the UN has no interest in Justice for Saddam. it let him continue in power 12 years ago and it will continue to do so for as long as we allow it. Saddam has said he would rather die than leave office. Let him have his wish.
the UN has no interest in Justice for Saddam. it let him continue in power 12 years ago and it will continue to do so for as long as we allow it. Saddam has said he would rather die than leave office. Let him have his wish.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Man that just totally destroyed any respect I had for the anti-war movement.
Man that just totally destroyed any respect I had for the anti-war movement.
???
Is this girl your girlfriend or are you her simply her intellectual twin?
At the core of this issue is how states interact with each other in the post Cold War era.
- and this is primarily done through the UN
Our system international collective security has worked for the past 50 years, and scrapping it by changing the rules of the game (ie, preemptive attack is acceptable) is not the best idea right now.
-international collective security... were you referring to NATO? I doubt it.
Only through international cooperation will we solve the problems that face us in now or in the future.
- done through what organization? Not the UN?
Our upcoming war with Iraq is the antithesis of international cooperation, as it looks like now we may be going in alone (literally - without the UN approval or support from the UK). So it's the antithesis of international cooperation because the UN won's sign off on it, but you weren't referring to the UN.
You are an idiot... ha ha ha ha ha ha haaah...
That isn't the question IMO. The question is whether we should try and oust him. If the UN says we should, then we should. If they don't think we should, then we shouldn't. To be honest, I don't really don't care that he abuses his people...it isn't my business. If the world community wants him stopped, I'm all for my country doing their part. If they don't care, I certainly don't.
My only real concern is exterminating everyone involved with 9-11. When we've done that, I will go back to ignoring everything except Speed and Discovery Wings.
i believe santa claus exists. i personally have no evidence for this, but i believe it. disbelief is simply unacceptable to me. -jahawkin.
First I'd like to thank the original poster! Thanks, that was very entertaining!
Many anti-war protesters, including this radio guest are justifying their position in a moral context: that a war in Iraq will result in the needless deaths of many Iraqi civilians. The caller's question, which this girl just can't answer, just implies a basic fact: that inaction with regards to Iraq doesn't stop the killing that's already happening there everyday. This is certainly not justification for intervention, nor should it be, but simply something to remind those who are so concerned about the dire consequences of action that inaction carries a price with it too.
Many anti-war protesters, including this radio guest are justifying their position in a moral context: that a war in Iraq will result in the needless deaths of many Iraqi civilians. The caller's question, which this girl just can't answer, just implies a basic fact: that inaction with regards to Iraq doesn't stop the killing that's already happening there everyday. This is certainly not justification for intervention, nor should it be, but simply something to remind those who are so concerned about the dire consequences of action that inaction carries a price with it too.
Originally posted by: Stark
???
Is this girl your girlfriend or are you her simply her intellectual twin?
At the core of this issue is how states interact with each other in the post Cold War era.
- and this is primarily done through the UN
Our system international collective security has worked for the past 50 years, and scrapping it by changing the rules of the game (ie, preemptive attack is acceptable) is not the best idea right now.
-international collective security... were you referring to NATO? I doubt it.
Only through international cooperation will we solve the problems that face us in now or in the future.
- done through what organization? Not the UN?
Our upcoming war with Iraq is the antithesis of international cooperation, as it looks like now we may be going in alone (literally - without the UN approval or support from the UK). So it's the antithesis of international cooperation because the UN won's sign off on it, but you weren't referring to the UN.
You are an idiot... ha ha ha ha ha ha haaah...
You have to be kidding me!!
I'm talking about the 50 years of collective security that the West has had! Its based on the concept that countries will defend each other if attacked. Institutions like the UN and NATO are used in collective security, but there is an underlaying assumption that if say Mexico get attacked by Cuba, we'll help defend them. Its also based on pattern of behavior and similar characteristics demonstrated over time by the nations engaged in it. There must also be frameworks and rules to this international system, one of them being the principle of sovereignty. The US attacking Iraq would be a violation of sovereignty and would undermine the confidence and trust needed for collective security.
I'm saying this is the antithesis of international cooperation because we could literally be the only nation with soldiers attacking Iraq. The Brits might pull out and then we'll be on our own. Some token support (no military support) from Kuwait, Quatar and other Arabian pen. states but other than that, its all us. Compare this with the first Gulf War where we even had the Syrians supplying soldiers for the cause. That's real international cooperation and what we have now is the US acting alone.
You should read a book about international realations. You might learn a thing or two like how the UN is not the primary way states interact with each other.
Look, it's my turn to weigh in on this issue, again, with some personal experience.
Several years ago, I worked for several brothers that fled Iran because of the conflict with Iraq and the constant turmoil in their nation. His name was Hamid. When we had downtime working together, he would tell me of all he went through escaping that region of the world and what drove him to it. He spoke of things like seeing body parts of friends in the streets from the bombs that Saddam dropped on his home town. He actually saw his fathers head sitting in a gutter on the street after a bombing raid by Iraq that finally caused him to leave. He fled through the mountains and went on a long arduous journey to leave his home country, ultimately because of Saddam and the Iraqi government. It took several months to years and eventually, his brothers he had left behind, managed to make it out of the country too. Stories like this tell me what Saddam is all about. Until you've sat down and actually spoken to someone from the region that's been touched by war and evil regimes, you have no leg to stand on. To attack the guy that called in and call him a fake, etc., is pure and utter ignorance. I suppose you're some kind of dialogue coach or linguist and can pick out Osama's real voice on a telephone call too, right? This guy's assessment of Iraq from his personal experience mirrors very closely that of Hamid and his brother's experience with Saddam attacking their country.
Was he harsh to that woman? Maybe. But someone who knows absolutely what they're talking about will nearly always approach falsehoods vehemently and with little patience for a counter arguement. That is exactly what he did in this instance and her entire arguement crumbled under the weight of his first hand knowledge. Could he have been just as effective without insults? Yes, he could have, but in my experience, insults come from emotion, emotion which is often invoked by false accusations and lack of knowledge. This woman spewed non-sensical rhetoric to someone who knew what the hell he was talking about and she's better off for it, really. Maybe from this point forward she won't be so quick to speak of something she obviously knows nothing about first hand. Perhaps some other people in this thread who've already admitted they don't know what they're talking about should take the same advice listed above.
BTW, I'm trained in interviews and interrogation techniques.
Several years ago, I worked for several brothers that fled Iran because of the conflict with Iraq and the constant turmoil in their nation. His name was Hamid. When we had downtime working together, he would tell me of all he went through escaping that region of the world and what drove him to it. He spoke of things like seeing body parts of friends in the streets from the bombs that Saddam dropped on his home town. He actually saw his fathers head sitting in a gutter on the street after a bombing raid by Iraq that finally caused him to leave. He fled through the mountains and went on a long arduous journey to leave his home country, ultimately because of Saddam and the Iraqi government. It took several months to years and eventually, his brothers he had left behind, managed to make it out of the country too. Stories like this tell me what Saddam is all about. Until you've sat down and actually spoken to someone from the region that's been touched by war and evil regimes, you have no leg to stand on. To attack the guy that called in and call him a fake, etc., is pure and utter ignorance. I suppose you're some kind of dialogue coach or linguist and can pick out Osama's real voice on a telephone call too, right? This guy's assessment of Iraq from his personal experience mirrors very closely that of Hamid and his brother's experience with Saddam attacking their country.
Was he harsh to that woman? Maybe. But someone who knows absolutely what they're talking about will nearly always approach falsehoods vehemently and with little patience for a counter arguement. That is exactly what he did in this instance and her entire arguement crumbled under the weight of his first hand knowledge. Could he have been just as effective without insults? Yes, he could have, but in my experience, insults come from emotion, emotion which is often invoked by false accusations and lack of knowledge. This woman spewed non-sensical rhetoric to someone who knew what the hell he was talking about and she's better off for it, really. Maybe from this point forward she won't be so quick to speak of something she obviously knows nothing about first hand. Perhaps some other people in this thread who've already admitted they don't know what they're talking about should take the same advice listed above.
BTW, I'm trained in interviews and interrogation techniques.
StinkyPinky
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2002
- 6,990
- 1,283
- 126
Wow, that's the biggest case of super ownage I've ever heard. I don't think she'll be talking on air ever again. I actually feel sorry for her. A harsh life lesson.
She's a pretty involved activist. Chances are she'll be spreading her ignorance again on the air very soon. BTW her name is Andrea Buffa, United For Peace and Justice spokesperson.
Much of the anti-war force needs to be taught the same lesson, as they are "protesting" just because they want to be in a group which is getting loads of attention.
I have had this repeating all night and it gets funnier every time. The guy was more than fair with the bird. He won, she lost. I don't know how else you could classify it. He doesn't shout over her and interrupt her until she starts repeating herself again or states something completely irrelevant. The guy does sound exactly like the arab voice on one of the jerky boys tapes, but even if that were the case it too is completely irrelevant.
haha i thought i was the only one playing it over and over
OH NOW YOU LAUGH AT US, DARLING?!
HAHAHA
OH NOW YOU LAUGH AT US, DARLING?!
HAHAHA
outriding
I thought it was Hillary and her "I don't recall".
Anyway, do you want to answer the questions posed?
I thought it was Hillary and her "I don't recall".
Anyway, do you want to answer the questions posed?
that if you think that is was alright for regean to say it and not the girl then you are a hypocrite
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter