• NudeCelebForum has been moved from the vBulletin to the XenForo platform.
    For additional information, see: NCF Moved To XenForo
  • New threads will not be visible until approved by a moderator.
  • Welcome to the forum!
    You must activate your account in order to post and view all forum content
    Please check your email inbox & spam folders for our activation email, then follow the link to validate your email address.
    Contact Us if you are having difficulty posting or viewing forum content.
  • You are viewing our forum as a guest, with limited access.
    By joining you will gain full access to thousands of Videos, Pictures & Much More.
    Membership is absolutely FREE! Registration is FAST & SIMPLE.
    Register Today to join the first, most comprehensive and friendliest communities of nude celebrity fans on the net!
  • See: Humanitarian Assistance to Ukrainians

War In Iraq/Terrorists

moxdevil

moxdevil

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2004
Messages
572
Reaction score
657
cableguy said:
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
Click to expand...

Whilst we're abusing John Stuart Mill quotes-

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

The quote in its entirety renders a completely different meaning.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice,—is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other."

And he's talking about 'war' against the southern slavers of America, not 'war' against other nations. Do take into account the context when one uses a quote, otherwise peoples views can be used to support anything and everything. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
M

mindido

Respected Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
1,829
Reaction score
704
cable,

If this is true:

"the President is the highest ranking military officer in the US"

and this is true:

"because of LAWS, certain orders must be disobeyed if given..."

then, is not the president ultimately responsible for the actions of his subordinates?

The rest of what you said is BS. NO SANE person that I know of (and this is at least the second or third time I've said this) blames the troops for this mess. They aren't the ones that made the decision to start the war but they're the ones paying for it.

"mindido and iceberg, under what circumstances would you say a war SHOULD be fought???"

Afghanistan.

"how far should it go,..."

Anyone that has ever been to war will tell you that there is NO human activity worse than war. When FORCED into it (like we were in Afghanistan) then it is no holds barred. You do what has to be done.

"and what are your conditions for victory, if any??"

There are no conditions, only when the job is done.


War,

"The terrorists hate our freedom guys."

War, this is a smoke screen. Do you really think they hate us because of our freedom? Do some research on what the US has done in the middle east starting about the first world war. You may be surprised to find why they actually hate us. But remember the key date is November 29, 1947.

And back on topic, another indicator we're getting closer to Vietnam:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050623...gaoUU0B;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 
Supafly

Supafly

Barely Ever Here
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Messages
4,004
Reaction score
255
Mindido

Let me school you a little.

Unfortunately, War is on your side and was being facetious.

Although we have different views we're still boys so I'll give him a plug.

Check out his site.

http://warforever.com/
 
M

mindido

Respected Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
1,829
Reaction score
704
Supa,

Thanks, I didn't realize.

War,

Sorry, I didn't know. Checked the site out briefly and particularly liked the "A Meditation on Politics" commentary. I agree with you almost 100%.
 
cableguy

cableguy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
595
Reaction score
0
mox, many thanks for completing that quote... i was unaware it was a partial... :( my bad...

i still think it applies, though... the war in iraq, as i personally see it, is morally and legally justified, in addition to being the right thing to do...

mindido, you still cannot have one without the other... if an unlawful order is carried out, the soldier/sailor/airman/marine is guilty of every single charge levelled against those who purportedly initiated said charge... thusly, impugning President Bush for the actions of members of the military is, by extension, an attack on those servicemembers as well... each servicemember has the DUTY to obey ONLY lawful orders... it seems to me, that with very few exceptions, there have pretty much only been lawful orders given.. we would most certainly have heard about it if this were not the case...
 
I

Iceberg

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
515
Reaction score
10
cableguy said:
the war in iraq, as i personally see it, is morally and legally justified, in addition to being the right thing to do...
Click to expand...

How is this when it was a violation of international law? How can anything be legally justified when it violates law? It's like an Islamic fundamentalist saying killing the current president is legally justified because it prevents their people from getting killed by the US military. This breaks international law, and is completely irrational.

cableguy said:
the President is the highest ranking military officer in the US
Click to expand...

Kind of a conundrum you're in, eh? The highest (and second-highest, if it is indeed Cheney) ranking military officer in the US is a guy (or guys) who did all he (they) could to avoid serving in Vietnam. (Student deferments, marrying and having children earlier than planned, etc.) How many students were DRAFTED and DIED in Vietnam while Bush was out binge drinking and doing coke?

cableguy said:
mindido and iceberg, under what circumstances would you say a war SHOULD be fought
Click to expand...

Afghanistan, WWII, maybe WWI, maybe Korea, and the War of 1812 (YAY, Canada!!!).

Afghanistan, since it was against an identifiable threat to the US and its people (Al'Qaeda).

WWII, since it was against a threat to civility in Europe and the world and a fight for the survival of an identifiable group of people (Jews). And there's the Japanese.

WWI was strange in that it was a fight over diplomatic failures and land squabbles. Germany was no great threat to Britain at the time, however, there was a sort of military competition, which boiled over when Archduke Franz Ferdinand of the Austral-Hungarian Empire was shot and killed in Sarajevo, triggering a chain reaction, which brought in Russia, Germany, France, and Britain into the war.

Korea, perhaps, since it was against the threat of an imperial conquest of Communist China towards the Korean Peninsula, which was a part of the Cold War premise.

The War of 1812, since it was a fight against American annexation of British North America (the term for Canada prior to Confederation in 1867).
 
cableguy

cableguy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
595
Reaction score
0
this current war can be justified by using your ww2 rationale... it is a fight for the survival of a clearly defined group of people.. actually, several groups... first and foremost, jews again... second, Americans.. perhaps extermination of Americans is a noble cause in your eyes, but as an American, i assure you i am in favor of any and all measures being used to prevent this from happening...

the justification of korea also fits, as this is also about stemming the tide of militant islamo-facism...

upon review, the afghan justification also fits, as al quaede is NOT the only organization that wants to see more of what happened on 9/11/01... there are many groups that would love to do the same thing... the common denominator is terrorism... terrorism is purpetrated by terrorists, who have no national identity... saddam supported terrorists, and in doing so, supported a threat to the lives of Americans at home and abroad...

international law is a joke, and a bad one at that... nations have interests, which frequently conflict with the interests of other nations... add to your argument that the current enemy has no nationality, and that simply muddys the waters further... is exploding a car bomb at a market filled with women and children noncombatabts against international law?? if it isnt, should it be?? where is your outrage at these acts?? or perhaps you are in favor of such things...

iceberg, someday, you will wake up and see that President Bush dodged nothing, fulfilled the commitment he agreed to, and broke no rules in the process... and he got better grades than kerry did... a conundrum was President Clinton, who DID dodge the draft AND commit treason... he was never my choice for the office...
 
I

Iceberg

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
515
Reaction score
10
cableguy said:
second, Americans.. perhaps extermination of Americans is a noble cause in your eyes, but as an American, i assure you i am in favor of any and all measures being used to prevent this from happening...
Click to expand...

Iraqis never killed one American prior to the US invading their country! At least not since Gulf War I. Get it through your head!

How on Earth can you say that "perhaps extermination of Americans is a noble cause" in my eyes, when the Iraq War, which you support wholeheartedly, is exterminating American soldiers needlessly? How can you say that when I said that the operations in Afghanistan are justified, since Al'Qaeda had a presence there and ought to have been eliminated?

I HAVE RELATIVES WHO ARE AMERICAN!!! THERE IS NO WAY I WANT THEM TO DIE!!! WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SAYING???

As for your last paragraph, it's FOX News bullshit and Swift Boat Rednecks for the Slander of a Great Politican propaganda. STOP LISTENING TO THAT CRAP!!!
 
Supafly

Supafly

Barely Ever Here
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Messages
4,004
Reaction score
255
Iceberg, answer this for us. How many Afgans killed US citizens prior to us invading their country?

I admit we went in thinking one thing and were proven wrong. But guess what, shit like that happens no matter how bad it sucks.

But I guarantee you Al'Qaeda has a presence in Iraq right now.

So using your logic. It's ok in one coutry but not the other. Even though there are similar circumstances.
 
Texan

Texan

The Gunhand
Staff Alumn
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
1,301
Reaction score
1,332
Iceberg said:
[
As for your last paragraph, it's FOX News bullshit and Swift Boat Rednecks for the Slander of a Great Politican propaganda. STOP LISTENING TO THAT CRAP!!!
Click to expand...

Well it is better than Dan Blather and Spineless Jennings.

If you want to keep bitching and complaining about Amercia, become a voting citizen of the greatest nation on earth. Until that time, worry about canada's problems.
 
I

Iceberg

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
515
Reaction score
10
Supafly said:
Iceberg, answer this for us. How many Afgans killed US citizens prior to us invading their country?
Click to expand...

Zero. However, Al'Qaeda, the group that claimed responsibility (and was responsible) for the 9-11 attacks were being harboured by the Taliban. In Iraq, Saddam was not harbouring Al'Qaeda. That, my friend, is the difference.

Supafly said:
I admit we went in thinking one thing and were proven wrong. But guess what, shit like that happens no matter how bad it sucks.
Click to expand...

Mistakes happen, and we all make them, so when people make mistakes, they must learn from them. C'est la vie. It's too bad that this mistake has taken many thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians' lives and the lives of c. 2000 coalition soldiers and many others who have been kidnapped.

Supafly said:
But I guarantee you Al'Qaeda has a presence in Iraq right now.
Click to expand...

That is a certain fact. However, had the US not gone into Iraq, Al'Qaeda would not be in Iraq today.

Supafly said:
So using your logic. It's ok in one coutry but not the other. Even though there are similar circumstances.
Click to expand...

These are similar circumstances only in that neither Afghans nor Iraqis were responsible for 9-11. However, since the Taliban in Afghanistan were harbouring Al'Qaeda terrorists and the Ba'athists in Iraq were not, Afghanistan was justified and Iraq was not.

Texan said:
If you want to keep bitching and complaining about Amercia, become a voting citizen of the greatest nation on earth. Until that time, worry about canada's problems.
Click to expand...

Our problems are a bit worrisome. However, those south of the 49th parallel tend to be far more broad in scope, meaning they affect the whole planet, not just one or a few nations (like our problems tend to, since we only have about 33 million people). Because of this, it seems like all Earthlings have the right to discuss the problems the US faces.
 
war|forever

war|forever

exp0sed samurai
Staff Alumn
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
75
Supafly said:
Unfortunately, War is on your side and was being facetious.
Click to expand...
Haha, a majority of my jokes fail because I'm either going over someone's head, or trying to be funny online. Neither of which result in the desired effect unless I post some gay-ass html slug like [ / sarcasm ]. Good lookin out Supa' (we came up around this place during the same time). CLASS OF JANUARY '05 UNITE!

BOT, did anyone catch that general testifying at the Armed Services Committee that our Vice-President was a lying sack of crap in regards to the "insurgency in it's last throws" comment?
 
M

mindido

Respected Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
1,829
Reaction score
704
War,

Yes, I caught that. There seem to be alot more than that general that aren't backing the VP. That was a pretty stupid statement. What I've found pretty interesting is that CIA report that suggests Al Quaeda is now using Iraq as its basic and advanced training base. Who would have thought.
 
cableguy

cableguy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
595
Reaction score
0
iceberg, thank you for joining the ad hominem as a primary defense club... this was NEVER a war against al quaeda.. it started out as, and still is, a war on terrorism and terrorists... you know what the basis for it is, and where to find it...

the reason i proposed that you might be in favor if exterminating Americans, is that you seem dead set against doing ANYTHING to PREVENT further attacks... we all know who hates the US, and who has called for more attacks against it, and we are learning more and more about who is FUNDING these groups... for a successful attack, the attackers need to be trained and funded... al quaeda is only one of many similar groups... those other groups arent any less of a threat because they havent YET made a successful attack against US soil... that does not mean they dont want to, and it doesnt mean they arent trying to... it also doesnt mean they havent already tried and failed... saddam may not have attacked the US directly, but he sure as hell funded and trained terrorists... if not al quaeda, than some other group...

if you still wish to defend your position, i am all ears...

as for al quaeda using iraq for training, i actually see this as a good thing... the iraqi army and the coalition troops over there are far better suited to fighting terrorists than you or me... also, the ones that are caught in the act in iraq generally end up dead, and not clogging the court system... of the two, i prefer my terrorists dead... they simply cant be used as any sort of bargaining tool that way...

if anyone has a way to prevent further attacks without going to war, i would love to hear it... bottom line, the folks arrayed against the new iraqi government and who are eager to kill massive numbers of civillians hate the US, hate Israel, and simply cannot be talked out of wanting to do us great harm... talk, in this case, is not only cheap, but terribly ineffective... these folks understand the hammer, and thats about it...
 
moxdevil

moxdevil

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2004
Messages
572
Reaction score
657
cableguy said:
iceberg, thank you for joining the ad hominem as a primary defense club... this was NEVER a war against al quaeda.. it started out as, and still is, a war on terrorism and terrorists... you know what the basis for it is, and where to find it...

the reason i proposed that you might be in favor if exterminating Americans, is that you seem dead set against doing ANYTHING to PREVENT further attacks... we all know who hates the US, and who has called for more attacks against it, and we are learning more and more about who is FUNDING these groups... for a successful attack, the attackers need to be trained and funded... al quaeda is only one of many similar groups... those other groups arent any less of a threat because they havent YET made a successful attack against US soil... that does not mean they dont want to, and it doesnt mean they arent trying to... it also doesnt mean they havent already tried and failed... saddam may not have attacked the US directly, but he sure as hell funded and trained terrorists... if not al quaeda, than some other group...
Click to expand...

Cable, by that reasoning the CIA are terrorists and threats to America, they trained some of the leaders of the groups you say want to destroy America. It is also known that some of the Islamic militant groups were aided and trained by Irish Republicans, who are in turn funded and supported by members of your country.
 
I

Iceberg

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
515
Reaction score
10
cableguy said:
iceberg, thank you for joining the ad hominem as a primary defense club... this was NEVER a war against al quaeda.. it started out as, and still is, a war on terrorism and terrorists... you know what the basis for it is, and where to find it...

the reason i proposed that you might be in favor if exterminating Americans, is that you seem dead set against doing ANYTHING to PREVENT further attacks...
Click to expand...

I can't believe how full of shit that comment is.

How the hell do you get that I am "dead set against doing ANYTHING to PREVENT further attacks" if I said a million times that I support the war in Afghanistan? The operations in Afghanistan were to PREVENT further attacks from Al'Qaeda by isolating them and destroying their base (Osama, Mullah Mohammed Omar, et al.).

However, Bush decided that this wasn't worthwhile and left Afghanistan to fester in its own misery (increasing the numbers of disenchanted Afghans who are considering joining Al'Qaeda, further endangering the US), saying Osama was nno longer of concern to him.

What the operations in Iraq will do is increase the number of people joining terrorist organisations which have the purpose of destroying America and Americans. Not only has it made the Middle East more volatile, it has put America in greater danger than if they had just focused on Al'Qaeda.

As far as "the ad hominum as a primary defence club," you have been the most active member of the above named club. In my post, I did not use an ad hominum attack. It was you who used such a cowardly attack.

Get a life.
 
OCC-402

OCC-402

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2004
Messages
270
Reaction score
68
John, John, John,
you've got your priorities all wrong.
While men fly airplanes into skyscrapers,
dive bomb the pentagon,
while they stick explosives into their shoes,
and then book a seat right next to us,
while they hide knives in their luggage,
steal kids on school buses,
take little girls from their beds at night
drive trucks into our state capital buildings,
while our president calls dangerous men all over the world
evildoers and devils,
while we live in the threat of biological warfare
nuclear destruction,
annihilation,
you are out buying yardage
to save Americans
from the appalling
alarming, abominable
aluminum alloy of evil,
that terrible ten foot tin tittie.
You might not be able to find Bin Laden
But you sure as hell found the hooter in the hall of justice.

It's not that we aren't grateful
But while we were begging the women of Afghanistan
to not cover up their faces,
you are begging your staff members to
just cover up that nipple,
to save the American people
from that monstrous metal mammary.
How can we ever thank you?

So, in your office every morning,
in your secret prayer meeting,
while an American woman is sexually assaulted every 6 seconds,
while anthrax floats around the post office,
and settles in the chest of senior citizens,
you've got another chest on your mind.
While American sons arrive home in body bags
and heat seeking missiles,
fly around a foreign country,
looking for any warm body,
you think of another body.
And you pray for the biggest bra in the world John,
because you see that breast on the spirit of justice
in the spirit of your
own inhibited sexuality.
And when we women see
our grandmothers, our mothers, our daughters, our granddaughters,
our sisters, ourselves,
when we women see that
statue the spirit of justice
we see the spirit of strength
the spirit of survival.
While every day
we view innocent bodies dragged out of rubble
and women and children laid out
like thin limp dolls
and baptized into death as collateral damage,
and the hollow eyed Afghani mother's milk has dried
up underneath her burka,
in famine, in shame,
and her children are dead at her breast.

While you look at that breast John,
that jug on the spirit of justice,
and deal with your thoughts of lust,
and sex, and nakedness,
we see it as a testimony motherhood,
And you see it as a tit.

It's not the money it cost.
It's the message you send.
We've got the right to live in freedom.
We got the right to cheat Americans out
of millions of dollars and then
just not want to tell congress about it.
We've got the right
to drop bombs night and day
on a small country that has no army,
no navy, no military at all,
because we've got the right to bear arms
but we just better not even think
about not the right to bare breasts.
So now John, you can be photographed
while you stand there and talk about
guns,and bombs, and poisons,
without the breast appearing over your right shoulder,
without that bodacious bosom bothering you,
and we just wanted to tell you,
in the spirit of justice,
in the spirit of truth,
John,
there is still one very big boob left standing there in that picture.
​

Claire Braz-Valentine
 
Last edited:
cableguy

cableguy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
595
Reaction score
0
iceberg, for the umpteenth time, if unattributed, the words i say are my own, and for the record, yet again, i do not watch fox news or visit their website... period.. when you accuse me of things, please have the common decency to make sure they are things i have done...

afghanistan was retaliatory, iraq was pre-emptive... there is a difference, and you are smart enough to know what it is... that said, i stand wholeheartedly behind what i said... i would like nothing more than for you to show me how i am wrong...
 
Zinista

Zinista

Koalas & Kangaroos kill people
Staff Alumn
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
458
I'd like to know why Saudi Arabia have never been accused of harbouring Terrorists....

Here's an interesting tidbit:

How many of the September 11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia?
Of the 19 hijackers, 15 were Saudi citizens. Many al-Qaeda fighters are from Saudi Arabia, as is Osama bin Laden himself.

More in the article below..

http://cfrterrorism.org/coalition/saudiarabia.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Teenmushi
Skyler / Teeen Skyler
Replies
0
Views
4K
Teenmushi
Teenmushi
Teenmushi
Olivia Jayy
Replies
18
Views
4K
LiCeK
LiCeK
LarryO
  • Locked
  • Sticky
FORUM RULES
Replies
0
Views
4K
LarryO
LarryO
Teenmushi
Angel Youngs
2 3
Replies
46
Views
15K
Teenmushi
Teenmushi
Elsar
Kaycee Ryan
Replies
6
Views
19K
LiCeK
LiCeK
Top