Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Dislogic · Sep 1, 2003, 06:06 pm

ok well i must say i found this very amusing... not sure if anyone else has seen this but i would love to be the one to bring it here. Its very true for the most part too, if you think about it logically!

click here - http://asdfg.mine.nu/\

all in all some very funny stuff going on.

Paavo · Sep 1, 2003, 07:56 pm

yeah, I read that. It's great.

Also, click the "another one" link.

Dislogic · Sep 1, 2003, 08:00 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Paavo@Sep 1 2003, 07:56 PM
yeah, I read that. It's great.

Also, click the "another one" link.

lol yeah i did click that. its funny... and fairly true for that matter.

Sodfather · Sep 1, 2003, 08:17 pm

Haha, good article, good article, I'll give you that. Personally I liked the Saudi Arabia part. :)

GreatWyrm of Babylon · Sep 1, 2003, 08:31 pm

Lame, making up a story where you are the good guy does not require talent because you control all the dialog, and can simply leave out anything that points at weak logic...

Dislogic · Sep 1, 2003, 08:36 pm

true but it still carries some of the more obvious truths to light that the current US administration does not acknowledge and decides to ignore if they are ever questioned about them.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · Sep 1, 2003, 08:46 pm

I ignore ignorant personal attacks as well, what is your point. Some of the bible thummpers here think that failure to argue with them in scripture invalidates my logic that God does not exist.

This circular reasoning that America attacked Iraq because of WMD, and then claiming that failure to find them somehow validates that point is simply to ignorant an opinion to dispute. Failure to see the inherent contradiction is proof that reason is not something that will be grasped by these people.

indierockboy · Sep 1, 2003, 10:12 pm

so, if failure to find weapons of mass destruction does not invalidate the argument that they existed, what, pretell, would?

GreatWyrm of Babylon · Sep 1, 2003, 10:25 pm

You have as yet to demonstrat that the war was over WMD, giving money to suicide bombers families, supporting terrorists in general, giving visa's to terrorists, training terrorists, laundering money for terrorists, all played a part I am sure...

Dislogic · Sep 1, 2003, 10:42 pm

maybe but i think more of it had to do with George Bush's greed for personal wealth and the wealth of his family, friends, and collegues... not that there is anything wrong with that in general however there is something wrong with that when you send a nation to war for that reason when you are its representitive.

Also i do seem to recall that George Bush stated many times before the war that he was going to go to war because of WMD and that he did not believe that Suddam was telling the truth about this. That was his main arguement to go to war although i believe as i stated before that he had alterior motives for personal benifit. Besides like stated in an other thread somewhere... (forget which one) other countries are in the same and in some cases in more violation of what president bush seems to think is appropriate behavior for a nation other then the US but he is not going to war with them. I think we all know hes in it for the money, the facts just add up. i mean for instance, we have WMDs and whos to say considering president bushes outlandish behaviors in foriegn policy thus far he might not use WMDs to solve a problem that he is hell bent on having his way? And another thing... why is it ok for us to have WMDs and not others who is to judged us? us? that just doesent make sense because we will always side with ourselves on that one.

oh and i think i had something else to say that supported my poiint but i forgot it so i will post it later when i remember it.

G. Adams · Sep 1, 2003, 11:27 pm

Or perhaps it could be to do with 'Project for the New American Century' now running the administration, as Cheney, Rummy, Wolf, Perle (out supposedly but I do wonder) and Bush's brother all being founding members. As this group explicitly states its goal is for the USA to gain full spectrum military dominance of the world by 2020. Taking out the only military power in the middle east, besides Israel, is a big step towards this.

fedfem · Sep 1, 2003, 11:32 pm

I was just going to post that. G. Adams. Good point and the real reason.

Dislogic · Sep 1, 2003, 11:32 pm

yeah these facts about Bushes corruptive behavior seem much more logical to me then the reasons that bush stated there were for going to war... you must be able to admit that.

G. Adams · Sep 1, 2003, 11:45 pm

http://www.atrueword.com/index.php/article...leprint/49/-1/1

I really wouldn't put it past the US gov. to do it for those reasons either.

indierockboy · Sep 2, 2003, 12:55 am

i have no need to demonstrate what the president's platform for war was; he himself clearly stated one of the main reasons for his invasion was saddam's suspected possession of weapons of mass destruction. and with no clear connections drawn between iraq and al qaida (besides the umbrella term "terrorism"), the events of septemeber 11th can hardly be used as justification.

g. adams: to be fair, saddam didn't really have much of a military presence in the middle east. look at how quicky his forces crumbled under allied invasion.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · Sep 2, 2003, 12:56 am

If anything would actually push America toward becoming an Empire it is the rest of the worlds "negative reinforcement no matter how you act because you are America" attitude. Personally I do not understand why America simply does not just do as it damn well pleases because the rest of the world hates us regardless of what we do, so why waste resources trying to please the unpleaseable.

We have countries in Europe that brag about how little pollution they cause, and how much America does, mainly because we produce their products for them so the pollution gets made here and the product goes there. Meanwhile China is using old factories that put of fifty times as much pollution as American ones for the same amount of production, and it is America that is expected to improve its' factory controls.

We have 'allies' that beg for our support covertly, but in public they decry that America is an unwanted presence.

We have Puerto Rico that complained about the navel manuevers so we move the base to another spot and they complain about lost revenue, tough. Of course, Germany did the same thing.

Then, of course, we have the Middle East. A group of countries that covertly support terrorists because their religion says they must kill anyone that is not a member. But they have oil so we have to turn our eye away and pretend not to have a problem, because the only world market allowed open to us demands oil, and that same world market would object if we resorted to force to solve the problem. Even if we did find another market there are other countries that would be happy to take our place in that same world market, and would probably be asked to drop a few bombs on our country to get the oil contract...

I see no reason why America does not get fed up and simply take what it wants, could we possibly be treated worse?

fedfem · Sep 2, 2003, 01:33 am

First I want to remind you that Puerto Rico is not "another country", it is a territory of the US.

I don't believe the world hates us(meaning Americans) as a whole. Other countries have issues with our policies as do some Americans who are aware of it. With the popularity of the internet there are a lot of blowhards(from all countries) posting ignorant, arrogant and misguided views around the globe. To be fair--there is intelligent communication also. Generalities don't cut it on the global level.

If you don't think of America as being an empire then we will never agree. Most of the world was fine until this administration--made up of Nixon and Reagan era criminals--decided to push their weight around and began taking what it wanted. Our Government is supposed to be of, by and for the people. They are a gov for only the people they choose.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · Sep 2, 2003, 01:39 am

You may want to read the news more often, Puerto Rico is now a commonwealth...and one of their major political parties hates the US.http://welcome.topuertorico.org/government.shtml

fedfem · Sep 2, 2003, 02:17 am

and what do you think a Commonwealth is? It has been a commonwealth for years. Puerto Ricans are American citizens.

indierockboy · Sep 2, 2003, 03:01 am

with america's ever changing international policies, do you really think it would be welcomed with open arms? lets not forget the boondockle that resulted in the slaughter of iraqies during the gulf war, or the billions of dollars given to support the taliban or the training facilities set up to train osama bin laden.

america sets itself up to be the world's police, but with policies that dramatically shift and change as often as the administration, that's a very difficult task to accomplish.

as for your arguments on pollution, america is the worlds #1 polluter both per capita and overall. you can't tell me china, with a population as large as it has and as industrialized as it is, is a greater pulloter than america. in this instance, the numbers are not debateable.

Sep 1, 2003, 06:06 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
Dislogic Molten Ash Location: USA Posts: 115	ok well i must say i found this very amusing... not sure if anyone else has seen this but i would love to be the one to bring it here. Its very true for the most part too, if you think about it logically! click here - http://asdfg.mine.nu/\ all in all some very funny stuff going on. <span style='color:gray'><span style='font-family:Geneva'><span style='font-size:7.5pt;line-height:100%'>Kerry/Edwards 2004: He can't make up his mind, but at least he has one.</span></span></span>

Sep 1, 2003, 08:31 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	Lame, making up a story where you are the good guy does not require talent because you control all the dialog, and can simply leave out anything that points at weak logic... Logical Fallicies Link

Sep 1, 2003, 08:36 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
Dislogic Molten Ash Location: USA Posts: 115	true but it still carries some of the more obvious truths to light that the current US administration does not acknowledge and decides to ignore if they are ever questioned about them. <span style='color:gray'><span style='font-family:Geneva'><span style='font-size:7.5pt;line-height:100%'>Kerry/Edwards 2004: He can't make up his mind, but at least he has one.</span></span></span>

Sep 1, 2003, 08:46 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	I ignore ignorant personal attacks as well, what is your point. Some of the bible thummpers here think that failure to argue with them in scripture invalidates my logic that God does not exist. This circular reasoning that America attacked Iraq because of WMD, and then claiming that failure to find them somehow validates that point is simply to ignorant an opinion to dispute. Failure to see the inherent contradiction is proof that reason is not something that will be grasped by these people. Logical Fallicies Link

Sep 1, 2003, 10:12 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
indierockboy Molten Ash Location: ontario canada Posts: 104	so, if failure to find weapons of mass destruction does not invalidate the argument that they existed, what, pretell, would? http://www.autophobic.net/tmesis/sig.gif

Sep 1, 2003, 07:56 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Paavo Location: Finland Posts: 712	yeah, I read that. It's great. Also, click the "another one" link.

Sep 1, 2003, 08:17 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Sodfather Igneous Magma Posts: 327	Haha, good article, good article, I'll give you that. Personally I liked the Saudi Arabia part. :)

Sep 1, 2003, 10:25 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	You have as yet to demonstrat that the war was over WMD, giving money to suicide bombers families, supporting terrorists in general, giving visa's to terrorists, training terrorists, laundering money for terrorists, all played a part I am sure... Logical Fallicies Link

Sep 1, 2003, 10:42 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
Dislogic Molten Ash Location: USA Posts: 115	maybe but i think more of it had to do with George Bush's greed for personal wealth and the wealth of his family, friends, and collegues... not that there is anything wrong with that in general however there is something wrong with that when you send a nation to war for that reason when you are its representitive. Also i do seem to recall that George Bush stated many times before the war that he was going to go to war because of WMD and that he did not believe that Suddam was telling the truth about this. That was his main arguement to go to war although i believe as i stated before that he had alterior motives for personal benifit. Besides like stated in an other thread somewhere... (forget which one) other countries are in the same and in some cases in more violation of what president bush seems to think is appropriate behavior for a nation other then the US but he is not going to war with them. I think we all know hes in it for the money, the facts just add up. i mean for instance, we have WMDs and whos to say considering president bushes outlandish behaviors in foriegn policy thus far he might not use WMDs to solve a problem that he is hell bent on having his way? And another thing... why is it ok for us to have WMDs and not others who is to judged us? us? that just doesent make sense because we will always side with ourselves on that one. oh and i think i had something else to say that supported my poiint but i forgot it so i will post it later when i remember it. <span style='color:gray'><span style='font-family:Geneva'><span style='font-size:7.5pt;line-height:100%'>Kerry/Edwards 2004: He can't make up his mind, but at least he has one.</span></span></span>

Sep 1, 2003, 11:27 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	Or perhaps it could be to do with 'Project for the New American Century' now running the administration, as Cheney, Rummy, Wolf, Perle (out supposedly but I do wonder) and Bush's brother all being founding members. As this group explicitly states its goal is for the USA to gain full spectrum military dominance of the world by 2020. Taking out the only military power in the middle east, besides Israel, is a big step towards this. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Sep 1, 2003, 11:32 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	I was just going to post that. G. Adams. Good point and the real reason.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:32 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Dislogic Molten Ash Location: USA Posts: 115	yeah these facts about Bushes corruptive behavior seem much more logical to me then the reasons that bush stated there were for going to war... you must be able to admit that. <span style='color:gray'><span style='font-family:Geneva'><span style='font-size:7.5pt;line-height:100%'>Kerry/Edwards 2004: He can't make up his mind, but at least he has one.</span></span></span>

Sep 1, 2003, 11:45 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	http://www.atrueword.com/index.php/article...leprint/49/-1/1 I really wouldn't put it past the US gov. to do it for those reasons either. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Sep 2, 2003, 12:55 am	#15 (permalink) (top)
indierockboy Molten Ash Location: ontario canada Posts: 104	i have no need to demonstrate what the president's platform for war was; he himself clearly stated one of the main reasons for his invasion was saddam's suspected possession of weapons of mass destruction. and with no clear connections drawn between iraq and al qaida (besides the umbrella term "terrorism"), the events of septemeber 11th can hardly be used as justification. g. adams: to be fair, saddam didn't really have much of a military presence in the middle east. look at how quicky his forces crumbled under allied invasion. http://www.autophobic.net/tmesis/sig.gif

Sep 2, 2003, 12:56 am	#16 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	If anything would actually push America toward becoming an Empire it is the rest of the worlds "negative reinforcement no matter how you act because you are America" attitude. Personally I do not understand why America simply does not just do as it damn well pleases because the rest of the world hates us regardless of what we do, so why waste resources trying to please the unpleaseable. We have countries in Europe that brag about how little pollution they cause, and how much America does, mainly because we produce their products for them so the pollution gets made here and the product goes there. Meanwhile China is using old factories that put of fifty times as much pollution as American ones for the same amount of production, and it is America that is expected to improve its' factory controls. We have 'allies' that beg for our support covertly, but in public they decry that America is an unwanted presence. We have Puerto Rico that complained about the navel manuevers so we move the base to another spot and they complain about lost revenue, tough. Of course, Germany did the same thing. Then, of course, we have the Middle East. A group of countries that covertly support terrorists because their religion says they must kill anyone that is not a member. But they have oil so we have to turn our eye away and pretend not to have a problem, because the only world market allowed open to us demands oil, and that same world market would object if we resorted to force to solve the problem. Even if we did find another market there are other countries that would be happy to take our place in that same world market, and would probably be asked to drop a few bombs on our country to get the oil contract... I see no reason why America does not get fed up and simply take what it wants, could we possibly be treated worse? Logical Fallicies Link

Sep 2, 2003, 01:33 am	#17 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	First I want to remind you that Puerto Rico is not "another country", it is a territory of the US. I don't believe the world hates us(meaning Americans) as a whole. Other countries have issues with our policies as do some Americans who are aware of it. With the popularity of the internet there are a lot of blowhards(from all countries) posting ignorant, arrogant and misguided views around the globe. To be fair--there is intelligent communication also. Generalities don't cut it on the global level. If you don't think of America as being an empire then we will never agree. Most of the world was fine until this administration--made up of Nixon and Reagan era criminals--decided to push their weight around and began taking what it wanted. Our Government is supposed to be of, by and for the people. They are a gov for only the people they choose.

Sep 2, 2003, 01:39 am	#18 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	You may want to read the news more often, Puerto Rico is now a commonwealth...and one of their major political parties hates the US.http://welcome.topuertorico.org/government.shtml Logical Fallicies Link

Sep 2, 2003, 02:17 am	#19 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	and what do you think a Commonwealth is? It has been a commonwealth for years. Puerto Ricans are American citizens.

Sep 2, 2003, 03:01 am	#20 (permalink) (top)
indierockboy Molten Ash Location: ontario canada Posts: 104	with america's ever changing international policies, do you really think it would be welcomed with open arms? lets not forget the boondockle that resulted in the slaughter of iraqies during the gulf war, or the billions of dollars given to support the taliban or the training facilities set up to train osama bin laden. america sets itself up to be the world's police, but with policies that dramatically shift and change as often as the administration, that's a very difficult task to accomplish. as for your arguments on pollution, america is the worlds #1 polluter both per capita and overall. you can't tell me china, with a population as large as it has and as industrialized as it is, is a greater pulloter than america. in this instance, the numbers are not debateable. http://www.autophobic.net/tmesis/sig.gif