West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: infinite59 on April 26, 2004, 11:00:26 PM
-
This U.S. govt. propaganda is so blatantly obvious. People have been so easily fooled into believing that weapons of mass destruction are a justification for war, when Isreal and the United States have more Weapons of Mass Destruction than anyone (besides Russia). And America is still the only country who has used them (WW2).
Also, the use of this word terrorism has vaguely been applied to mean anyone who challenges the will of George Bush. People fall for this. The media has total mind control.
I had an old friend tell me the other day that he's been trying to understand the Isreali/Palestinian conflict so he's been trying to watch CNN alot. I'm sorry, but that's not going to cut it. That's just going to give you U.S. government propaganda. You got to check the history.
-
lol @ your friend.
What can I say American people are flat out stupid ;D
-
iraq used them against iran
when america dropped the bomb on japan it probably saved more lives than it killed cos otherwise japs would have carried on till the end especially as they thaught they were unconquourable because there haddn't been a successful invasion of japan in over 1000 years, and they also had a much stronger mentality than the allies. and until then surrender wasn't an ooption even tho the generals knew they couldn't win.
at the end of the day western countries now would never use WMD unless they were used on us and that was our only defense, times have changed alot since WW2
-
iraq used them against iran
when america dropped the bomb on japan it probably saved more lives than it killed cos otherwise japs would have carried on till the end especially as they thaught they were unconquourable because there haddn't been a successful invasion of japan in over 1000 years, and they also had a much stronger mentality than the allies. and until then surrender wasn't an ooption even tho the generals knew they couldn't win.
at the end of the day western countries now would never use WMD unless they were used on us and that was our only defense, times have changed alot since WW2
What was the second bomb dropped for ?
-
This U.S. govt. propaganda is so blatantly obvious. People have been so easily fooled into believing that weapons of mass destruction are a justification for war, when Isreal and the United States have more Weapons of Mass Destruction than anyone (besides Russia). And America is still the only country who has used them (WW2).
Yo man, stop with the Islamic propaganda. The difference between the US having weapons of mass destruction and Iraq having them is that Iraq agreed to discontinue all of its weapons programs AS A RESULT OF THE CEASEFIRE AGREEMENT THAT ENDED THE FIRST GULF WAR. The fact that Iraq had started up its weapons programs and kicked UN weapons inspectors out of the country violated the UN ceasefire.
Seriously, open your eyes and quit being such a sheep. Where do you get your information from, Al-Jazeera?
-
will your islamic bullshit ever cease?
1. saddam hussein is a person who quietly killed thousands of his own people and threw them in mass graves, he invaded another country for no reason, and when pushed back into his own country, starts oil mines on fire...this is the kind of responsible individual we should let have WMD
2. when we went to war with Iraq, it was just that.....the war with iraq....now it's against terrorists
3. and on cnn i hear about bombings of israelites and tanks running over palistinians...so where's the US spin on that?
-
Israelis not Israelites...LOL
-
Israelis not Israelites...LOL
i was talking about the fat free ones 8)
-
And nevertheless, he's right about the propaganda.
I remember that after 911 and when the plans for a war on Afghanistan first came to the ear of the public,CNN had all kinds of interviews with people who had lost family and such in the 911 disaster and every interview would be like this:
-A part describing how great the lost person was and how he/she was missed (this involved lots of crying,understandably)
- Then a part where people said how they couldn't understand why this was done
and at last, the interviewer asked 'do you think the Americans should punish the ones organising this terrible event?' and of course, people answered 'Yes,I want that' then the interviewer would ask 'Should we make a war on them,if that's neccesary to punish them?' and of course, the people answered in tears 'Yes'
And this way propaganda for a war on Afghanistan was made.
-
this is the kind of responsible individual we should let have WMD
LMFAO!!!! This is a great question/. Go visit Reagan when hes not shaking and ask him this question. He had no problems providing the weaponry./
-
Z Virus, it didn't take interviews with the victims to spread the want for war. The second the first plane hit the wtc, there were a million rednecks in my area ready for war.
Infinite, these threads do nothing but show how dumb you think the typical american is. I take it as an insult that you feel the need to "expose" these things. If people can't see the media for what it is, then they aren't going to understand or care when someone tries to spell it out for them. You are wasting your breath.
-
this is the kind of responsible individual we should let have WMD
LMFAO!!!! This is a great question/. Go visit Reagan when hes not shaking and ask him this question. He had no problems providing the weaponry./
ask him what question?
-
Z Virus, it didn't take interviews with the victims to spread the want for war. The second the first plane hit the wtc, there were a million rednecks in my area ready for war.
Of course it did. As I'm sure 'your area' isn't the entire US, this instance of 'a million rednecks ready for war' can hardly be called representative.That said,though I'm sure no American wouldn't want the ones organising this to get away with it,I'm also sure that they didn't all think of a war on Afghanistan as the way to punish them. It was the propaganda by Bush that made the majority think war was the best way to do this. A war would serve, and has served, Bush well. The US was in an economic dip and as Hitler could have told you, making warplans and giving the war industry a push provides a major boost to an economy. Therefore, a war would come in very handy and the Twin Tower event,though terrible, couldn't have occured at a better moment. And then the machine of propaganda started working and the rest is history.
-
this is the kind of responsible individual we should let have WMD
LMFAO!!!! This is a great question/. Go visit Reagan when hes not shaking and ask him this question. He had no problems providing the weaponry./
ask him what question?
Reagan supplied Saddam with with weapons of mass distruction to aid Iraq's war with Iran, which lasted 8 years. Remember, we hated Iran more than any other nation, including the USSR in the 80's. Reagan gave Saddam all of his weapons, and Saddam used the technology to make more weapons, and after his war with Iran which he had thousands of Kurds killed, turned to Kuwait over using his cool new weapons, and the United Nations led a group of nations, which the U.S. headed, to take back Kuwait, and Bush Sr. and the U.N. wanted Iraq to destroy their weapons. Answer questions?
-
so thank you for strengthening my arguement....we gave him WMD and he abused them so we took them away and wanted to make sure he didn't have anymore...
-
And nevertheless, he's right about the propaganda.
I remember that after 911 and when the plans for a war on Afghanistan first came to the ear of the public,CNN had all kinds of interviews with people who had lost family and such in the 911 disaster and every interview would be like this:
-A part describing how great the lost person was and how he/she was missed (this involved lots of crying,understandably)
- Then a part where people said how they couldn't understand why this was done
and at last, the interviewer asked 'do you think the Americans should punish the ones organising this terrible event?' and of course, people answered 'Yes,I want that' then the interviewer would ask 'Should we make a war on them,if that's neccesary to punish them?' and of course, the people answered in tears 'Yes'
And this way propaganda for a war on Afghanistan was made.
grieving and revenge is apart of coping with a tragic loss of life, this also happens when people are killed by drunk drivers.... i guess we shouldn't prosecute drunk drivers either because we're just falling for US propaganda?
-
so thank you for strengthening my arguement....we gave him WMD and he abused them so we took them away and wanted to make sure he didn't have anymore...
oh kay then. We haven't had any signs of Iraq housing WMD since 1998, and that was suspecting, not even proven. The war was argued because Saddam had weapons, and he didn't want to get rid of them. But for the 5 years leading up to the war, we never had any solid proof of it. The war was senseless in that Saddam had no weapons, Bush promised weapons, and we get no weapons, but to spare the troops the feeling of fighting for nothing, we say we are liberating Iraq, a nation that well some are happy about getting rid of Saddam, some are not. Hell, in 2000, Bush didn't even get the majority of the vote, and his president, which is against the United States will due to a faulty election system, we hold WMD, and we have used them, Iraq being the latest in 1991, and if you don't believe me, ask a vet, I have a few in my family who told me about the weapons they used. And with that, no one liberated us. One country should not control the government of another. You then have a puppet government. We didn't even remove the Empiror of Japan, who we looked at as our worst enemy, remember, he did bomb us, he did actually have our men killed. We have yet to remove all the other evil governments around the world. We don't have that right. So why are we in Iraq fighting a war that proved to be another Vietnam, a war we can't win because the people we are fighting, like in Vietnam, you can kill them all, but their cause will still have them fight on. In Vietnam, we may have had about 500 solders coming home in boxes a week, one of them my uncle who my dad still talks about, but we killed about 1400 of them a week, and destroyed villages, LBJ was up all night with the best military people in the U.S., trying to figure out how to win this war and beat the other into submission, but you can't. In Iraq now, Saddam is gone, his sons dead, his daughters are hidding, the other former leaders are captured, and the fighting is getting worst, why? because you have a people that are used to being down, poor, hungry, seeing friends and family dying, and you know what, they have nothing to lose. To die in combat is an honor, to them, we are the rich United States, the powerful, the New York Yankees of the world, the country that has everything because they stepped on your back. You see, they have nothing to lose, and you can't beat that. How can you lose, when you have nothing to lose. Saddam is gone, the rest are either captured are dead, and they still fight on. If you don't get it by now, you never will.
Your arguments are very interesting about drunk drivers. I honestly have no clue about your connection. I just find it interesting that once the planes hit in New York, our leaders knew exactly who it was. I'll just say this, something is very fishy right there. The minds and hearts of millions of U.S. citizens where played with to start something we can't win, but are told we can. Of course after 9/11, every U.S. citizen is going to want to destroy who did it. But again, after the Taliban were removed, fighting in Afganistan continues. Hell, fighting in Iraq started just so 9/11 wouldn't happen again, don't believe me your heart was mess with, why in a speech about Iraq, was 9/11 mentioned 13 times, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I'm sorry to say, but Bush knew about 9/11, and used that to start his war.
Talib Kweli said it best:
It's just the beginning, the first inning
Battle for America's soul, the devil's winning
The President is Bush, the Vice President's a Dick
So a whole lot of fuckin is what we gon' get
They don't wanna raise the babies so the election is fixed
That's why we don't be fuckin with politics
-
when america dropped the bomb on japan it probably saved more lives than it killed cos otherwise japs would have carried on till the end especially as they thaught they were unconquourable because there haddn't been a successful invasion of japan in over 1000 years, and they also had a much stronger mentality than the allies. and until then surrender wasn't an ooption even tho the generals knew they couldn't win.
Wrong
The Japanese were ready to surrender
The US wanted to drop the bombs on Japan more as a demonstration to the Soviets not to fuck with them after the war than anything else.
-
hahahahaha, ready to surrender?????? They took the first nuke and STILL didn't give up until the second one hit 3 days later. We killed almost double the people by fire bombing them before we dropped the nukes anyways. Japan was a bull headed nation who didn't know when to say when.
-
so thank you for strengthening my arguement....we gave him WMD and he abused them so we took them away and wanted to make sure he didn't have anymore...
U were just crying right now about, "this is the guy we should let have weapons?"
when u were the ones who gave him the weapons, and stood by his side when he used them
10 yrs later u wana go to war for this reason? LOL
-
so thank you for strengthening my arguement....we gave him WMD and he abused them so we took them away and wanted to make sure he didn't have anymore...
U were just crying right now about, "this is the guy we should let have weapons?"
when u were the ones who gave him the weapons, and stood by his side when he used them
10 yrs later u wana go to war for this reason? LOL
so do we not let kids use writing instruments because they might stab someone with them? the US might be technologically advanced but we still haven't perfected seeing into the future
-
^That's completely beside the point. I'll help you to get back on it:
The point was not that we can't look into the future to see what harm might be done but that it smells rather suspicious to start a war because of something you yourself have given to the one you'll attack,just because he has it. It's like kids playing,one giving the other a shovel and then the first kid hitsthe other one because the other has a shovel that he might use to hit him.
-
^That's completely beside the point. I'll help you to get back on it:
The point was not that we can't look into the future to see what harm might be done but that it smells rather suspicious to start a war because of something you yourself have given to the one you'll attack,just because he has it. It's like kids playing,one giving the other a shovel and then the first kid hitsthe other one because the other has a shovel that he might use to hit him.
nah it's like giving the kid a shovel so he can hit another kid with it.....he does that and then starts harming himself with the shovel, when you ask for it back he doesn't answer so you beat the kids ass
-
^I don't think Saddam threw WMD on Iraq,especially considering he didn't have any.
-
^I don't think Saddam threw WMD on Iraq,especially considering he didn't have any.
you're right, hundreds of thousands of iraqis just decided to fall in mass graves and not get out
-
LOL... the funny thing is, is that you keep up your argument.
Fact, no weapons have been seen in Iraq since after Gulf War I, when the U.N. went in there and told Saddam to destroy his weapons. Fact, in 1998, Bill Clinton bombed what was believed to be a factory for chemical weapons (what they were called before Bush renamed them to make them sound more dangerous). Fact, since 1998, no one has ever investigated if Iraq still has weapons until 2002, in which the U.N. found none. Fact, if Saddam had weapons, I'm pretty sure he'd used them with the U.S. invading, or at the very least, when his sons died. I know if someone killed my sons, I'd use everything in my power to get back at them. You continue an argument that even Bush is starting to take back. Face it, Iraq had no weapons. You were lied to by the man that you put your trust in. It happens. The media, your president, everyone has lied to you. Wake up
-
LOL... the funny thing is, is that you keep up your argument.
Fact, no weapons have been seen in Iraq since after Gulf War I, when the U.N. went in there and told Saddam to destroy his weapons. Fact, in 1998, Bill Clinton bombed what was believed to be a factory for chemical weapons (what they were called before Bush renamed them to make them sound more dangerous). Fact, since 1998, no one has ever investigated if Iraq still has weapons until 2002, in which the U.N. found none. Fact, if Saddam had weapons, I'm pretty sure he'd used them with the U.S. invading, or at the very least, when his sons died. I know if someone killed my sons, I'd use everything in my power to get back at them. You continue an argument that even Bush is starting to take back. Face it, Iraq had no weapons. You were lied to by the man that you put your trust in. It happens. The media, your president, everyone has lied to you. Wake up
i don't think Saddam would have used them...there was no way to win that war even if he did use them.....he would have just lost allies and incurred the full wrath of the world... you people really don't think....most of the world is against the US for attacking them without proof, and then sadaam is just going to whip them out and use them? most of you guys on this board would make shitty advisors because you don't think before you speak. fact is he's had them (because we gave them to him) and second fact is they just don't vanish into thin air.....they are somewhere. anyways saddam wouldn't have used them for two reasons.
1. he did better job discrediting the US
2. it's hard to get electricity in rat holes he was hiding in
-
You truely believe that. You are fucked up.
The supposed thinking of Saddam... "OK, I have weapons, and my sons just died, and the United States is hunting me, but I'm protected in this fox hole with my pistol. I will get killed for my cause because as long as the world doesn't know I have weapons, then they will support me, even though they have not stopped this war."
LOL... damn, you must think of Saddam as a fool, give the man credit, he has been a military dictator for quiet sometime, his regime survived a war with the U.S., and a U.N. blockaid. And he used his weapons that Reagon gave him in the 80's, and people still supported him, why not used the weapons now when everyone hates us. After all, the rest of the world would just say we deserve it. Man, think homie, think
-
you might want to think about your dumb logic before you type again.