# An open letter to those protesting the war in Iraq:



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 24, 2003)

An open letter to those protesting the war in Iraq:

I dont agree with the reasons Ive seen either.  There are certainly other causes or risks closer to home to be dealt with.  Our economies at a low, businesses are failing, homelessness and unemployment are rising.  In the west, a hostile nation has weapons that can easily reach our western shores. So, why are we in Iraq?

No Blood for Oil you cry.  
Its not about the oil.  
We get less than 11% of our oil from the Middle East. 

No Blood for Israel you cry.
Its not about Israel. 
Israel has been told to keep out of this conflict, and allow US forces to handle it.

Sowhat is it really about?

Its about a dictator who for over a decade has refused to comply with the demands of a world body whose goals are peaceful resolution. 

Its about a sadist who maintains dungeons and torture that would shock the Spanish Inquisition. 





> Witnesses had told them about prisoners of the regime having finger and toenails torn out, being given electric shocks to the genitals, tortured with boiling water and beaten.
> Women were suspended by the hair or legs in front of their families and raped while their husbands were forced to watch.
> Saddam's son Qusay  the head of Iraq's security and intelligence agencies  had administered mustard gas on prisoners, including a 12-year-old boy whose father heard his screams from a neighbouring cell, they were told.
> Saddam's special adviser Barzan al-Tikriti, Iraq's former representative on the UN Commission on Human Rights, had personally taken part in the torture of detainees before their execution.
> ...



Its about a government that forces its people at gunpoint to wave their flag.
In the US, no one makes you wave a flag, or turn out for a parade.  In Iraq, if you dont you may pay with your life.

Ive heard it said that were only in it for the $$ that will be pumped into the big corporations.  Maybe.  But..Iraq has been decaying for over a decade.  Its infrastructure is broken down, jury rigged, obsolete and backwards.  It will take hundreds of billions of $$ to update and repairEstimates run into the decades time wise.  Its definitely not a good short term venture.

The United States is doing what it has to do.  

Who gave us the right?  The rest of the world did.  By sitting there in committees, and debates, and giving Saddam chance after chance after chance.  How many chances do you give before you say enough is enough?  How long do you wait?  The rest of the world gave us the right by sitting there on their asses and doing nothing, or worse.
When no one else would step up to the plate, we took charge.

And now, people are crying because a few dozen soldiers have diedscreaming about the cost.

Hogwash!  

The United States Military is the finest trained, best equipped, and most motivated of any in the world. 

Despite what you may think of George W. Bush, and his government, the generals in the field will not spend their mens lives foolishly. The fact that we have to date covered over 200 miles into enemy held territory and only suffered light losses is a testament to the training, and equipment and planning that is going on. We must be prepared for higher losses, especially if they are forced to take cities.  The British lost just under 240 KIA in 72 days in the Falklands.  During WW2, The Allies sustained about 22,800 casualties in their conquest of Sicily. The Axis powers suffered about 165,000 casualties, of whom 30,000 were Germans. Remember, Sicily is only 110 square miles, slightly less than twice the size of Washington, DC and took 38 days to conquer.  Iraq is 271,596 sq miles.  Thats a lot of ground to cover.
Despite what you may think of this war, or what you may personally believe is behind it please support our troops.  They are doing what we can or will not. They deserve our support, our prayers and our well wishes. It is because of their bravery and sacrifice that we can enjoy the freedoms we have.  It is because they go to places like Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, and Iraq that we can sit at home in comfort and complain.  When you have donned the uniform, and gone thru the training, and put your time in, perhaps then you can judge them.  But for now, whether you support the cause or not, support the troops.

Protest all you want.  Hold your candlelight vigils, march in the streets, wave your flags, whatever.  But, do it peacefully.  And, when this war is over, welcome those brave souls home with open arms.  They will have been through a hell we can not imagine, nor do we want to.  Give them your love, support and prayers. They deserve it.

Peace.
:asian:


----------



## Master of Blades (Mar 24, 2003)

Very cool post Kaith.....I really enjoyed reading :asian:


----------



## chufeng (Mar 24, 2003)

Well said.
Thanks.
:asian:
chufeng


----------



## karatekid1975 (Mar 24, 2003)

That was beautiful, Kaith. My feelings exactly  You took the words outta my mouth (and heart). Thanks so much for writing that :asian:


----------



## Seig (Mar 25, 2003)

:asian:


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 25, 2003)

My thoughts and prayers go out to our troops.  :asian:


----------



## Yari (Mar 25, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *
> 
> Protest all you want.  Hold your candlelight vigils, march in the streets, wave your flags, whatever.  But, do it peacefully.  And, when this war is over, welcome those brave souls home with open arms.  They will have been through a hell we can not imagine, nor do we want to.  Give them your love, support and prayers. They deserve it.
> ...




I dont agree in the war. But I do agree with this statement Kaith has written. 

/Yari


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Mar 25, 2003)

Nicely stated post. 

Now that hostilities are underway, it's time to finish up with this war ASAP, eliminate the thugs in power and bring about the necessary humane changes needed in Iraq to help innocent Iraqi citizens.


----------



## Matt Stone (Mar 25, 2003)

I am fully behind the reasons why we are doing what we are doing.  There is a part of me that resents very deeply the countries who would not stand by our decision to do the harsh things that must be done to rid the world of this kind of tyrant.

My resolve was sealed after watching the Al Jazeera video clip of dead American soldiers...  This clip is not on CNN, nor on local news.  I watched it on the internet, forwarded to me by a like-minded colleague.  In the video it is clear that at least two soldiers were executed by gunshots to the head.  They displayed the bodies laid side by side, and one Iraqi man had the largest grin on his face I have seen while he repositioned one body for the camera...

No right minded person *wants* war.  But sometimes, as I tell my children when I admonish them for failing to clean their rooms, just sometimes we have to do things we really don't want to do...

The tree of Freedom must often be watered by the blood of Patriots.  Our founding fathers knew this, and it is no less true today than it was at the creation of our nation.

Godspeed to the men and women who are serving not just our nation, but the whole world, by sacrificing in this way.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## karatekid1975 (Mar 25, 2003)

Well said :asian:


----------



## Cthulhu (Mar 25, 2003)

Very nice post, Kaith.

I was just telling a co-worker today that it really isn't important for U.S. citizens as individuals support the war or support the President.  However, it's of utmost importance that we support the men and women who are doing their duty in a hostile, foreign land.  You can protest the war all you want for all I care, but never waiver in your support for our troops.  They're the reason you continue to have the _right_ to protest.

Cthulhu
bit tired from work and not sure I'm entirely coherent


----------



## Nightingale (Mar 26, 2003)

Personally, I don't think we were right to go in in the first place.  But now that we've started it, we need to finish it. Completely this time. 

I may not agree with the war, and I may not be overly fond of the guy sitting up in the white house with his finger on the button, but I do support our troops.  They're following orders and doing what they are told is necessary to protect our national security.  I have friends over there that I send letters to daily.  

I support the troops by hoping they finish their mission as quickly as possible and come home safe.  And that, Kirk, was my motivation for posting KIA and MIA/POW lists.

-Nightingale


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *Personally, I don't think we were right to go in in the first place.  But now that we've started it, we need to finish it. Completely this time.
> 
> I may not agree with the war, and I may not be overly fond of the guy sitting up in the white house with his finger on the button, but I do support our troops.  They're following orders and doing what they are told is necessary to protect our national security.  I have friends over there that I send letters to daily.
> ...



You support them, yet call them criminals?  On kenponet, IMO 
you've made it painfully clear that you don't support war, for any
reason.  You've made it clear that the govt or people in ANY 
position of authority should never use the word "God" in
front of children.  You're in a position of authority here now.  
Your signature file is far more offensive than the use of a word 
that refers only to love of your fellow man, respect to others,
love of nature, and all things good in life.  Are you telling those
that you send letters to, that you feel they're committing some
kind of crime?  Are you sending letters to the women of Iraq, 
telling them about the "crime" of us rescuing them from 
persecution, rape, starvation, and watching thier children die?

I'm not trying to start some flame war here.  You're entitled to 
your opinions on this whole shebang.  I just think posting what
you did in the MIA/POW thread, with the signature you have is
most disrespectful.  You've called my father, my brother, my
uncles, my grandfather ... criminals.  It's MY opinion and mine
alone.  When a reverent post is made ... I feel that irreverent
posts should be deleted, or made into thier own thread.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 26, 2003)

Say it ain't so Nightingale.....

Criminals?  Kind of FAR FETCHED isn't it?

They are warriors. Prpfessionals. They do a job for America, at the command of an elected civilian leadership.  They don't choose when to fight, who to fight againts.

The American military is among the most professional services.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 26, 2003)

I think it all depends on how you define 'crime'.

It is a crime to fight for what you believe in?  Is it a crime because of the senseless waste in life?  Is it a crime because those who are at the top so rarely face the concequences of their actions?

Which is more criminal?  
If GW loses this war, he gets to be a 1 termer, with a nice pension, benifits, speaking fees, and possibly a library named for him.  

Of course, the 300,000+ US/UK troops there will pay for it with their lives.  Remember, the majority of these are 18-26yr olds...our future.

The otherside of this is we're dealing with a madman (many actually) who think rape is fun, acid baths are a hoot, and feeding children into wood chippers is a fun weekend outting.

so, how do we define 'crime'?

:asian:


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 26, 2003)

There is no chance we can lose this war.  It is a simple fact based on how much intelligence we have gathered about Iraq over the last 12 years, how much we have improved our fighting capabilities and how much Saddam's war machine has laid waste due to lack of training and spare parts since Gulf war I.  It is even more one-sided than the last time around.

The psychology is not hard to understand. Once it is clear that Saddam is not going to prevail, the whole thing will collapse in an instant. Right now, you have a population that has been terrorized forever by Saddam's henchmen. They remember how the US let Saddam stay the last time around. So, you have all fence sitters now. They will watch and wait to see.

The US is not unlike the Roman legions. They might suffer losses and set back. But they continue to grind on.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *I think it all depends on how you define 'crime'.
> 
> It is a crime to fight for what you believe in?  Is it a crime because of the senseless waste in life?  Is it a crime because those who are at the top so rarely face the concequences of their actions?
> ...




1. An act committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding or commanding it and for *which punishment is imposed* upon conviction. 

2. *Unlawful* activity: statistics relating to violent crime. 

3. A serious offense, *especially one in violation of morality*. 

4. An unjust, senseless, or *disgraceful* act or condition:


I don't like referring to my brethren/family/friends in any of those
definitions.  Number four, without the word disgraceful, albeit still
bad IMO, can be a matter of opinion, but still (IMO) doesn't belong
in a reverent thread.  And saying that sparring the lives of so 
many women, and children is unjust or senseless, is laughable.

______________________

"That depends on what your definition of the word 'is', is."
-- Bill Clinton


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *There is no chance we can lose this war.  It is a simple fact based on how much intelligence we have gathered about Iraq over the last 12 years, how much we have improved our fighting capabilities and how much Saddam's war machine has laid waste due to lack of training and spare parts since Gulf war I.  It is even more one-sided than the last time around.
> 
> The psychology is not hard to understand. Once it is clear that Saddam is not going to prevail, the whole thing will collapse in an instant. Right now, you have a population that has been terrorized forever by Saddam's henchmen. They remember how the US let Saddam stay the last time around. So, you have all fence sitters now. They will watch and wait to see.
> ...



If the comprised U.N. that's opposed to our being Iraq, joined 
together, and took up arms against us, then that's a whole HUGE
can of worms ... it's possible we could lose.

And a STRONG public opposition in this country, could lose the
war.


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 26, 2003)

All these men and women that sign up do so with the knowledge that they may have to lay down thier lives one day.  They may not agree as to why but it's thier job and if they weren't willing then they wouldn't have signed up.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *If the comprised U.N. that's opposed to our being Iraq, joined
> together, and took up arms against us, then that's a whole HUGE
> can of worms ... it's possible we could lose.
> ...



LMAO!  Fat chance that will EVER happen!  The UN is IMPOTENT! It couldn't take up arms to swap a fly!  lol  Against the US, which pay 25% of its operating expense?  Kirk, you need to stay away from the Tequila. 

The STRONG public opinion is to FINISH the mass murderers in Iraq.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *You're in a position of authority here now.  *



Moderators (including administrators) are entitled to their opinions on MartialTalk. This is why official posts are signed as below. All other posts represent the opinions of the poster. 

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## arnisador (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Your signature file is far more offensive*



Ah yes, interpret Hemingway in a simple literal manner. (Incidentally, as a Red Cross volunteer in WWI, he was badly wounded by Austrian shrapnel.) Do you know the rest of that quote?



> Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified is not a crime. Ask the infantry, and ask the dead.


----------



## Matt Stone (Mar 26, 2003)

Thanks, Arnisador, for clearing up that quote.  I was going to point out that Hemingway was a war veteran, a breed far different from the run of the mill civilian who has never had their hide in real jeapordy.

Nightingale, you are entitled to your opinion.  I am going to restrain myself, simply because I am too tired of arguing with people who have absolutely no reason to ***** about what we are doing.  You profess that what we are doing is a crime.  Fine.  Remember that because of our "crimes" you can stand free without fear of reprisal for calling what we do a "crime."  Next time you accuse us of being criminals, be sure to remember to thank us as you finish your inflammatory comments for providing you the freedom with which to vent your views.

Only those who have volunteered to protect our freedoms should have the right to vote and ***** in public about the policies of the Government, IMO.  I agree fully with Heinlein (another war vet) in his take on this.  If you civilians who so liberally enjoy the freedoms which you have done nothing whatsoever to earn disagree with me, then sit and swallow it the way we soldiers have to sit back and swallow your twisted views as well...

I am tired.  Tired of wondering every day whether I am going to get my orders to go to Iraq.  Tired of wondering whether or not Iraq will use chemical or biological weapons and my friends and I may die deaths that animals would not be subjected to.  Tired of wondering if, when and for how long I will have to be separated from my wife and children.  How many of you civilians who protest so loudly about our "crimes" have these concerns on your minds?  

Come see me when you do...

Gambarimasu.
:asian: :tank: :tank: :tank: :tank: :asian:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *LMAO!  Fat chance that will EVER happen!  The UN is IMPOTENT! It couldn't take up arms to swap a fly!  lol  Against the US, which pay 25% of its operating expense?  Kirk, you need to stay away from the Tequila.
> 
> The STRONG public opinion is to FINISH the mass murderers in Iraq. *



No argument .. but they're possibilities, however improbable.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Moderators (including administrators) are entitled to their opinions on MartialTalk. This is why official posts are signed as below. All other posts represent the opinions of the poster.
> 
> -Arnisador
> -MT Admin- *



Ah, yes, interpret what I said in that simple manner.  The point
being was that she made it known that her opinion that when
one is in a position of authority, such as teacher, principle, dean,
soccer coach, etc ... that expressing opinions is harmful to 
children.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Ah yes, interpret Hemingway in a simple literal manner. (Incidentally, as a Red Cross volunteer in WWI, he was badly wounded by Austrian shrapnel.) Do you know the rest of that quote? *



Why wasn't the rest included?  IMO she's pushing her own 
personal agenda, and would like to believe she's a hip california
humanitarian.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 26, 2003)

Right now, weapons are being found in schools, hospitals, homes.  Red Cross access to those taken prisoner is being blocked by the Iraqis.  I saw the video footage of the POWs.  The ones dead all had head wounds...2 of which looked to be very close range, like, point blank.  No, I'm not an expert, but I do know people who are and they confirmed those were close range impacts.  There are 2 females un accounted for at this time.  Those who hold them have no problem with using rape and worse.  Not for any real gain, just for 'kicks'.

I am not 'for' this war.  I think there are more pressing concerns.  The economy thats in the crapper.  N. Korea pointing nukes at our western shores that can actually hit it.  Gas prices that are out of this world due mostly to US oil companies gouging us.  (Spill 1 litre of oil in Iran, watch oil jump $20 a barrel.  Pump 2 Bil. extra barrels in, wate 30 days for prices to come down.  Thats BS, and thats gouging).  At every level of government, rights are being eroded, budgets eliminated and services with them.  I find it hard to feel that a nutcase on the other side of the world, who can maybe kill a few dozen people in Egypt is a risk to us here, in North America.

I definately dont like the fact its gonna take me forever to cross the border to get to Toronto this weekend...I like it less that it will take twice as long to get back into the US.

The UN is supposed to be the force for peace, yet seems to be content to discuss things in commitees forever.  It has no real power to do anything.  Sanctions have been imposed on Iraq for over a decade.  They've done nothing towards fixing the problems.  As a parent, how many times do you tell your kid to 'clean their room' before you go in with the garbage bag and do it for them?  How many times do you tell Johnny to stop poking Sara before you give him a swat?  If youre the UN, you take away his pudding rights, and wait til she moves out.

I don't like GWB.  I have this problem with non-elected leaders.  I like his 'people' even less.  The US acted when it concluded that the others wouldn't.  It wasn't "UN back us" it was "UN enforce this, or we will act".  Most of these 'idiots' in the US gov. are college educated, with access to all sorts of information that we just do not have.  As much as I do not like GWB, I think I trust his judgement better than I do some Git actor who never made it outta highschool and watches CNN.

The biggest reason for me writing the original letter was to support the troops.  They didn't choose this fight.  They are doing their duty to their country, despite their personal feelings.  They are the ones who are facing things that we don't even want to think about.  I have friends over there.  I have friends in Afgahnistan.  I lost friends in earlier conflicts...and I've seen the once who came home.  Once you see it, it changes you.  I hope I never have to see what they saw.

Despite wether you think the US is right or not, please remember those in the field in your thoughts and well wishes.  I believe that enough positive energy focused at it, may shorten the conflict, and bring many home who otherwise might not have.  It is my hope that this will be over soon, with minimal loss of life or injury, on both sides.

I've heard that Canada is ready to assist in the humanitarian aid, and join the fight if UN approval is given.


> OTTAWA, March 26  - The Honourable Susan Whelan, Minister for
> International Cooperation, today announced that Canada, through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), has committed $100 million in humanitarian assistance for the people of Iraq.
> "Today's contribution demonstrates our commitment, on behalf of
> Canadians, to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people," said
> ...



We can all agree to disagree on 'was it the right thing to do'.  Let us all agree in our hopes for a fast, positive end to the conflict.

Peace.


----------



## Nightingale (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *You support them, yet call them criminals?  On kenponet, IMO
> you've made it painfully clear that you don't support war, for any
> reason.
> *


*

Actually, I said that I didn't support the war without the backing of the UN.  There is a difference.

also:

I chose a quote from Hemingway precicely because he was a veteran, and therefore, probably knew what he was talking about.  and I didn't include the rest of the quote simply because I couldn't remember it exactly.  The book I have simply had that portion, and I had read the remainder somewhere, but couldn't remember where, and didn't want to read through my entire collection of Hemingway to find it.  

War is a crime because it is a disgraceful  state for humanity to be in.  That's why I chose that signature.  I'm not calling the soldiers and officers criminals.  They're following orders, and probably think they're doing the right thing. I can't fault them for that.  It isn't that the soldiers are criminals, its that the state of war in general is criminal*


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *I've heard that Canada is ready to assist in the humanitarian aid.*



Yep.



> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *and join the fight if UN approval is given.*



You %$#@ing d@mn well know it.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Why wasn't the rest included?  IMO she's pushing her own
> personal agenda*



I can't tell you how shocking I find it to hear that someone is using their .sig file to do that.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *War is a crime because it is a disgraceful  state for humanity to be in.  That's why I chose that signature.  I'm not calling the soldiers and officers criminals.  They're following orders, and probably think they're doing the right thing. I can't fault them for that.  It isn't that the soldiers are criminals, its that the state of war in general is criminal *



I can believe that,  I can understand that opinion, and in some
ways agree (necessary evil .. part of human kind).


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 26, 2003)

_**getting on the flame proof suit to watch this one**_
:flame:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I can't tell you how shocking I find it to hear that someone is using their .sig file to do that. *



What exactly is your intent here?  What do you mean by that?


----------



## Nightingale (Mar 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *I can believe that,  I can understand that opinion, and in some
> ways agree (necessary evil .. part of human kind). *



that's it exactly...


----------



## qizmoduis (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *What exactly is your intent here?  What do you mean by that? *



What I suspect he's trying to point out, is that there is no such thing as a post, or a .sig, without an agenda.  Complaining about someone having an "agenda" is about as useful as constantly pointing out that oranges are orange.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by qizmoduis _
> *What I suspect he's trying to point out, is that there is no such thing as a post, or a .sig, without an agenda.  Complaining about someone having an "agenda" is about as useful as constantly pointing out that oranges are orange. *



Well then the consistancy request once again goes unanswered.
I was told to change my signature one time, because it offended
1 or some.

What's the agenda with yours?


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 27, 2003)

The U.N. is a joke IMO just another place for politicians to lie and push thier own agenda's. War and fighting will never go away. People are people and to think that humanity will eventually evovle into a utopian state of enlightenment where we all live in this love and harmony is a waste of energy. War is necessary sometime people/goverments need thier @ss kicked to get the point across.


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *Thanks, Arnisador, for clearing up that quote.  I was going to point out that Hemingway was a war veteran, a breed far different from the run of the mill civilian who has never had their hide in real jeapordy.
> 
> Nightingale, you are entitled to your opinion.  I am going to restrain myself, simply because I am too tired of arguing with people who have absolutely no reason to ***** about what we are doing.  You profess that what we are doing is a crime.  Fine.  Remember that because of our "crimes" you can stand free without fear of reprisal for calling what we do a "crime."  Next time you accuse us of being criminals, be sure to remember to thank us as you finish your inflammatory comments for providing you the freedom with which to vent your views.
> ...



Nice take on the subject. Semper Fi... :asian:


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 27, 2003)

People who naively believe that "UN Approval" is the stamp of morality and righteousness, are simply just being "naive".  There is nothing more naive to say that you would support the war if the UN approved it.

The UN is a political body with each member holding close to its dear heart, the selfish interest of the ruling class behind each government. If you buy into the righteosness of "UN Approval"  then you are simply turning a blind eye to the special interest groups that control the governments that made up the UN.

It saddens me that otherwise intelligent and reasonable people, can be so naive and simplistic when it comes to international politics.  All those nations who oppose the war, do it out of their self interest and the special interest of big businesses in France, Germany, Russia, etc ,which happen to do billions of business with Iraq both in the past and behind the UN embargo.  France, Germany and Russia are afraid that once the US gets its hands on the Iraqi archives, they will discover how much involvement these self-righteous nations have dirty corporate hands in Saddam's pockets, selling him weapons and technolgy to imprison, torture and murder the Iraqi and develop WMD.  The Arabs oppose the war because liberation  is  a dirty word in the dictionary of dictators.

THe naive leftists who whine about how innocent civilians may be injured are simply being brain dead to the reality that innocent civilians ARE already being tortured, raped, murdered systematically in Iraq daily. Their only hope of reprieve is this war!!   This is NOT the first time that leftists being stupid. They used to romantize the barbaric Soviets and communisn too. Gosh ! The stupidity of these people!

Of course, the US is not doing it purely out of concern for the wellfare of the Iraqis. We do it, b/c it is in America's interest to establish a friendly regime on top of the second largest oil reserve in the world. It is the duty of our government to look out for our national interests.


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Mar 27, 2003)

With respect to *Johnathan Napalm's* last post, yes I agree, and besides the patriotism that has arisen, there are certainly econonic interests involved, there's no question or doubt about that. 

However, I believe we, most Americans, are also honestly concerned about the innocent civilians, and of course our troops and their well being as this war plays out...  :asian:


----------



## arnisador (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *What exactly is your intent here?  What do you mean by that? *



I think it was quite obvious what my point was.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Well then the consistancy request once again goes unanswered.
> I was told to change my signature one time, because it offended
> 1 or some.*



That was an entirely different type of matter.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *That was an entirely different type of matter.
> 
> -Arnisador
> -MT Admin- *



Yeah, okay    So then change the rules to "thou shalt
not offend religiously, but patrioticly or politically is perfectly fine".


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I think it was quite obvious what my point was. *



Well I'm stupid, explain it to me.


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Well I'm stupid, explain it to me. *



Yes I can agree with that I've found him eating crayons and paste a couple of times at work. Ofcourse there was that one time when he glued his face to his desk..........


----------



## Cryozombie (Mar 27, 2003)

I absolutley agree with you about Heinlan.  I think the Book Starship Troopers pointed out a LOT of solutions to problems he saw growing in this country at the time he wrote it, that have since come to pass.

Too Bad the movie didn't do the political ideals of that book Justice.


----------



## Matt Stone (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by fist of fury _
> *Yes I can agree with that I've found him eating crayons and paste a couple of times at work. Ofcourse there was that one time when he glued his face to his desk.......... *



You have to _work_ with him?!?!?  Poor guy...

Slap him in the nads for me next time you see him.  Tell him I said "hi."  

Gambarimasu.
:asian: :tank: :asian:


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by fist of fury _
> *Yes I can agree with that I've found him eating crayons and paste a couple of times at work. Ofcourse there was that one time when he glued his face to his desk.......... *



Heeheeheehee, that's some funny stuff...  :rofl:

:lol:


----------



## arnisador (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Well I'm stupid, explain it to me. *



I decline. We differ in our level of interest in engaging in a discussion of this sort.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 27, 2003)

*Mod Note*

*The discussion on 'Signatures' has been split off to a seperate thread of its own.  Please return this thread to its main focus.

Thank you

Kaith*


Sig thread : http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?&threadid=6988


----------



## Cryozombie (Mar 29, 2003)

www.newsmax.com

Disillusioned Human Shields 
Reed Irvine
Friday, March 28, 2003 
At the Armys daily briefing in Qatar on March 26, a reporter asked Gen. Vincent Brooks what he had to say to the human shields who have gone to Iraq to risk their lives to stop the war. The general missed a great opportunity to tell what two of these "human shields" had recently said about what they learned in Baghdad that caused them to abandon their plans to risk their lives trying to protect innocent Iraqi civilians. 

In a dispatch from Amman, Jordan, distributed by UPI and published in the Washington Times on March 23, veteran foreign correspondent Arnaud de Borchgrave reported that a group of Americans who had joined a delegation of Japanese "human shields" in Iraq had changed their minds and fled the country with 14 hours of videotaped interviews with Iraqis who hoped the Coalition forces would be their liberators. 

The spokesman for the group, the Rev. Kenneth Joseph, a pastor of the Assyrian Church of the East, an ancient Christian church that has a substantial membership in the United States, told de Borchgrave that his trip to Iraq "had shocked me back to reality." 

He said that his talks with Iraqis convinced him that Saddam is "a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so [the torture masters] could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head." 

He told de Borchgrave that some of the Iraqis he had interviewed on camera told him they would commit suicide if the American bombing didnt start and that they were willing to see their homes destroyed if it would free them from Saddams bloody tyranny. 

The Rev. Joseph and his group were not the only would-be human shields who changed their minds after hearing what Iraqi civilians had to say about Saddam. Daniel Pepper, a 23-year-old Jewish American living in London who had traveled in the Middle East as a student and a photographer for Newsweek, went to Iraq on Jan. 25 with a group that intended to serve as human shields to call attention to the anti-war movement. He wrote about his experience in the London Telegraph on March 23. 
He said, "The human shields appealed to my anti-war stance, but by the time I had left Baghdad five weeks later my views had changed drastically. I wouldnt say that I was exactly pro-war. No, I am ambivalent, but I have a strong desire to see Saddam removed. I was shocked when I first met a pro-war Iraqi in Baghdad  a taxi driver taking me back to my hotel late at night. I explained that I was American and said, as we shields always did, Bush bad, war bad, Iraq good. He looked at me with an expression of incredulity. 

"He slowed down and started to speak in broken English about the evils of Saddams regime. Until then I had only heard the president spoken of with respect, but now this guy was telling me how all of Iraqs oil money went into Saddams pocket and that if you opposed him politically he would kill your whole family. It scared the hell out of me. ... I had read reports that Iraqis hated Saddam Hussein, but this was the real thing. Someone had explained it to me face to face. ... I became increasingly concerned about the way the Iraqi regime was restricting the movement of the shields, so a few days later I left Baghdad for Jordan by taxi with five others." 

Safely over the border, they asked the driver "what he felt about the regime and the threat of an aerial bombardment." He surprised them, saying: "The Americans dont want to bomb civilians. They want to bomb the government and Saddams palaces. We want America to bomb Saddam. All Iraqi people want this war." 

He was convinced that Saddam had paid them to come to Iraq. Pepper concluded his article saying, "Anyone with half a brain must see that Saddam has to be taken out. It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protesters are marching to defend a government which stops people from exercising that freedom." 

Extraordinary indeed. 

Reed Irvine is chairman of Accuracy in Media.


----------



## chufeng (Mar 29, 2003)

The U.N. security counsel has demonstrated its impotence more than once...the only reason it seems to be a big deal now is that a conservative (Bush is far from conservative folks...except to those so far to the left that they take on the appearance of Marxists) president with REAL convictions based on MORALS has decide it is time to defang the snake...NO one said SQUAT when Clinton approved action against in Kosovo (another war without U.N. support)...

Those who opposed this war are the very same governements who were sleeping with the Iraqi regime...

Ghouch the French AND the Germans...

I am not Republican, Democrat, or whatever...I vote for the least worst choice (which seems to be the way many elections have gone since Nixon)...

But I am a proud American...have we screwed up in the past? Yes...and WE admit that (what other government has without losing a war?)...

More American blood is spilled to protect OTHERS and allow them a chance at freedom and equality...yet, we are still viewed by many as the enemy...OK, I can buy that from an Iraqi or Iranian...

but NOT from my fellow Americans...Those people flat out disgust me...MOST of them have never bothered to look at WHAT the regimes we fight against have done...MOST of them are mindless little pawns for the professors they have in their liberal arts colleges...MOST of them don't have an inkling of the blood that has been spilt on foreign soil for a noble cause...They just get their "I hate America" banners out and start acting very violently in the name of peace...

Before you protest...take the time to research the facts...NOT what your college professor tells you are the facts...BUT the REAL facts...Someone posted a letter from a "human shield" who had his eyes opened by REALITY...I hope you all read it.

:asian:
chufeng


----------



## Elfan (Mar 30, 2003)

> _Originally posted by chufeng _
> *Bush is far from conservative folks...*



O I agree 100%, Bush is definantly a neo-conservative.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 30, 2003)

REED IRVINE is who you're relying upon for facts? Yikes. AIM (not the American Indian Movement) is a well-known ultra-conservative group of "media critics," and has been for going on twenty years. These are guys who run around the country their whole lives, twitching, living in fear that somewhere, somehow, somebody gay might be teaching or writing a book...they actually think that the media and the educational system are run by communists and lesbians....

As for Robert Heinlein (correct spelling, incidentally), "Starship Troopers," was the focus of a debate about fascism about twenty-five years ago. I'd recommend reading his, "Farnham's Freehold," for a book that charmingly links anti-communism, nuclear war, racist ideas about black people, and some of the worst sex scenes ever written in a mishmosh of goop...

Nothing has ever been funnier than Doogie Howser as a Gestapo colonel...takes me back to Verhoeven's first movie, "Soldier of Orange," great film.

Incidentally, nobody has a purely objective and politics-free viewpoint. The only folks I've ever met who claim such an approach are a) rabid conservatives, b) old-line Marxists who really think that the epistemological break of the 1840s allowed Karl to see history simply as it was...while, of course, Jenny was back home doing his shirts and scrabbling around for money to feed the kids.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by chufeng _
> *The U.N. security counsel has demonstrated its impotence more than once...the only reason it seems to be a big deal now is that a conservative (Bush is far from conservative folks...except to those so far to the left that they take on the appearance of Marxists) president with REAL convictions based on MORALS has decide it is time to defang the snake...NO one said SQUAT when Clinton approved action against in Kosovo (another war without U.N. support)...
> 
> Those who opposed this war are the very same governements who were sleeping with the Iraqi regime...
> ...




right on!

I hope those "human shields" are rotting in the rubbles in Iraq, giving Saddam and his thugs a belly-aching laugh!


----------



## arnisador (Mar 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *I hope those "human shields" are rotting in the rubbles in Iraq *



This seems a bit harsh.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 31, 2003)

While I don't condone the hope for harm.... I wonder how many of them are now realizing just how blind and stupid they are..having volenteired to shield things...and now are being held to their offer at gun point by the nobel and peaceloving Iraqi secret police.

Saw this...I like it. 
Ghandi didnt need a ball bat.... MLK didnt need to throw a brick....


> I got this from one of the websites I was at, and well, it seems to be a timely, albeit a mature themed joke. I hope no one is offended, as it is just a joke
> 
> How to deal with peace activists:
> 
> ...


----------



## Elfan (Mar 31, 2003)

8. Realize that since step 5 has a typo in it and thus didnt' make sense, try again, and this time see how the peace activist "learned his lesson" and now carries a knife.  As  you lie in a pool of your own blood reflect on how violence only begets more violence.
-----
Sorry thats the best I could come up with.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Mar 31, 2003)

Just to occasion comment: the reason violence gets used as often as it does is because violence is the lazy, thoughtless, short-term solution. 

Sure, there are times when you must protect yourself. Sure there will be times when mass fighting, wars, are necessary. Sure, there are times when bullying of whatever kind has to be slapped down.

But ya know, most of the time these "necessary," wars are the result of stupid, lazy people so blinded by their own hostility that they don't bother to really think, to really look for alternatives. Just look at the record...

And if that don't float yer boat, how about the military's comments on Rumsfield et al? Ignore me, by all means...but Gen. Wallace? Military historians like John Keegan? And apparently, a lot of captains, majors, lieutenants, etc? I've heard this stuff before--about Vietnam, where apparently you pretty much couldn't get the truth out of anybody above the rank of major, and everybody else said openly that the whole thing was an immense, stupid f'up. 

Clearly Hussein's gonna lose. I am not going to shed any tears over his fall. But long-term--what'll we do about consequences?

Oh, well. Just woofin'.


----------



## chufeng (Mar 31, 2003)

Yeah...well he had 12 plus years to do the right thing...all the while the hand-ringers kept sucking up his crap and he kept on killing his own people.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *This seems a bit harsh. *


 \

Tough luck. If they are stupid enough to be Saddam's tools...   Some people are not fit for survival.  If you are stupid enough to jump into the line of fire, well...... so long!   Live like a moron and die as one.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 1, 2003)

What the protestors don't understand is that War is sometimes a neccessary evil. 
Also, since it (War) has begun the protestors should be supporting our soldiers instead of causing more problems for people over here. We have it hard already over here with the threat of more terrorist action then having more created from domestic unruling efforts on the part of protestors.

Its funny how the protestors seem to scream about money being spent on the war effort and being diverted from other needed areas when they efforts and civil disobedience costs the city millions of dollars to deal with their protesting that could be spent some where else..

:soapbox: 

Chicago Green
Dragon  :asian:


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Just to occasion comment: the reason violence gets used as often as it does is because violence is the lazy, thoughtless, short-term solution.
> 
> Sure, there are times when you must protect yourself. Sure there will be times when mass fighting, wars, are necessary. Sure, there are times when bullying of whatever kind has to be slapped down.
> ...



Yeah well. You only heard the stuff from CNN. What you don't hear is how well the war is being executed on the ground; how well the US troops have adapted to killing the Fedayeens and the thugs; how the Screaming Eagle has done it again in over running the Republican Guards positions;how the troops describe the fightinng as "shooting practice";how the Marines have gathered tons of intelligence on the Fedayeen and are hunting them down at their homes; how the Brit commandoes are wrecking havoc using guerilla tactics against the Fedayeens; how the troops in Afghanistan are systematically destroying weapon caches; how terrorists cells are systematically bursted all over the world.  

All you hear is gloom and doom. But the tune of it, you would thought we have lost the war against terror and the war against Saddam .  Bad news sells better than good news.  Ever heard of the expression, "Succeed in Silence" ?


----------



## arnisador (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Chicago Green Dragon _
> *What the protestors don't understand is that War is sometimes a neccessary evil. *



Perhaps they understand but think this is not one of those times?

I find wishing harm on protesters to be downright un-American, personally. What other siginifcant rights does the US guarantee you--principally the right to speak/protest/think as you will, an dto be free from coercive and abusive govt. authority (fifth amendment, etc.). Protesting is an American tradition.

Yes, the human shields should a.) expect to die and b.) question if now is the time for a protest. Given how many other people in other nations question the need for war, it's unclear to me that protesting is itself irrational--I think reasonable people can differ as to whether a war was needed and justified.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Apr 1, 2003)

Hey JN - Interesting bits... Shoot me some sources?  Thanks!


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 1, 2003)

Hate to break anybody's heart, but I don't watch CNN. I went by a) the "New York Times," b) the networks, c) "Slate", d) the BBC and NPR (I put these together to get all the Commies in one basket), and e) that hotbed of liberalism, "Newsweek."

And, FYI, I have pretty much the same attitudes towards offical statements that Ernie Pyle and Bill Mauldin did, from what I can see by reading their stuff.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *Hey JN - Interesting bits... Shoot me some sources?  Thanks!  *



Check PM


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Perhaps they understand but think this is not one of those times?
> 
> I find wishing harm on protesters to be downright un-American, personally. What other siginifcant rights does the US guarantee you--principally the right to speak/protest/think as you will, an dto be free from coercive and abusive govt. authority (fifth amendment, etc.). Protesting is an American tradition.
> ...




Hey, if they want to shout their lung out, who cares? 

If they want to protect Saddam's *** and die in the process, HA! Don't expect me to cry for them.

If they want to interfere with the operation of public services, expect to be deal with according to the law.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *Check PM *


Got it!
Much apreciated!:asian:


----------



## Cryozombie (Apr 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *REED IRVINE is who you're relying upon for facts? *



Absolutly not.  I can't say that I am RELYING on anyone... I'm just passing along "interesting" (to me anyhow) articles.  Besides, Im sure we agree The truth, slanted or not, is ALWAYS based on someone's perception of the situation.  Unless someone is out to openly decieve someone else. In which case they may lie about the truth even if they don't see it that way.



> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *
> As for Robert Heinlein (correct spelling, incidentally), "Starship Troopers," was the focus of a debate about fascism about twenty-five years ago. I'd recommend reading his, "Farnham's Freehold," for a book that charmingly links anti-communism, nuclear war, racist ideas about black people, and some of the worst sex scenes ever written in a mishmosh of goop...
> *



Read it.  (sadly)  And you must forgive my spelling, Im a PC tech... Im used to SPELLCHECK doing all my work for me.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 1, 2003)

Nice to meet ya, T'punk. (Romulan variant)

Good points, I think. However, Reed Irvine is to facts as garlic is to vampires...


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Hate to break anybody's heart, but I don't watch CNN. I went by a) the "New York Times," b) the networks, c) "Slate", d) the BBC and NPR (I put these together to get all the Commies in one basket), and e) that hotbed of liberalism, "Newsweek."
> 
> And, FYI, I have pretty much the same attitudes towards offical statements that Ernie Pyle and Bill Mauldin did, from what I can see by reading their stuff. *



I suppose those sources REALLY know what is ACTUALLY going on in the field, huh?   

Journalists are the least technically educated (what do you expect from "School of Journalism"  ?),  least informed and yet most highly self-opinioned. They are practically worthless.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Apr 2, 2003)

My problem with the protestors is not giving them the chance to voice their feelings. That is fine. That is one of the things we have here in America that make us like no other place in the world.

People have the right to voice their feelings out for how they feel.

But when they create civil disobediense, destroy public or private property. fight with the police physically. I have to draw the line. 


:soapbox: 

Chicago Green 
Dragon   :asian:


----------



## Elfan (Apr 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *I suppose those sources REALLY know what is ACTUALLY going on in the field, huh?
> 
> Journalists are the least technically educated (what do you expect from "School of Journalism"  ?),  least informed and yet most highly self-opinioned. They are practically worthless. *



What alternatives would you reccomend?


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 2, 2003)

Uh...JN, methinks you don't know who Pyle and Mauldin were.

As for the other sources, weeellp. What can I say? I mean, the other day I heard some AM host calling Walter Cronkheit (really...I'm not kidding) a traitor, and uninformed to boot.

I quite agree that a lot of what the media says/shows can't be trusted. That's obvious. However, to argue that all of it's anti-American fantasy...that's silly. If it's anything, it's too much like pro-Am propaganda.

There are, I think, two basic problems here. The first is that somehow it's become traitorous to report anything but the Official Government Line, when in fact there's supposed to be a real conflict between what government tries to hide and what reporters try to report. It's not supposed to be like it was in thee old Soviet Union, where "Pravda" and "Izvestia," were tools of State propaganda...in our system of democracy and capitalism, the whole idea is that reporters earn their money by trying to find out secrets the government doesn't think we're old enough to know. And all this guff about reporters giving "aid and comfort to the enemy?" Bushwa....hey. I made a funny.

The second issue, for me, is that I've seen these charges before. Several times. Our government--our government, not something owned by those older and wiser, our government--lied through its teeth about Vietnam. It lied through its teeth about Watergate. It lied, toothily, about Chile and ITT; about death squads in Latin America; about Iran/Contra...well, the list goes on. And every time, every time, anybody who reported what was going on got labelled a traitor or worse. Hell, Stanley Karnouw got screamed at for a pretty bland history of the Vietnam War...seemingly, no amount of kowtowing to the Powers That Be was sufficient. 

I'm sorry folks don't like the facts. And we can argue about what the facts are...but to simply reject them, or accuse anybody who brings the facts to light of being a moron or a traitor...that's the crap the CPUSA used to pull, back when the facts about Stalin's little worker's paradise were coming out.

I don't know if the US government is BS-ing in this case. I suspect they are; hell, Lyndon Johnson couldn't get through a day without telling three whoppers just to cover his butt during Vietnam. But I might also mention that from my viewpoint, our reporters are not being nearly critical enough...which might suggest to many that they've pretty much got it right. 

There's one other problem...all those nay-sayers, those nattering-nabobs-of-negativism (Spiro T. Agnew...you remember. The VP of the United States who always went off about lefties, and was taking cash for favors right in his office?) have an ugly habit of turning out often to be right, in the long run.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Elfan _
> *What alternatives would you reccomend? *



On military issues :

www.strategypage.com

www.hackworth.com

www.sftt.com

On international strategic issues:

www.stratfor.com


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Uh...JN, methinks you don't know who Pyle and Mauldin were.
> 
> As for the other sources, weeellp. What can I say? I mean, the other day I heard some AM host calling Walter Cronkheit (really...I'm not kidding) a traitor, and uninformed to boot.
> ...



me think you need to listen to people who are in the field, who walk the walk. Not some armchair quarterbacks.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Chicago Green Dragon _
> *But when they create civil disobediense, destroy public or private property. fight with the police physically. I have to draw the line. *



Well, I agree about fighting the police and about destroying property, but Civil Disobedience has been very useful--the civil rights movements of the 1960s, India's independence, etc. There's something to be said for it.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 2, 2003)

If the enemies of the US and these doubters and naysayers are any close to been right, Afghanistan would be a smoldering, uninhabited, radioactive wasteland. So would Iraq and a couple of countries.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 3, 2003)

That's it by way of rebuttal? Nothing about facts, or interpretation, or underlying theory?


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Well, I agree about fighting the police and about destroying property, but Civil Disobedience has been very useful--the civil rights movements of the 1960s, India's independence, etc. There's something to be said for it. *



So you credit the nation of islam more so than Martin Luther King
for the success of the civil rights movement?


----------



## Rich Parsons (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *So you credit the nation of islam more so than Martin Luther King
> for the success of the civil rights movement? *




Kirk,

Kirk,

Kirk,
:shrug: 

Arnisador, wrote that he agreed that fighting against the police was incorrect and that destruction of private property is was not productive.

He did say that, peaceful marching and getting the issues out into the public eye allows for discussion. This discussion allows for one to then make changes, with out physical violence being the method of execution.

Now for civil rights, in 1863, 140 years ago, President A. Lincoln's proclamation, in essence release the everyone from slavery, with in the USA. In the 1960's about one hundred years later the civil right movement allowed our society to make changes. And this week alone before the Supreme Court, they heard a case of U of Michigan and discrimination. The issue is still not resolved.

As for the Nation of Islam, do you know what Algebra is? Well this is the Name of a Muslim Mathematition. Al' Gebra. During the European Dark Ages, when most Christians were back trying to just farm dirt, the Nation of Islam maintained much knowledge in their colleges and schools that would have been lost otherwise. The Renaissance period happened after many learned from the Libraries of the Islam Nation. Then many of the hidden libraries were either translated our revised, and with the knowledge from the Mid-East the whole were filled in.


So, this is how I read it Kirk.

Just my take.
:asian:


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *Kirk,
> 
> Kirk,
> ...



The Nation Of Islam is a militant group formed in the Americas in
the late 50's.  Founded by the "honorable" Elijah Mohammed, and
now led by Louis Farakhan.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *That's it by way of rebuttal? Nothing about facts, or interpretation, or underlying theory? *



It is a statement of fact. If you do not understand the underlying logic, then just ask.  On second thought, don't bother. I won't have the patience to educate you anyway.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 3, 2003)

The Nation of Islam is a bit older than the 1950s.

Could you just show me which facts got presented? I quite understand the logic, and if I'd claimed expertise in, say, small-unit tactics, it would make sense to demand that I "walk the ground." But I looked up the sites JN mentioned above, and except for Hackworth's they're either a) sites of stock-market touts, b) war games--I repeat, games--sites. Did I miss one? 

I'd rather rely on, say, John Keegan.

Guys, perhaps if you'd show me some facts, make some arguments, explain some ideas, rather than throwing personal accusations around and making assumptions about patriotism (and when did you get to arbitrate that?), it'd be a little easier to discuss matters.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Apr 3, 2003)

I think there is confusion between the 'Nation of Islam' the group, and the culture.

The culture has given us a wealth of information (the zero for one)

I dont know of any contributions of the group.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *The Nation of Islam is a bit older than the 1950s.
> 
> Could you just show me which facts got presented? I quite understand the logic, and if I'd claimed expertise in, say, small-unit tactics, it would make sense to demand that I "walk the ground." But I looked up the sites JN mentioned above, and except for Hackworth's they're either a) sites of stock-market touts, b) war games--I repeat, games--sites. Did I miss one?
> ...



LMAO!  Are you really this thick????  HEllo?? Anybody in there?

Did you even read www.strategypage.com? A game site? LMAO!!   Do you even know how to read?  Ever heard of Hooked-on-Phonics?  Gosh!     How old are you anyway?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Apr 3, 2003)

www.strategypage.com seems to have a decent amount of info, as well as detailed maps of movements on par with those I've seen in the past on battles.  

http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/map.asp#map is pretty decent.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Apr 3, 2003)

"Did you even read www.strategypage.com? A game site?"

Gee, I guess I got distracted by this statement on their homepage: "The very best in online wargaming and military news." I certainly recognize that they may have some good stuff--but I assume that they put "wargaming," first for a reason.

Well, sauce for the goose. Did you ever read anything by Keegan, who's taught a lot of military history? At Sandhurst? 

I repeat: these sites have a lot of financial advice, a lot of gaming, a lot of "alternative history," stuff like Harry Turtledove's. Nothing wrong with that--but I'm dubious about their use as sources of historical fact. 

Of course, I could easily be wrong. Could you show me where I am? Just illustrate, and leave off the insults?


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> [BJust illustrate, and leave off the insults? [/B]



Why, you certainly don't.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *The Nation of Islam is a bit older than the 1950s.
> *



Picky, picky ... 1934.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *The Nation Of Islam is a militant group formed in the Americas in the late 50's.  Founded by the "honorable" Elijah Mohammed, and now led by Louis Farakhan. *



I know this, but I wasn't thinking of them at all. They're extremists in my opinion. I was thinking of Rosa Parks and similar but better-organized acts of civil disobedience.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *The culture has given us a wealth of information (the zero for one)*



As Rich Parsons indicated, they transmitted much information, and this is one of them. They did discover many things as well.

The Islamic nations have contributed a great deal over the years--less in recent centuries than in those before perhaps.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *As Rich Parsons indicated, they transmitted much information, and this is one of them. They did discover many things as well.
> 
> The Islamic nations have contributed a great deal over the years--less in recent centuries than in those before perhaps. *



No disagreement .. however the current numbering system is an
_Arabic_ system, not a Muslim one.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I know this, but I wasn't thinking of them at all. They're extremists in my opinion. I was thinking of Rosa Parks and similar but better-organized acts of civil disobedience. *



My bad, I haven't been getting enough sleep.  Somehow I read
"violent civil disobedience" .. when you didn't say that at all.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *No disagreement .. however the current numbering system is an Arabic system, not a Muslim one. *



Although it is called Arabic, it's actually from India where their astronomers developed it near the end of the first millenium. It was misnamed because it came to Europe via the Arabs but that was merely a matter of transmission. By this time the distinction between Arabs and Muslims was less significant than you indicate, I think--as a practical matter all Arabs were Muslims by the time the system came to Europe (it was still making inroads into Northern Europe as late as the 1500s), though not conversely.

There is some evidence that this base ten positional notation actually began in Indochina, but this is less solid.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *My bad, I haven't been getting enough sleep.  Somehow I read
> "violent civil disobedience" .. when you didn't say that at all. *



Ah, OK--now we're on the same ground. I am not discussing violent civil disobedience--which is in the estreme open rebellion--but rather blocking traffic and peaceably being arrested, sitting in 'whites-only' restaurants and being arrested, etc. These were acts of some courage that were appropriate and beneficial, in my opinion.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Ah, OK--now we're on the same ground. I am not discussing violent civil disobedience--which is in the estreme open rebellion--but rather blocking traffic and peaceably being arrested, sitting in 'whites-only' restaurants and being arrested, etc. These were acts of some courage that were appropriate and beneficial, in my opinion. *



Totally!


----------



## Nightingale (Apr 3, 2003)

um... civil disobedience is just that... civil (think sit-ins and marches here and Martin Luther King Jr)  violent disobedience is the complete opposite (think Los Angeles Rodney King Verdict Riots).  No such thing as violent civil disobedience. its oxymoronic.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *um... civil disobedience is just that... civil (think sit-ins and marches here and Martin Luther King Jr)  violent disobedience is the complete opposite (think Los Angeles Rodney King Verdict Riots).  No such thing as violent civil disobedience. its oxymoronic. *




1. Of, relating to, or befitting a citizen or citizens: civil duties. 

2. Of or relating to citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state: civil society; the civil branches of government. 

3. Of ordinary citizens or ordinary community life as distinguished from the military or the ecclesiastical: civil authorities. 

4. Of or in accordance with organized society; civilized. 

5. Sufficiently observing or befitting accepted social usages; not rude: a civil reply. See Synonyms at polite. 

6.Being in accordance with or denoting legally recognized divisions of time: a civil year. 

7.Law. Relating to the rights of private individuals and legal proceedings concerning these rights as distinguished from criminal, military, or international regulations or proceedings.


----------



## Kirk (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *um... civil disobedience is just that... civil (think sit-ins and marches here and Martin Luther King Jr)  violent disobedience is the complete opposite (think Los Angeles Rodney King Verdict Riots).  No such thing as violent civil disobedience. its oxymoronic. *



But still, thank you for taking the time from your busy schedule
to educate me.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *violent disobedience is the complete opposite (think Los Angeles Rodney King Verdict Riots).  No such thing as violent civil disobedience. its oxymoronic. *



A riot of that sort is so spontaneous and unorganized that I'm not sure that I agree that it qualifies. As to the term being oxymoronic, I cannot agree. As *Kirk* points out, the principal and I suspect in this case guiding meaning of _civil_ is relating to citizenry--and in this case the laws that affect them as citizens of a particular govt. I can think of many examples of what I'd call violent civil disobedience--the Koresh cult comes to mind, the Vietnam War era bombing at UW-Madison, the Oklahoma City bombing,and others. These people were protesting govt. policies--in violent ways.

Frankly, the events leading up to the American Revolutionary War must be considered acts of civil disobedience to the ruling govt., and some of those acts were violent; and what we called a war, they thought of, at first at least, as an uprising of their citizenry. Luckily, the victors write the history books!


----------



## Kirk (Apr 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *A riot of that sort is so spontaneous and unorganized that I'm not sure that I agree that it qualifies. As to the term being oxymoronic, I cannot agree. As Kirk points out, the principal and I suspect in this case guiding meaning of civil is relating to citizenry--and in this case the laws that affect them as citizens of a particular govt. I can think of many examples of what I'd call violent civil disobedience--the Koresh cult comes to mind, the Vietnam War era bombing at UW-Madison, the Oklahoma City bombing,and others. These people were protesting govt. policies--in violent ways.
> *



That's how I figured you meant it .. glad I interpreted right for
once 



> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Frankly, the events leading up to the American Revolutionary War must be considered acts of civil disobedience to the ruling govt., and some of those acts were violent; and what we called a war, they thought of, at first at least, as an uprising of their citizenry. Luckily, the victors write the history books! *



Very, very good point.   

Being so close to Mexico, thier history books are readily available.
Reading thier version of things (especially the U.S. - Mexico war) 
is real interesting.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Apr 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> .....I repeat: these sites have a lot of financial advice, a lot of gaming, a lot of "alternative history," stuff like Harry Turtledove's. Nothing wrong with that--but I'm dubious about their use as sources of historical fact.
> 
> Of course, I could easily be wrong. Could you show me where I am? Just illustrate, and leave off the insults?....



I repeat: you don't know what the hell you are talking about. 

Just read the content of the sites.  Please don't ask me to do for you what you can do yourself.


----------



## Elfan (Apr 4, 2003)

> civil disobedience
> n.
> Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means.
> 
> ...


----------



## chufeng (Apr 4, 2003)

Has this thread gone WAY off topic, or what???

chufeng


----------



## arnisador (Apr 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Being so close to Mexico, thier history books are readily available.
> Reading thier version of things (especially the U.S. - Mexico war)
> is real interesting. *



I intend to do something like this sometime, just for the experience. I have a (translated) copy of a Chinese book on Tibetan history for example.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Apr 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by chufeng _
> *Has this thread gone WAY off topic, or what???
> 
> chufeng *



Yes.

I started this as an attempt to show support for the troops.  We've long since past that point and are now debating foriegn policy and protests past.  Part of the blame for the side trip must be mine as I didn't nudge it when I had the chance.

I've locked this thread.  Feel free to pick up the tangents in new threads.

Thanks.

:asian:


----------

