Amazing interview with Michael Berg, father of beheaded son in iraq

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

LMAO. You really are that stupid, aren't you.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

Yeah. And George W. Bush ordered the invasion. 100,000 civilians dead. George W. Bush's choice.

Berg, Sr's point was that the kids in Iraq right now are not going to forget how their fathers, mothers, uncles, cousins, siblings died. It's not going to be surprising, exactly, if these kids grow up and decide they want to blow up America. He's talking about a cycle of violence, and how he doesn't want to participate in it.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

so he chose to act like a soverign nation, albeit a nation not favored by the US, but a soverign nation nonetheless. And he was removed from power with military force by our administration.

so now what? it is still his fault that from that point in history to THIS DAY, thousands and thousands of people in Iraq die?

Don't you think our Administration has maybe at LEAST an ounce of responsibilty to the people of Iraq? after taking out its leadership and leaving it to the wolves (terrorists)?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

so he chose to act like a soverign nation, albeit a nation not favored by the US, but a soverign nation nonetheless. And he was removed from power with military force by our administration.

so now what? it is still his fault that from that point in history to THIS DAY, thousands and thousands of people in Iraq die?

Don't you think our Administration has maybe at LEAST an ounce of responsibilty to the people of Iraq? after taking out its leadership and leaving it to the wolves (terrorists)?

It's amazing. But every reason he stated has been proven over and over again to be completely false, but yet, 3 years later, he'll spout that same bullsh*t.

 

[Cerb]

I feel doubly bad, though, because Zarqawi is also a political figure, and his death will re-ignite yet another wave of revenge, and revenge is something that I do not follow, that I do want ask for, that I do not wish for against anybody. And it can't end the cycle. As long as people use violence to combat violence, we will always have violence.

:thumbsup: We should be happy if al-Zarqawi were imprisoned, but in death, there is the probability of being made a focus for revenge, and an inspiration for martyrdom.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
It's amazing. But every reason he stated has been proven over and over again to be completely false, but yet, 3 years later, he'll spout that same bullsh*t.

What?

Go read a timeline of Iraq disarmament.

I swear, sometimes you guys just refuse to acknoledge truth and you somehow twist things into your "bush lies, people die" mantra.

Eitherway, this Berg character is a kook just like sheehan and his 15 minutes will be over with.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Tab
Did anyone actually read the interview? This guy isn't a Cindy Sheehan, he's articulate, smart and isn't a loon. He seems to be one of the few who knows that you can't combat violence with more violence.

I wish more people would realize this...

So, what do you combat violence with? Flowers and hugs?!? That's stopped lots of criminals. If only Churchill had offered to give Hitler a hug, WWII could've been avoided! :roll:

The human being is violent; history has proven this again and again and again and again and again . . . you get the picture. The only options in response are violence or surrender. The emotional (and prone to violence) side of the human mind will never be completely subverted, at least not without drugs. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us for the foreseeable future.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
It's amazing. But every reason he stated has been proven over and over again to be completely false, but yet, 3 years later, he'll spout that same bullsh*t.

What?

Go read a timeline of Iraq disarmament.

I swear, sometimes you guys just refuse to acknoledge truth and you somehow twist things into your "bush lies, people die" mantra.

Eitherway, this Berg character is a kook just like sheehan and his 15 minutes will be over with.

what is the truth? share it with us.

you are running away from a reasoned argument. Don't do it!

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Tab
Did anyone actually read the interview? This guy isn't a Cindy Sheehan, he's articulate, smart and isn't a loon. He seems to be one of the few who knows that you can't combat violence with more violence.

I wish more people would realize this...

So, what do you combat violence with? Flowers and hugs?!? That's stopped lots of criminals. If only Churchill had offered to give Hitler a hug, WWII could've been avoided! :roll:

The human being is violent; history has proven this again and again and again and again and again . . . you get the picture. The only options in response are violence or surrender. The emotional (and prone to violence) side of the human mind will never be completely subverted, at least not without drugs. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us for the foreseeable future.

You know what? you are absolutely right. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and in order to overcome violence we must resort to violence. We can operate no other way. Not with your type of mentality.

But there are people throughout history that have operated with a different type of mentality and have suceeded. It starts with peace in your mind and heart. Mr. Berg is one of those people, unfortunately he is drowning in a sea of hate.

 

[spidey07]

C'mon guys. I don't have to google a timeline for you. You can find that yourselfs.

Just type in "Iraq Disarmament Timeline" and read. You'll see the events that lead up to this and how time and time again Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. And didn't.

He was given a choice/opportunity many times. And he choose his path and the path for his country.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: spidey07
C'mon guys. I don't have to google a timeline for you. You can find that yourselfs.

Just type in "Iraq Disarmament Timeline" and read. You'll see the events that lead up to this and how time and time again Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. And didn't.

He was given a choice/opportunity many times. And he choose his path and the path for his country.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Inspectors were on the ground for months before the invasion getting 100% unfettered full access. Saddam had NOTHING and everybody knew it, even the White House. What was he going to show?

Listen, I know you get all these talking points from your radio gods, but really, you're embarrassing yourself now. Just stop now.

 

[amish]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: saymyname
That guy is a coward.

Word. He's worse than scum. He's a scumbag coward.

He's worse than the witches of brunswick (jersey 911 wifes)

Fact of the matter is his son wanted to help and went and helped and died a very unfortunate and sad death.

Hi Ann! How are you? Eaten any children today?

Are you still upset that Timothy McVeigh didn't kill more people?

oh, i'm ok i guess, but i'm on the rag and out of kiddies. i guess i'll have to make a quick stop at the orphanage.

i'm over the whole mcveigh thing. i've got loads of money from these book deals. i've also got loads of attention from the media. i guess i should send hilary a card for making this all possible instead of just ignoring me like america should.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: spidey07
C'mon guys. I don't have to google a timeline for you. You can find that yourselfs.

Just type in "Iraq Disarmament Timeline" and read. You'll see the events that lead up to this and how time and time again Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. And didn't.

He was given a choice/opportunity many times. And he choose his path and the path for his country.

you must have skipped over my post. Here it is again:

so he chose to act like a soverign nation, albeit a nation not favored by the US, but a soverign nation nonetheless. And he was removed from power with military force by our administration.

so now what? it is still his fault that from that point in history to THIS DAY, thousands and thousands of people in Iraq die?

Don't you think our Administration has maybe at LEAST an ounce of responsibilty to the people of Iraq? after taking out its leadership and leaving it to the wolves (terrorists)?

edit: btw- I couldn't care less about your timeline. That is a useless tangent.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: amish

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: saymyname
That guy is a coward.

Word. He's worse than scum. He's a scumbag coward.

He's worse than the witches of brunswick (jersey 911 wifes)

Fact of the matter is his son wanted to help and went and helped and died a very unfortunate and sad death.

Hi Ann! How are you? Eaten any children today?

Are you still upset that Timothy McVeigh didn't kill more people?

oh, i'm ok i guess, but i'm on the rag and out of kiddies. i guess i'll have to make a quick stop at the orphanage.

i'm over the whole mcveigh thing. i've got loads of money from these book deals. i've also got loads of attention from the media. i guess i should send hilary a card for making this all possible instead of just ignoring me like america should.

:laugh: :beer:

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: spidey07
C'mon guys. I don't have to google a timeline for you. You can find that yourselfs.

Just type in "Iraq Disarmament Timeline" and read. You'll see the events that lead up to this and how time and time again Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. And didn't.

He was given a choice/opportunity many times. And he choose his path and the path for his country.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Inspectors were on the ground for months before the invasion getting 100% unfettered full access. Saddam had NOTHING and everybody knew it, even the White House. What was he going to show?

Listen, I know you get all these talking points from your radio gods, but really, you're embarrassing yourself now. Just stop now.

No, let him keep going. I am hoping that he might learn something.

seriously.

 

[moshquerade]

the guy is out of his mind. so sad. 🙁

 

[spidey07]

OrByte,

Of course I think we have some resonsibility. But the path was chosen by Saddam. All of this could have been avoided if he had just complied with the some 17 attempts to get him to comply.

But to compare the President of the United States to Saddam (as this loon did) just shows how loony he really is. You should have heard some of the stuff coming out of his mouth - it was full of vile, venom and hatred. Not peace.

 

[Albatross]

"Now, take someone who in 1991, who maybe had their family killed by an American bomb, their support system whisked away from them, someone who, instead of being 59, as I was when Nick died, was 5-years-old or 10-years-old. And then If I were that person, might I not learn how to fly a plane into a building or strap a bag of bombs to my back? "

just another excuse to take a cheap shot at bush.
bush=saddam or worse,zarqawi is just a political figure,not the assassin who killed his son and countless iraqi,terrorism is justified,etc.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Tab
Did anyone actually read the interview? This guy isn't a Cindy Sheehan, he's articulate, smart and isn't a loon. He seems to be one of the few who knows that you can't combat violence with more violence.

I wish more people would realize this...

So, what do you combat violence with? Flowers and hugs?!? That's stopped lots of criminals. If only Churchill had offered to give Hitler a hug, WWII could've been avoided! :roll:

The human being is violent; history has proven this again and again and again and again and again . . . you get the picture. The only options in response are violence or surrender. The emotional (and prone to violence) side of the human mind will never be completely subverted, at least not without drugs. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us for the foreseeable future.

You know what? you are absolutely right. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and in order to overcome violence we must resort to violence. We can operate no other way. Not with your type of mentality.

But there are people throughout history that have operated with a different type of mentality and have suceeded. It starts with peace in your mind and heart. Mr. Berg is one of those people, unfortunately he is drowing in a sea of hate.

I never said violence was the only solution; occasionally, however, it's the best solution. I was merely demonstrating that your statement "You can't combat violence with more violence" was clearly false. It's fine to have "peace in your mind and heart" (I think I do), but the rest of the world doesn't, and it's silly and unrealistic to think otherwise.

Take this fellow Berg - it's admirable that he hasn't allowed the loss of his son to consume him with hatred, but if he had a chance to kill al-Zarqawi before he chopped off the head of Berg's son, don't you think he'd resort to violence to save his own child? I know I would.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: spidey07
OrByte,

Of course I think we have some resonsibility. But the path was chosen by Saddam. All of this could have been avoided if he had just complied with the some 17 attempts to get him to comply.

But to compare the President of the United States to Saddam (as this loon did) just shows how loony he really is. You should have heard some of the stuff coming out of his mouth - it was full of vile, venom and hatred. Not peace.

how can you say we have some responsibility, yet turn right around and say the path was chosen by Saddam?

the US did not have to invade Iraq. Iraq was less than worthless in terms of being a threat. Do you still believe Iraq had WMDs?

Again if you look at the numbers of those that have died during the "liberation of Iraq" and those that have died under Saddams rule, it is easy to make the comparisons. You say we have some responsibility, then that means we have to take some of the blame for those that die everyday in Iraq.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

so he chose to act like a soverign nation, albeit a nation not favored by the US, but a soverign nation nonetheless. And he was removed from power with military force by our administration.

so now what? it is still his fault that from that point in history to THIS DAY, thousands and thousands of people in Iraq die?

Don't you think our Administration has maybe at LEAST an ounce of responsibilty to the people of Iraq? after taking out its leadership and leaving it to the wolves (terrorists)?

Saddam =/= the nation of Iraq. Moreover, since he was never popularly elected, none of his actions is any reflection of the national will, no more so than GWB's actions are a reflection of the will of most of the people here.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: spidey07
OrByte,

Of course I think we have some resonsibility. But the path was chosen by Saddam. All of this could have been avoided if he had just complied with the some 17 attempts to get him to comply.

But to compare the President of the United States to Saddam (as this loon did) just shows how loony he really is. You should have heard some of the stuff coming out of his mouth - it was full of vile, venom and hatred. Not peace.

how can you say we have some responsibility, yet turn right around and say the path was chosen by Saddam?

the US did not have to invade Iraq. Iraq was less than worthless in terms of being a threat. Do you still believe Iraq had WMDs?

Again if you look at the numbers of those that have died during the "liberation of Iraq" and those that have died under Saddams rule, it is easy to make the comparisons. You say we have some responsibility, then that means we have to take some of the blame for those that die everyday in Iraq.

you are completely ignoring this statement by spidey: "All of this could have been avoided if he had just complied with the some 17 attempts to get him to comply."

lest we forget, Saddam could've cooperated and prevented this war.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Tab
Did anyone actually read the interview? This guy isn't a Cindy Sheehan, he's articulate, smart and isn't a loon. He seems to be one of the few who knows that you can't combat violence with more violence.

I wish more people would realize this...

So, what do you combat violence with? Flowers and hugs?!? That's stopped lots of criminals. If only Churchill had offered to give Hitler a hug, WWII could've been avoided! :roll:

The human being is violent; history has proven this again and again and again and again and again . . . you get the picture. The only options in response are violence or surrender. The emotional (and prone to violence) side of the human mind will never be completely subverted, at least not without drugs. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us for the foreseeable future.

You know what? you are absolutely right. Violence has been with us since the beginning, and in order to overcome violence we must resort to violence. We can operate no other way. Not with your type of mentality.

But there are people throughout history that have operated with a different type of mentality and have suceeded. It starts with peace in your mind and heart. Mr. Berg is one of those people, unfortunately he is drowing in a sea of hate.

I never said violence was the only solution; occasionally, however, it's the best solution. I was merely demonstrating that your statement "You can't combat violence with more violence" was clearly false. It's fine to have "peace in your mind and heart" (I think I do), but the rest of the world doesn't, and it's silly and unrealistic to think otherwise.

Take this fellow Berg - it's admirable that he hasn't allowed the loss of his son to consume him with hatred, but if he had a chance to kill al-Zarqawi before he chopped off the head of Berg's son, don't you think he'd resort to violence to save his own child? I know I would.

In the bolded you contradict yourself.

I agree that to save a loved one from a violent act I would resort to violence. absolutely. But that is a different argument then what you originally proposed.

and allow me to be silly and unrealistic when it comes to the rest of the world... but the cycle of violence is not the solution, because it will never end.

 

[spidey07]

OrByte,

In case you haven't forgotten. We are at war. People die in a war.

In terms of responsibility we had a resonsibility to act. An obiligation and duty.

I remember what was going on at the time around beginning 2002 and just knew we were going to war and there was no way around it because Saddam kept thumbing his nose and kicking inspectors out. I kept thinkg "man, this isn't good. Those are the kinds of actions that start wars"

But for you guys to compare the President to Saddam, I really think that is reaching. It also proves the "liberals hate america" notion.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: spidey07
Don't you remember? It was building for a long time (years). Shooting at our planes, not letting inspectors in, denying access to certain areas. Then he was warned and warned and warned. Finally an ultimatum was given. He did not comply. His choice.

so he chose to act like a soverign nation, albeit a nation not favored by the US, but a soverign nation nonetheless. And he was removed from power with military force by our administration.

so now what? it is still his fault that from that point in history to THIS DAY, thousands and thousands of people in Iraq die?

Don't you think our Administration has maybe at LEAST an ounce of responsibilty to the people of Iraq? after taking out its leadership and leaving it to the wolves (terrorists)?

Saddam =/= the nation of Iraq. Moreover, since he was never popularly elected, none of his actions is any reflection of the national will, no more so than GWB's actions are a reflection of the will of most of the people here.

ok....?

Sadaam = leadership of Iraq. Does that suit you better?

you are foolish to think that Sadaam wasn't the will of Iraq..popular or otherwise.

Try not to forget that in all of this, we were lead to war under the false pretense that it was to save our heiny from mushroom clouds...not to liberate Iraqs people. The will of Iraqs people was never a factor. So, at the time we were dealing with one Dictator protecting his soverign interests. Or am I still wrong?