHING* to inflict harm on us. I think Europe, etc has forgotten how Sept 11 has traumatized the US.
If anything we (meaning the US) have been rather restrained. If anything, we should invade into Pakistan, wipe out the whole mess in there. Wipe out the Nuclear plants in North Korea, oust Iraq, oust Iran... and give a good thrashing to anyone else...
|
|
| #14 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:05:42 AM |
| Posted By : kstagger |
Reply | Edit | Del |
who may harbor terrorists.
Oh sure, that would make us the 'bullys' - but if we want to do it... we have to do it right!
|
|
| #16 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:14:36 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#14, My big complaint about war on Iraq is not one of cause. For their potential to produce weapons which MAY be used against us, and their potential for destabilizing our economy, I think we've got enough reasons, regardless of whether they are actually involved with terrorism directly, or engaged in other active hostilities.
My question is how we can fight a war on Iraq which will secure the desired outcome without creating something that the rest of the world will view as a total atrocity. Will simply removing Saddam and his government be enough?
|
|
| #17 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:22:53 AM |
| Posted By : mr_mcmunkee |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Wow. I missed this. I'm proud of you guys for talking down that British guy. He has NO clue what it means to be an American, to live in a country with freedoms that need defended, and to be the most powerful nation in the world...which will automatically mean we're the biggest target in the world. If any little European nation was attacked by Iraq, Al Queda, or the Polish Perogie Parade...you KNOW they'd be runinng and crying to us for help. They'd at least expect it because that's always been our role, defender of the free world. We're the only ones who can do it and will. If these other countries, or even ignorant Americans, think it's better that we sit back and let the world around us destroy itself...they're terribly mistaken.
|
|
| #18 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:24:17 AM |
| Posted By : kstagger |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#16 - true... The ME is not exactly known for political stability... our takeover in Afghanistan needs more bolstering. What Afghanistan needs is more money/industry/jobs for the people there. If people have jobs and are making some income, they are less likely to start fighting for holy causes.
The whole tribal infighting makes Afghan's end up shooting themselves in the foot. Hopefully Iraq would be better since they have more existing infrastructure. Just lop off the head and replace it with
something better.... well hopefully better. But it will be a big mess either way. We would have to setup someone/something that is respected by the other ME countries and is not perceived as a puppet of the USA. A difficult task.
Iraq could be a great country since they get a lot of income from oil. They could have beautiful cities and well educated people. But instead they have a terrible dictator and oppression.
|
|
| #19 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:25:59 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
You'd think by now that Europe and the U.N. would realize that, in the event we decide to go in and kick some ass, we're probably not going to ask for their input, unless they're interested in joining in the fun.
|
|
| #20 |
1-30-2003 @ 11:30:58 AM |
| Posted By : kstagger |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Afghanistan needs a Job Corp... of afghanCorps for building roads...
Iraq just needs a government reorganization...
|
Showing page: 1 of 4
[ 1 2 3 4 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
