you are not in Iraq now. Like the US wasn't involve early in ww2. But later it will pull in all the countries.

Kuu Wrote:What are you guys like 15? This is getting just plain ridicules.

No i just like to argue. lol

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 12:22 AM by Incadude.)

Kuu Wrote:Then why aren't wee in Iraq?


What are you guys like 15? This is getting just plain ridicules.

It's because your country voted to stay in Afghanistan until 2011. They still see it as a vital military area.

Incadude Wrote:you are not in Iraq now. Like the US wasn't involve early in ww2. But later it will pull in all the countries.

That's not entirely true. See above.

Also, Kuu, where the hell do you think pictures like this, an Afghan child waving a Canadian flag, come from?


definitely not "invading 3rd world countries" and murdering civilians and all that shit you and Assassinator have been spouting.

(I got it off Wikimedia, and while looking at the linked pages, I found this lol:
"Corporal Rob Furlong, PPCLI, (Operation Anaconda, Afghanistan) holds the record for the longest recorded and confirmed sniper kill at 2,430 metres (1.51 miles) using a .50 calibre (12.7 mm) McMillan TAC-50 rifle.")

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 12:27 AM by Chroma.)

Dammit, it's almost 1:30 and I have class in less than 9 hours. I'm going to bed. Incadude, as you said earlier, don't bother. Let em argue themselves into a red-faced, huffing frenzy.

Kuu Wrote:Then why aren't wee in Iraq?

metalgear08 Wrote:

Incadude Wrote:you are not in Iraq now. Like the US wasn't involve early in ww2. But later it will pull in all the countries.

That's not entirely true. See above.

a vital military area... i wonder for what? Afghanistan, Turkey, and Iraq are all vital military areas. They all are early areas to keep Iran from taking over the world!!!

lol i sound like a nut but the puzzle pieces do fit. don't they?

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 12:33 AM by Incadude.)

metalgear08 Wrote:I never said that just the US was experiencing shit or I personally was experiencing shit. I was actually talking about the world over. Times are changing, my friend.

If you are talking about the world in general, then how am I not experiencing shit, and you are? So I'm not part of the world?

metalgear08 Wrote:George Bush may be misguided and inexperienced, but he isn't a "horrible human being who killed over 1 million Iraqis and <insert large number here> of Afghans." The total Iraqi death toll, first of all, is sitting right around 200,000. And that's NOT all from us. That's from the children strapped with explosives who walk into a crowded market and push the button, the guys who bomb civilian buses, etc. In fact, the aforementioned tragedies account for most of that death toll. Contrary to your misguided beliefs, the soldiers aren't there shooting civilians on sight.

Now when did I I believed that the soldiers were shooting civilians on sight?

It's like all your other arguments. You just assume your views are automatically right. You never even bother looking at the other side, and considering different point of views.

Take this report for example.  -» http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_...casualties

Quote:Based on the responses, the total casualties were calculated to be 1,220,580 deaths.

...

ORB reported that "48% died from a gunshot wound, 20% from the impact of a car bomb, 9% from aerial bombardment, 6% as a result of an accident and 6% from another blast/ordnance."[1]

Now 1/2 died from gun shots, contradictory to what you said about most dying from Iraqis blowing themselves and each other up.

I know what you're going to say, you're going to say it's bullshit, because you cannot accept anything that is contradictory to your beliefs. I'm not saying that this particular survey is necessarily correct, it could be like you said, only 200,000 casualties, but you cannot say that it is definitely not correct (just because you want to think it's not correct).

And even if you are correct on everything you said, it will be because of the US invasion that so many people are blowing themselves up. So even if it's not directly caused by the invasion, it indirectly is.

metalgear08 Wrote:

Assassinator Wrote:Not everyone shares your thought. I know for a fact that at least most of the Iraqis don't. So because you're stronger, you attack someone weaker to forcefully impose your thoughts onto them.

And you know for a fact? Really? I doubt it. Again, have you spoke to anyone that's ever been over there or been there yourself?

Many surveys have been done, and they show that, in general, the Iraqis don't like the US there.

And it's not like you spoke to any Iraqi there either. And even if you have, you wouldn't have spoken to enough to get a general opinion that can account for everyone.

Assassinator Wrote:1. Wee weren't attacking a 3rd world country, wee were liberating it. There's a difference. Wee freed millions of civilians, everyday people, from a tyrant who wiped out an entire subset of the Arab people not even 30 years ago. Do the Kurds ring any bells? I mean, the man committed genocide.

Look, in the end, every side always think their correct. Hitler probably thought he was correct as well, so did Mussolini, and that Japanese leader guy.

Like some people thinks George Bush is their hero. Some people thinks George Bush is no better than other war criminals. Everyone has different views, and that will continue to be the case.

You simply just only look at your own (George Bush's) view, and simply assume that you're perfectly right.

In your view, you freed millions. In the Iraqi view, you came and murdered a million.

metalgear08 Wrote:2. No, if wee hadn't joined the fight, Germany would have definitely won. In case you forget, wee stopped them from making the nuclear bomb.

Germany was getting donkey raped in Russia due to the winter and everything, and wasn't doing that well in the rest of Europe either. They are also running low on resources to fuel the war. If the US didn't help, maybe it'll just take longer, but Germany most likely would have still lost. And in the end, it was the Russians that got to Berlin first anyway, instead of the allies (and note: allies = not only the US, there was the British and other countries too). So don't try to act like it's all the US's glory that the WW2 was won. Coalition victory (including the Russians too). Not US Victory.

metalgear08 Wrote:Hell, one of my little brother's best friends has family that lives over there, and he talks about how they say they don't live in fear. Real people, man, not the fucked up image the media portrays and that you buy into.

You argue that I'm buying the fudgeed up image the media portrays (I'm not, I don't trust the media at all). I can just argue in the same method that you're just buying the fudgeed up image George Bush portrays to you.

metalgear08 Wrote:

Assassinator Wrote:Now Iraq is somehow better than before? No. Iraq is way more screwed up than it has ever been.

Yes, in fact, it is. Iraq is much better than it was before. As I said twice before, have you ever spoken to anyone that's been over there?

And have you ever spoke to an Iraqi there?

The only one you ever spoke to was a US soldier. he's a goddamn US soldier, of course he would have a biased opinion. Even if he thought otherwise, he probably wouldn't want to diss himself.

And not all soldiers think that way anyway. Take Kuu's friend as an example

Quote:My friend thinks it's chocolate that he has to clean up another countries mess. He always emails us (me and my other friends) complaining how he signed up to protect other countryies but is fed up with cleaning the US's messes.

Key words: protect country. Not attack other country. You say that it's the same thing, and attacking Iraq is protecting yourself by removing the threat. EDIT: you did

metalgear08 Wrote:What, you think he isn't protecting other countries? Wee liberated a country from a dictator, and are currently defending it from those who want it to all go to hell.

Then that's just thinking like Hitler » If wee defeat everyone else, then noone will ever pose a thread to us.

And Iraq is definitely more screwed up than it is now. Look at how much people have died, and how unstable the situation is at the moment. People are shooting each other, blowing themselves up and everything. They weren't before (even if they were, it's much worse now).

metalgear08 Wrote:WWII was a similar situation to what is happening today, albeit on a much larger scale. Wee went in to free an oppressed country from a ruthless dictator who ruled with an iron fist.

Copypaste George Bush view?

metalgear08 Wrote:Not to bring up the WWII thing AGAIN, but if wee had let the evil people be, as you suggest, then you'd most likely be speaking German and be saluting to Hitler's grandson.

Thus wee should crush the US and hang George Bush? (Cause there are a LOT of people in the world that think he's wrong, not just me.) Despite the fact that I don't particularly like current US government, I wouldn't want to go to that path.

And Iraq is NOT going to take over the world. Not even close.

metalgear08 Wrote:Are you on something? Iran has been testing ballistic missiles, and developing its own nuclear technology, under the guise of nuclear power. I mean, the man denies that the Holocaust happened, and says he wants to erase Israel off the map. He's got the power to start some serious shit, and has expressed the interest to do so.

ONCE AGAIN. How do you know ths? Have you seen his stash of weapons and determined that he's no real threat? Have you?

Wow, he has ballistic missiles. Wow, he has a stash of weapons.

Dude, there are craploads of other countries out there with ballistic missiles and a stash of weapons, and actual complete nukes, rather than still in development. And iran won't be close to able to face up to all these countries added up. So they won't try, unless they want to be completely donkey-raped.

And again, for the 1235262124th time, what the fuck does that have to do with Iraq

Incadude Wrote:Totally wrong...  Dotdotdot

how could Germany be a strong country after losing WW1?

Even though they lost, they were still industrially very strong (WW1 damaged other countries as well + there is room for recovery in the period in between. And Germany was pretty good at recovering). They boasted some of the best military technology at the time. They had good tanks, and they had submarines, which were completely pwning allied ships.

If they were weak, then they wouldn't have had the ability to do as much as they did.

Incadude Wrote:Iran wants blood spilled. Who do you think funds and protects the organizations that terrorize european and american countries? Is that not a method of warfare? They are reason Iraq can keep a stable government. This leads us back to the whole topic. Iran supported the the group that attacked america and destroyed the twin towers. So who is attacking first? US? Wee should have attacked first but there's too many people in a blanket of comfort that don't want to wake up and see the truth.

Again, what does that have to do with Iraq?

So I'm not even going to bother arguing with you on that.

---

Look, I'm out of here. It's not worth my time arguing this bullchocolate. It's not like I'm going to change anyone's views, and it's not like anyone's going to change mine. Pointless.

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 12:56 AM by Assassinator.)

* Incadude wants to start a rant on attacking Russia...

yeah i agree Cowboy GW did break the constitution by playing world police on iraq. He did it for the wrong reasons. Probably caused more harm than good. Since Iraq is in state of civil war. Saddam did hate Iran. Which i liked about him. But he wanted to take over Kuwait. Where Cheney's company haliburtan was pumping oil from. I wish WW3 wasn't going to happen but it will. Like i said before "im hope im dead by then".

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 12:59 AM by Incadude.)

Incadude Wrote:yeah i agree Cowboy GW did break the constitution by playing world police on iraq. He did it for the wrong reasons. Probably caused more harm then good. Since Iraq is in state of civil war.

Good, now wee agree. :)

(I was never arguing to you about Iran in the 1st place, it was always about Iraq. And now that's settled.)

but i want to argue some more...

Ok next topic... pick one:

1.) Russia
2.) China
3.) Obama vs McCain
4.) What came first, the chicken or the egg?

(This post was last modified: 12/09/2008 01:05 AM by Kuu.)