The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The Americans are insane. After all, a nation can only be as good as its leader, and we all know who leads America. The American government listens to just one man, no one else is involved in decision making and no one else matters.
The people, ah yes, the people of America are simply blindly following their leader as the German people followed Hitler and they have no thought for anyone but themselves. There are no Americans that oppose this war with Iraq, because, of course, it affects them all personally.
There was no complaint made against Bush during this whole war march in America, no-one supports the other side and anyone who speaks out should be hung, this is the land of the brave after all, and it’s not brave to support the enemy.
Bush himself has single-handedly pushed the world in to war because of his own personal quest, but it’s clear that all America is behind him. I asked 3 Americans what they thought and they were both adamant that they would support Bush. 3 Separate people with the same view, so that proves beyond doubt that America is a brainwashed mass of zombies who are arrogant and rude (one put the phone down without saying goodbye).
And then there’s the French. Not content with speaking English, they make up their own language. And that Chirac, he’s to blame for all of it. Chirac has stood up to America for his own personal reasons. I’ve heard from a friend down the road that he personally has an account to sell weapons to Iraq and is good friends with Saddam himself.
The French people are all arrogant and smell of Garlic. I know this first-hand, because I went to get some wine from France and met a bunch of French people while I was there. All they do is complain about the English and how we invade their country. Well, we should have finished them off like in that Henry V film and made the place ours.
It’s nearly as bad with the Spanish, they steal all our fish and accuse us of being moaning when we complain about it. We pay their wages, all those holidays we take, they should be grateful to us.
The people, ah yes, the people of America are simply blindly following their leader as the German people followed Hitler and they have no thought for anyone but themselves. There are no Americans that oppose this war with Iraq, because, of course, it affects them all personally.
There was no complaint made against Bush during this whole war march in America, no-one supports the other side and anyone who speaks out should be hung, this is the land of the brave after all, and it’s not brave to support the enemy.
Bush himself has single-handedly pushed the world in to war because of his own personal quest, but it’s clear that all America is behind him. I asked 3 Americans what they thought and they were both adamant that they would support Bush. 3 Separate people with the same view, so that proves beyond doubt that America is a brainwashed mass of zombies who are arrogant and rude (one put the phone down without saying goodbye).
And then there’s the French. Not content with speaking English, they make up their own language. And that Chirac, he’s to blame for all of it. Chirac has stood up to America for his own personal reasons. I’ve heard from a friend down the road that he personally has an account to sell weapons to Iraq and is good friends with Saddam himself.
The French people are all arrogant and smell of Garlic. I know this first-hand, because I went to get some wine from France and met a bunch of French people while I was there. All they do is complain about the English and how we invade their country. Well, we should have finished them off like in that Henry V film and made the place ours.
It’s nearly as bad with the Spanish, they steal all our fish and accuse us of being moaning when we complain about it. We pay their wages, all those holidays we take, they should be grateful to us.
Page:
Goatboy wrote:
> That's not a criticism, that's me saying sure you may agree with
> stopping Saddam, but *why* do you feel that? What is it about these
> events that make you think the way you do?
I'll tell you.
Before 9/11 I always believed that given a chance this could be a much better world than it is.
Sure, many of us live in relative peace, and comfort, with our families, but so many don't. They live in countries where they suffer terribly, and all because certain people in power in those countries. In a fair few cases these people were helped to that position by us, the West, because they were the lesser of two evils.
Yet these men remained in power when all it would take is our help to remove them, and the nations of the world generally stood by and watched the Balkans, parts of Africa like Somalia, and so many other places descend into war and death. We watched, and did nothing, even when the UN went into the Balkans they largely failed to help save lives because of insane policies set by the UN. By men and women removed by a continent from the battles.
With few exceptions, we, the west, have in my opinion sat safely at home and watched so many die, because we feared our intervention would cause more problems.
In 1991 the UN stopped it's forces from moving on Baghdad, and laid the seeds of this conflict. Endless military advisors made it clear that, to end Saddam ever being a threat again, this was the time to do it. There was no will.
Then 9/11. For a few months a will for nations to unite, then unity is lost in the old divisions once again, the horror is forgotten yet a few, America, the UK, Australia, and some european nations, do not forget. NEw measures push terrorist attacks into other areas - Pakistan, Bali, Africa, and elsewhere. More people die for little reason.
Saddam, for 12 years - and I have mentioned this pre 9/11 - has been left to his own devices. From his post 9/11 response we know where his loyalties lie.
Whether he truly is or is not a danger to us is something I feel no one can be sure. I believe the danger is that, as happened before WW2, the danger is not believe until it is too late. Saddam should have been removed long ago.
The very core of why I believe what I do comes down to this; If I, and others who believe Iraq has WMDs, supports terror e.t.c are right then we could prevent the next mass killing of innocent people. If we're wrong, and he is innocent, then a dictator is removed. If the anti war lobby is right, they save many innocent lives, but if they are wrong they condemn many more to death, and a world to a stark future.
When the stakes are this high can we risk the chance that Iraq is innocent, knowing what taking no action could mean ? I believe not, because history suggests the danger is usually real.
And... I truly do believe in America, and Bush , and to a lesser extent Blair and the course he has set the country on.
~~Belldandy~~
> That's not a criticism, that's me saying sure you may agree with
> stopping Saddam, but *why* do you feel that? What is it about these
> events that make you think the way you do?
I'll tell you.
Before 9/11 I always believed that given a chance this could be a much better world than it is.
Sure, many of us live in relative peace, and comfort, with our families, but so many don't. They live in countries where they suffer terribly, and all because certain people in power in those countries. In a fair few cases these people were helped to that position by us, the West, because they were the lesser of two evils.
Yet these men remained in power when all it would take is our help to remove them, and the nations of the world generally stood by and watched the Balkans, parts of Africa like Somalia, and so many other places descend into war and death. We watched, and did nothing, even when the UN went into the Balkans they largely failed to help save lives because of insane policies set by the UN. By men and women removed by a continent from the battles.
With few exceptions, we, the west, have in my opinion sat safely at home and watched so many die, because we feared our intervention would cause more problems.
In 1991 the UN stopped it's forces from moving on Baghdad, and laid the seeds of this conflict. Endless military advisors made it clear that, to end Saddam ever being a threat again, this was the time to do it. There was no will.
Then 9/11. For a few months a will for nations to unite, then unity is lost in the old divisions once again, the horror is forgotten yet a few, America, the UK, Australia, and some european nations, do not forget. NEw measures push terrorist attacks into other areas - Pakistan, Bali, Africa, and elsewhere. More people die for little reason.
Saddam, for 12 years - and I have mentioned this pre 9/11 - has been left to his own devices. From his post 9/11 response we know where his loyalties lie.
Whether he truly is or is not a danger to us is something I feel no one can be sure. I believe the danger is that, as happened before WW2, the danger is not believe until it is too late. Saddam should have been removed long ago.
The very core of why I believe what I do comes down to this; If I, and others who believe Iraq has WMDs, supports terror e.t.c are right then we could prevent the next mass killing of innocent people. If we're wrong, and he is innocent, then a dictator is removed. If the anti war lobby is right, they save many innocent lives, but if they are wrong they condemn many more to death, and a world to a stark future.
When the stakes are this high can we risk the chance that Iraq is innocent, knowing what taking no action could mean ? I believe not, because history suggests the danger is usually real.
And... I truly do believe in America, and Bush , and to a lesser extent Blair and the course he has set the country on.
~~Belldandy~~
Once again Bell, I'll repeat what I've told you before; I don't want you to 'shut up' cos I disagree with you. I have said this time and time again, but it suits you to ignore that so that you can continue your mindless "Bush is right!" "Why?" "Because he is right" jaunts into fantasy land.
I take issue with you because you are a self-congratulatory prat who will go to any length and say anything to ensure that you are seen as correct, or at least not demonstratably incorrect. As far as I can tell, all you've been doing when you try to justify your dislike of my opinion is take the criticisms that are levelled at you and level them at me. Which is not a debate. Neither is your continued insistence on bland assertion unsupported by evidence. And neither is your infantile desire to shout abuse at anyone who disagree's whilst whinging about anyone who does the same to you.
However, as Goatboy says, none of this really matters because we don't get a say in how the world is run. Maybe if you stopped basing your entire sense of self worth on the points you score in a web forum due to your political knowledge (because though you are selective about what you consider as fact, and even though it seems to have been learned parrot fashion rather than something you actually comprehend, you do at least have those background facts to support your opinion), you'd actually mature a little as a person. Either that, or you'll respond with another "You're a nasty man" piece of triviality. Up to you really. But seeing as how I'm not the only one taking issue with all the points I've mentioned, I'll be interested to see how you'll react now.
I take issue with you because you are a self-congratulatory prat who will go to any length and say anything to ensure that you are seen as correct, or at least not demonstratably incorrect. As far as I can tell, all you've been doing when you try to justify your dislike of my opinion is take the criticisms that are levelled at you and level them at me. Which is not a debate. Neither is your continued insistence on bland assertion unsupported by evidence. And neither is your infantile desire to shout abuse at anyone who disagree's whilst whinging about anyone who does the same to you.
However, as Goatboy says, none of this really matters because we don't get a say in how the world is run. Maybe if you stopped basing your entire sense of self worth on the points you score in a web forum due to your political knowledge (because though you are selective about what you consider as fact, and even though it seems to have been learned parrot fashion rather than something you actually comprehend, you do at least have those background facts to support your opinion), you'd actually mature a little as a person. Either that, or you'll respond with another "You're a nasty man" piece of triviality. Up to you really. But seeing as how I'm not the only one taking issue with all the points I've mentioned, I'll be interested to see how you'll react now.
Goatboy wrote:
> Leave him be?
> Nobody gives a hoot about Mugabe or Algiers or Tibet or El Salvador or
> The Sudan or N Korea or China abusing civil rights.
> What about General Pinochet coming over here for medical treatment?
> He's killed more than Hussein, yet Thatcher liked him.
This whole thing is ridiculous. While we invite Mugabe to a French summit, we tell Saddam that he's going to be dethroned soon. Why can't we at least adopt a common anti-dictator policy and make sure they all know where we stand?
> Leave him be?
> Nobody gives a hoot about Mugabe or Algiers or Tibet or El Salvador or
> The Sudan or N Korea or China abusing civil rights.
> What about General Pinochet coming over here for medical treatment?
> He's killed more than Hussein, yet Thatcher liked him.
This whole thing is ridiculous. While we invite Mugabe to a French summit, we tell Saddam that he's going to be dethroned soon. Why can't we at least adopt a common anti-dictator policy and make sure they all know where we stand?
Leave him be?
Nobody gives a hoot about Mugabe or Algiers or Tibet or El Salvador or The Sudan or N Korea or China abusing civil rights.
What about General Pinochet coming over here for medical treatment? He's killed more than Hussein, yet Thatcher liked him.
Nobody gives a hoot about Mugabe or Algiers or Tibet or El Salvador or The Sudan or N Korea or China abusing civil rights.
What about General Pinochet coming over here for medical treatment? He's killed more than Hussein, yet Thatcher liked him.
Anti-war but not pro-Saddam.
How do you propose he be removed then? Ask him nicely? Nothing short of force will get him off his high horse.
Unless you have a better idea? No diplomatic solution I can think of will dethrone him.
How do you propose he be removed then? Ask him nicely? Nothing short of force will get him off his high horse.
Unless you have a better idea? No diplomatic solution I can think of will dethrone him.
I'm anti-war but not pro-Saddam.
That seems to confuse an awful lot of people.
Just because I find the reasons/proof offered for ousting a tyrant that only exists thanks to the USA flimsy, doesn't mean I don't agree with the principle of the reasoning.
CIA and MI5 assist in installing Shah in Iran. Coup by Ayotollah, CIA and MI5 install Hussein in Iraq to prevent hardline Muslim rule from spreading into that area as well.
Now the Ayotollah is ok and we hate Hussein.
It's nothing more than "I dont like you, you cant have any cake" on a global scale.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - the only way to settle this is nation's leaders having a fight like proper angry blokes instead of ripping off old Uni lecture notes and sending kids to do your dirty work.
Bush Sr was nothing more than a tool of the Military Block, and his water-head son is a chip off the block.
Hell, Bush didn't even win the elections for chrissakes. He shouldn't even be there.
This entire situation is like giving a weapon to a retard and slapping him before sending him into another classroom
---
And that's that.
That seems to confuse an awful lot of people.
Just because I find the reasons/proof offered for ousting a tyrant that only exists thanks to the USA flimsy, doesn't mean I don't agree with the principle of the reasoning.
CIA and MI5 assist in installing Shah in Iran. Coup by Ayotollah, CIA and MI5 install Hussein in Iraq to prevent hardline Muslim rule from spreading into that area as well.
Now the Ayotollah is ok and we hate Hussein.
It's nothing more than "I dont like you, you cant have any cake" on a global scale.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - the only way to settle this is nation's leaders having a fight like proper angry blokes instead of ripping off old Uni lecture notes and sending kids to do your dirty work.
Bush Sr was nothing more than a tool of the Military Block, and his water-head son is a chip off the block.
Hell, Bush didn't even win the elections for chrissakes. He shouldn't even be there.
This entire situation is like giving a weapon to a retard and slapping him before sending him into another classroom
---
And that's that.
Belldandy wrote:
> My only argument is that, whilst I'm the one most people seems to
> accuse of ramming opinions down peoples throats, the majority of you
> that don't support sorting Saddam out, are happy to continue on. I get
> whinged at because I don't agree, I'm the one Light tells to shut up
> simply because I don't follow the line most of you are taking on this.
No, we don't mind at all other ideas, and I like to see things put into another perspective so I can look at them differently myself. What I hate, however, along with many other people, is others only listening to themselves, and that's why the likes of Light tell you to shut up, just so we can put our ideas to you. Being called a moron just because I think something could happen is not really debating, is it?
> My only argument is that, whilst I'm the one most people seems to
> accuse of ramming opinions down peoples throats, the majority of you
> that don't support sorting Saddam out, are happy to continue on. I get
> whinged at because I don't agree, I'm the one Light tells to shut up
> simply because I don't follow the line most of you are taking on this.
No, we don't mind at all other ideas, and I like to see things put into another perspective so I can look at them differently myself. What I hate, however, along with many other people, is others only listening to themselves, and that's why the likes of Light tell you to shut up, just so we can put our ideas to you. Being called a moron just because I think something could happen is not really debating, is it?
And you look like the bloke from Embrace.
Dont forget that.
Dont forget that.
Well, I was, perhaps, expecting more of a comment on social sterotyping and how we should not base the thoughts of an entire population on one of their leading members, but I guess I should have known better.
The clue was probably in the last paragraph and the fact that my own wife is Spanish....ho hum.
The clue was probably in the last paragraph and the fact that my own wife is Spanish....ho hum.
Light wrote:
> Dude, I'm MOVING to America soon...will someone record the war for me
> while I'm away? Only I don't think America's coverage of it will be as
> good.
*puts video in VCR*
> Dude, I'm MOVING to America soon...will someone record the war for me
> while I'm away? Only I don't think America's coverage of it will be as
> good.
*puts video in VCR*
Page: