[CP5670]

CP5670: You talk about not recognizing any international organization or treaty. That is so clearly a troll that I'm not going to go there... There is this thing called the UN that should be allowed to work, but U.S. won't let them, and now they're going to war on their own.

I don't know what "should" or "should not" be allowed to work, but this is the way things are; it is not a question of what "should" work. This is how the world has always been since the dawn of civilizations and will be for some time to come, which is why initiatives such as the UN have failed to work correctly; an international treaty, just like any other law, only has any meaning at all if it is backed by force or some kind of penalty for disobeying it. If you want to go into the theoretical aspects of why this is so, look for some of my older posts on this topic; it has been brought up many times around here.

I can only hope CP5670 will some day learn more about international relations... His comments leave me confused and conserned for him. (I hope it's just his young age - and no offence there either!)

Come on, is this the best counterargument you can come up with? This is like my saying that "I can only hope Terorist will some day learn more about special functions;" it simply makes no sense on its own.

I must say that I fully respect but utterly disagree with his interpetations as haveing a fundemental flaw, but we have had this discusion and I would rather we stayed on the topic of Iraq, if CP5670 wishes to discus this again he can make another topic

sure thing.
only, problem is, you have never pointed out that fundamental flaw.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Terorist
Goober5000:
"Who do you trust to tell the truth - al Qaeda or Bush? Both al Qaeda and Iraq will say anything if it furthers their own ends."
I trust... neither! Both will lie whenever they want to! Which one do you trust? Bush, simply because he's your leader? Give me a break... Do a little research on that specific matter, you'll find out the truth soon enough. Don't listen to me, Bush or any other side, just look at the facts and history!

I had a feeling I would get this kind of a response. How can you possibly draw moral equivalence between Bush and al-Qaida?!?

I don't trust Bush simply because he's my leader.  I evaluate a person based on his or her deeds.  Clinton was our leader a few years ago, and I wouldn't trust him with a crayon.

[Bobboau]

you know now that I think of it, didn't you allways say that the concept of morality would be replaced by cold law, isn't that something like what the suposed international comunity is composed of?
a whole **** load of treaties that nobody realy cares about for the most part but follow them simply becase there the law

(this was directed at CP, I don't expect many other people to agree with much/any of it)

[Razor]

Originally posted by Bobboau
I think only France was _going to_ use veto....

If that is so, Bush can not possibly go to war with Iraq because if any member of the SC, even if  one gives a veto, no decission can be taken. Tht counts for action too. So if Bush is going into this war WITHOUT an approval from the UN and the SC, he is thus violating who knows how many conventions. Tell ya what people, America should be removed from the SC as soon as possible because if it continues this way, the only thing we will end up with, will (in 99% chances) be a new world war.

[Bobboau]

OH.
MY
GOD

turn on MSNBC, I can not beleve it has a minute by minute count down clock running
that is too much for me,
**** why don't they start takeing odds on a body count or something
now I see were we get our reputation from

this would be worth a lol if it wasn't real

[Bobboau]

we already have a new world war
and I think the UN should be more worried about us leaveing them, as they have proven themselves impotent

[CP5670]

turn on MSNBC, I can not beleve it has a minute by minute count down clock running
that is too much for me,

I just saw that; quite ridiculous.

you know now that I think of it, didn't you allways say that the concept of morality would be replaced by cold law, isn't that something like what the suposed international comunity is composed of?
a whole **** load of treaties that nobody realy cares about for the most part but follow them simply becase there the law

well, the laws made by this "international community" are kind of a strange infusion of traditional ethics and an attempt to keep the world power balance static in the post-WW2 position. They used to be obeyed to some extent by most of the major countries, I suppose one of the reasons being that people were made to think that it was morally correct. Now the US is going against all of them, but all anyone else can do about is whine, because these laws were not backed by any threats, and thus they were not really laws at all.

[Knight Templar]

Originally posted by Bobboau

OH.
MY
GOD

turn on MSNBC, I can not beleve it has a minute by minute count down clock running
that is too much for me,
**** why don't they start takeing odds on a body count or something
now I see were we get our reputation from

this would be worth a lol if it wasn't real

and bush went on and on explaining how the deadline was only the deadline before we get serious and make up an arbitrary deadline.. to keep them guessing..

[Bobboau]

in you're talks of the new morality you never mentioned anything of the laws haveing to be backed by threats, you mearly said people would do what the laws told them to do whatever the laws were, they would do this as naturaly as people get sick at the sight of perceved atrocities, you never said that they would in fact be acting out of fear of the reprecusions of breaking the laws but rather that the laws would become there new religon

so in fact you're new morality is mearly resorting to a facist state were everyone lives in perpetual fear of the governing body.
I can not see this world lasting very long in that state if it were ever to reach it, not with the humans we have today (biologicaly speaking, though perhaps you could engeneer something basied on the human genome)

again directed entierly at CP, everyone else ignor... unless you want to help me

[Bobboau]

well my point was that I couldn't beleve how far they have pushed this into the pay-per-view super-hype get-the-kids-and-some-pop-corn-and-watch-the-entertainment format, I understand they need rateings but couldn't they reserve some sort of illusion of dignity, I'm not going to commit to a full boycott but I have now lost what very very little respect I had for that station and will only look it over briefly between comercals on other stations and then only when I have forgoten about the clock and if it's there away I shal go

[Pera]

CP, one question.

If I smashed in your head with a very large hammer('cause I'm urging to), would that be ok and right just because I can do it?

[CP5670]

in you're talks of the new morality you never mentioned anything of the laws haveing to be backed by threats, you mearly said people would do what the laws told them to do whatever the laws were, they would do this as naturaly as people get sick at the sight of perceved atrocities, you never said that they would in fact be acting out of fear of the reprecusions of breaking the laws but rather that the laws would become there new religon

so in fact you're new morality is mearly resorting to a facist state were everyone lives in perpetual fear of the governing body.
I can not see this world lasting very long in that state if it were ever to reach it, not with the humans we have today (biologicaly speaking, though perhaps you could engeneer something basied on the human genome)

It's a combination of both really; for the most part the people are made to think that, but this doesn't always work perfectly since criminals still exist, so that's what the threat of punishment is there for. But actually, the world is in something of that state even today (and has always been so), just in a somewhat disguised form to make people think otherwise, which is how it must be in order to work. Just think of what crime in the US would be like if there were no punishments for anything; the gangs would end up ruling the nation.

If I smashed in your head with a very large hammer('cause I'm urging to), would that be ok and right just because I can do it?

Certainly; I mean, what does it matter whether or not it is "okay" or "right" if you can do it? I may not like it and may retaliate, but that doesn't make it any more wrong (or right).

[Bobboau]

"Just think of what crime in the US would be like if there were no punishments for anything; the gangs would end up ruling the nation."
and what would be "wrong" with that

[CP5670]

nothing, that's just the way things would be.

[Bobboau]

then why did I sence that you consitered that to be less than desierable?

[CP5670]

undesirable, sure, but that's only from our point of view; it still doesn't make it any more universally right or wrong.

[Falcon X]

MSNBC is getting killed by FoxNews.  They need ratings badly.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Falcon X

IF you read international law, resolutions, and the gulf war peace treaty... we have the full legal right to do this.

...

Just because they have the right doesn't mean they should. They will have China (!), Russia and France + another buttload of opposed countries. This is what we will have after the war. This war isn't the only thing that matters. The US just tackled the entire international community.

Yeah we're dumb asses.  That's why everyone usually comes here for college.... and about 40% R&D is done by us... yeah we're just morons.  Congratulations Mr. Jealous.

Then again, tests have proiven that 40% of the US population (about 110 million) has a lower IQ then the average European.

And it isn't too strange that the US has tall the R&D. Thats just cause they have money. Money to hire 100 of the best scientists. That doesn't mean that the US is "smart". Sorry, don't take this personally but just taking your achievements and say you're smart is a dumb move on its own

Originally posted by Bobboau

most of our bombs are JDAMs they use GPS, so you're right but wrong(ish)

I only said it would "limit" strike capabilities. Not nullify.

F-117, B2, cruse missle

Yes, and some will go down. I never said it would be impossible. i still think the US will win. But at a HIGH price.

and will probly shoot anyhting that threatens them, wich would include Sadams army, I doubt they are going to be itching to make themselves into valid military targets, but who knows maybe they will

They've been in more wars. They know what to do by now.

first off, agreed, fully,
second, I thought Sadam didn't suport fanatics/terrorists

They came to him as volunteers. The US also enlists volunteers. No difference here.

will it be more than he has killed in the last ten?

Probably not, but why kill more? Kinda against the whole "we want to avoid casualties" policy.

BLEH!

[Warlock]

Ok how the hell can ppl sit here and agree Sadam needs to be removed yet not agree with force ? I mean do you really believe he'd just up and leave ? Sad thing is he's been given that option.

And for that whole "The US needs to let the UN do it's job and handle this" mess,. .. what 12 years isn't enough time ? Shall we wait until 3000 for Sadam to disarm ?

But seriously, I've got more respect for Bush simply because of the speech last night were he poointed out the Iraqi army will be given ways to avoid being targetted. Everyone loves to whine about Bush is after Oil and just invading Iraq, yet completely misses the fact we don't want to kill anyone we don't have to.


Then again reading the last few pages that appeared over night,...I see most practice of selective hearing/reading.

[Pera]

Originally posted by Tiara

Then again, tests have proiven that 40% of the US population (about 110 million) has a lower IQ then the average European.

Doesn't an average IQ mean that approximitely 50% of people have less than average IQ?

Originally posted by Warlock
But seriously, I've got more respect for Bush simply because of the speech last night were he poointed out the Iraqi army will be given ways to avoid being targetted. Everyone loves to whine about Bush is after Oil and just invading Iraq, yet completely misses the fact we don't want to kill anyone we don't have to.
 

Wow.

"Hey you! Give us your oil freely and we don't have to kill you."

This man is clearly a saint. I stand in awe of his immense goodness.