to crushingbore, parly, david, et al who are anti-war...

[Mindy's ghost]

can you find any real faults in my argument versus the other one provided in this thread? i take great offense at this person saying that i need to check my facts, especially since most of his arguments seem to be devoid of any!

http://www.moviesthatsuck.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000054.html

it kind of sucks fighting with people on that board. it's the first board i ever posted at. i've been posting there for nearly two years, on and off. the site recent underwent a revamping, so the old messageboard got erased, along with a good many of my posts. *sniffle* i like a lot of people on that board (including that rufus person), but damned if they aren't either warmongers or cowardly lions too afraid to roar. i especially resent the recent michael moore bashing on that site, not because i like michael moore (although i do), but because it's so f-ing poorly done! i mean, talk about needing to check one's facts!

so tell me, are there any real chinks in my armor? please indulge me.

 

[Me]

Me me me me me me me me meeeee! me me me me me me

me me me me me me meeeee! me me me me meeeeeeeeee! me me

me me me meeee! me me me me me me me me me me

me me me me me me me meeeeeeeeeee! me me me me me me

me me me me meeeeeeeeee! me me me meeeeeeeeee! me me me me

meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! MEEEEEEE!

MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

 

[An observer]

Why are you concerned with reporting facts to Rufus? From the get-go Rufus clearly stated that he won't listen.

Whatever facts you bring up in opposition to his "argument" (which is muddle-headed, sarcastic, and plainly vicious) will be refuted energetically by Rufus, whether they have merit or not. As with so many on both sides of this debate, his mind is made up about not only the war but the ignorance of those on the other side of the argument as well. You might as well be screaming at a wall.

This is not to say that you should give up trying to talk reasonably about why the war is wrong. Just give up on Rufus and turn your attention to people for whom your words may actually count for something.

 

[Mindy's ghost]

thank you for the advice. sadly, the board has a long history of censorship. a lot of people used to get banned for spouting opinions different from those of the board regulars (although, in most cases, it was because they were trolls or people one of us knew from elsewhere who were just there to annoy us/get some small measure of revenge for some miniscule slight). but yeah, people on that site seem to not want to dissent for fear of getting banned. that's why i'd been keeping my mouth shut for a while. but yes, you are right. rufus, long ago, proved his ignorance and hypocrisy.

by the way, i think you're much too kind. my response to rufus's argument is "what argument?!"

 

[the importance of being mindy]

> can you find any real faults in my argument versus the other one provided
> in this thread? i take great offense at this person saying that i need to
> check my facts, especially since most of his arguments seem to be devoid
> of any!

> http://www.moviesthatsuck.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000054.html it kind of
> sucks fighting with people on that board. it's the first board i ever
> posted at. i've been posting there for nearly two years, on and off. the
> site recent underwent a revamping, so the old messageboard got erased,
> along with a good many of my posts. *sniffle* i like a lot of people on
> that board (including that rufus person), but damned if they aren't either
> warmongers or cowardly lions too afraid to roar. i especially resent the
> recent michael moore bashing on that site, not because i like michael
> moore (although i do), but because it's so f-ing poorly done! i mean, talk
> about needing to check one's facts!

> so tell me, are there any real chinks in my armor? please indulge me.

michael moore is a mindless tit. he talks and says stupid shit, just to hear himself say it. people need to let it go, chalk it up to him being a jackass.people think he's smart and courageous for saying and thinking oddball shit, i think we should revoke his citizenship and tote his lard ass over to the middle east, where he can live the rest of his pork rind eating life.

 

[Mindy's ghost]

see, i don't think michael moore is perfect and i readily admit that he manipulates fact in the interest of getting his point across (although, what he does is arguably no worse than what blair did with his forged dossier, but who's keeping track?). however, i can't stand it when people make non-arguments about him. kind of like you just did. he's stupid and fat. that kind of thing. there are a lot of far more intelligent arguments one could make about michael moore.

 

[CrushingBore]

Well, as you say this Rufus presents almost no facts whatsoever to bolster his own argument, so I wouldn't feel terribly taken to task by his own admittedly anti-liberal ramblings.
1. He tells you to "just wait" or similar in relation to links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, which clearly demonstrates the fact that he has no real facts to bolster his own argument.
2. when he says "who says Saudi Arabia and Iran aren't next" who the f*** does he think he's kidding? Iran IS next, and Dubya's told us as much, but so long as Saudi Arabia remains a US ally, they will NEVER be on the hitlist, for the same reason Pakistan won't be - you can be as brutal as you want vis a vis your own people and accumulating WMD's so long as you support the US!
3. And for God's sake the guy's just given a comprehensive "up yours" to International law. Effectively what he's saying is that the US alone ought to be allowed to dictate who should or shouldn't be in power in any country on Earth. Which is fine, but he shouldn't in future be surprised at how much the US is derided as an arrogant and self-interested superpower given point 2.
4. The media is NOT demanding "are we there yet?" so much as "why were we told this war would be a cakewalk, and that the Iraqi people would greet us with flowers and confectionary when the opposite is quite demonstrably the case". The answer is a complex one, but essentially if one nation on earth feels like it has the right to determine who governs another and unilaterally declare war where no hostile action has directly been taken against it then it really oughtn't to be any surprise that no matter how much they hate their dictator the Iraqi people will oppose foreigners telling how they ought to be governed.
5. His most stupid-arsed tactic is to actually concede your argument vis a vis consistency over other despotic (and terror-backing) regimes by saying "I'll call George Bush and tell him to attack everyone immediately, post haste, without delay. He'll have started World War III, simultaneously allowing his enemies to be right for once." He's effectively saying "it's OK to be inconsistent on that point because the whole world would realise how unjust it is for the US to picking winners and losers in that regard".
6. The question of US rebuilding in Afghanistan is absurd. The fact is that active US involvement in Afhanistan is confined almost exclusively to participating in operations aimed at weeding out Al Qaeda and Taliban intransigents. US money is going towards the rebuilding/establishment of civilian infrastructure, but the active peacekeeping role has been left to those much-demonised Germans and the British. The Pakistani ISO is reported to have been active in its support and promotion of particular favoured warlords (thereby destabilising the elected government), but you don't hear much about US efforts to neutralise this influence, because the real ongoing game in Afghanistan is advancing US interests (ie capturing Bin Laden and destroying Al Qaeda). In the context of the extent to which Bush is proceeding to bankrupt the US Treasury by spending billions on the war in Iraq the ability of the US even to provide the ongoing and indirect monetary assistance to Afghanistan has to be questioned.
7. He says "there are changes afoot in saudi Arabia too, I'LL WAGER" (my capitals) therefore he has proven he has NO IDEA what is actually going on in Saudi Arabia, he's merely willing to take wild guesses and keep hoping. The Saudis have taken some moves towards eliminating alleged sources of Al Qaeda funding, but if he thinks real change in Saudi Arabia is driven by the attitude of the House of Saud, firstly he's badly mistaken and has no idea how much the regime is despised by ordinary Saudis, and secondly he neglects the fact that King Saud is on record as stating he has serious concerns governing the entirety of US policy in the region, and the extent to which they are forcing him into a dangerous corner in relation to the attitudes of his own people.
8. And regarding his original post - in no way did the people or government of Iraq who are having the crap bombed out of them in any way finance or actively support the events of Sept. 11 which he uses to justify the whole exercise like a twisted, ghoulish bigot. Provoked retaliation is fine, but if he's going to use that metaphor you should point out that a better analogy would be "if I punch you in the nose, then you would be justified in punching anyone who you feel vaguely looks like me right back, and doing the same to anyone who may have in any way had some association with me in the past, or that you feel might be likely to associate with me in the future. And if they appear to have the same religion as me, well you are justified in using knuckledusters".
9. And he completely avoids the question of why a direct recourse to war was needed NOW if the exercise is intended as a true "war on terror". Considering the radicalisation of the Muslim world the whole thing has engendered, a better phrase might be "the war that ensures we're able to splurge untold billions ensuring that we're able to keep asking for untold billions fighting a war on terror which was prolonged by the fact that we unilaterally and arbitrarily declared war on terror as the motivation and justification for invading a sovereign country".
10. At least he doesn't pretend the whole thing is somehow motivated by some altruistic concern for the Iraqi people.
11. I'm very tired, and I'm going to bed now.
LOL, the bore.

 

[CrushingBore]

The importance of being a prize nob-end

> michael moore is a mindless tit. he talks and says stupid shit, just to
> hear himself say it.

Well, you two have something profoundly in common, then!

> people think he's smart and courageous for saying and thinking
> oddball shit,

Well, I think he's courageous for just plain thinking. I'm sure they thought Columbus was talking "oddball shit" when he posited that the world was round. The majority is not always right - just look at Germany in the 1930's.

> i think we should revoke his citizenship and tote his lard
> ass over to the middle east, where he can live the rest of his pork rind
> eating life.

I think you should be forced to stew in your own bile for all eternity.

 

[Mindy's ghost]

thank you, bore. i feel so much better now. (i've been in a really weird mood where little things like this have been irking the f*** out of me.)

>10. At least he doesn't pretend the whole thing is somehow motivated by some altruistic concern for the Iraqi people.

and yes, that's one thing rufus has on oaf. (the sad thing is that i like the both of them when they aren't spouting their conservative crap.)

 

[CrushingBore]

Anyone heard from the Oaf since war broke out?

He's probably glued to Fox News lamenting the fact that these stupid Iraqis aren't showering the soldiers with flowers and lollies.

 

[Mindy's ghost]

Re: Anyone heard from the Oaf since war broke out?

those ingrates!

 

[LoafingOaf - AIPAC conspirator]

that's so cute, you miss me! and here i thought the board needed a break from me.

> He's probably glued to Fox News lamenting the fact that these stupid
> Iraqis aren't showering the soldiers with flowers and lollies.

Actually, I've been busy with a 30+ page paper I'm doing for my Race, Racism & the Law course, to fulfill one of my final requirements for graduation.

And I'm extremely proud and pleased with the way the war has been going. Nearly perfectly so far. I had been expecting the PAtriot missile defense system to fail, and it hasn't. And I had expected all the oil fields and bridges to be taken out by Saddam, which he failed to pull off. In fact, Saddam may have even failed to survive the first 2 minutes of the war! But I'm trying to stay out of the idiotic debates over every little incident that happens along the way, which are all just about distracting people's eyes from the ball. I don't know if they were aware of it, but I already knew some people were gonna die in a war.

So, as I said the other week, I'm holding my breath and praying Saddam can't pull off some final massive atrocity on his people before the final nail is hammered in his coffin. But so far so good. And the media has the same ridiculous pattern every war, always panicking in week 2 before the good old Americans and British pull it out soon enough thereafter. And I find it humorous that the same people who said we were gonna start WW3, or get caught up in a Viet Nam like quagmire, suddenly have started saying, "How come another ten minutes went by and you haven't won yet?" LOL! As far as how the Iraqi people feel, I'm 100% sure the substantial majority will be quite pleased and relieved to be rid of Saddam, although I wouldn't ever claim to know how they'll feel about anything beyond that. I'm glad that they'll be able to speak for themselves for the first time in decades, thanks to the Coalition. And it is not civilians who are fighting us. In fact, we just rounded up a handful of Iraqi generals and other scumbuckets thanks to the help of some Iraqi civilians.

Oh, I still don't see the hundreds of thousands of innocents being killed by Americans via carpet bombing and MOABs that some of you guys were predicting.
You guys did say that, right? Hundreds of thousands. I know I read it here.

Some people are always wrong and never learn. Someday I hope you'll realize that the reason America invested all that money in precision weaponry was because we don't wanna kill innocent people, and that that gives America a rather distinctive morality in this f***ed up world that we should feel good about. Duh!

Anyway...I taped the USA network's biopic of Rudy Giuliani, starring James Woods, so I'll leave the FOX news coverage alone for another night. Yes, good old Rudy. You know what, he was one of those "right wing fascists," according to the freakish-extremist left wing. A fascist? Hmm. Imagine that. If you wanna reduce crime in New York, you're a fascist! Amazing mentality and logic on the far left, eh. I dunno, Rudy always seemed decent enough to me, so I'm gonna pop some popcorn and watch this flick. Cuz I relate to him far more than I relate to the people who called him names. If Rudy's a "fascist," I guess I am too. And if this war is "Nazi-like," then hell, I guess I am too.

But then, what are these people who are always screaming these silly, fashionable, brainless things about people who are far better than they are? Well, interestingly enough, they sound almost indistinguishable from the ugly, vile rantings of the Iraqi Information Minister whom I've had the misfortune of seeing on IRaqi TV these past couple weeks. If I closed my eyes and wasn't told it was Iraqi TV, I'd think it was one of the so-called "peace protestors" I was hearing. So, yeah, whatever, I feel pretty good with the side I'm on and the people I relate to. Hope you do too.

This morning's newest poll out of France says one out of three French are rooting for Saddam. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-631671,00.html Imagine that. People sure do see things differently in this world. But yeah, I feel pretty good with my side - the side that, um, doesn't think peace and justice is promoted by Saddam winning the war....

 

[david]

hey Mindy, welcome back

no, there are not really Mindy. You have a good argument...the two things that I find strange about this Rufus bloke are...

1. he is the moderator....it does my head in when moderators talk crap just to provoke arguments.

2. his name is Rufus, so don't trust what he says too much...

I am no longer talking about the war...let's hope Bush hasn't started something he just can't finish (hey, it is a Moz board after all!)