28-10-2002 02:53									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

	28-10-2002 02:55									#92
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I'm going to quote Dr. Phil, "Now answer MY question."

	28-10-2002 02:57									#93
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

Yes, Saddam is the only liar with power in the world. And since he keeps trying to attack us....

Lincoln, you've said that you don't want to go to war with Iraq. But you keep making arguments for it. So which is it?

	28-10-2002 03:03									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

I don't think it matters. 1) it's neither our responsibility nor our right to ensure nuclear non-proliferation.

2) Hussein has already lost two wars. His military is a shambles, and doesn't even excecise control over the whole of Iraq.

3) There are plenty of other contries which have violated the will of the UN, including the United States. Any attempt to start enforcing the will of the UN out to start with the US paying all its dues and paying war crimes reparations to Nicaragua. Then we should go in order from first to last of violated UN resolutions. After all, the Israeli violations of the UN are a far more serious threat to peace than Iraq's.

4) This war is about deflecting the public's attention away from domestic problems and Bush's failure in the war on terrorism.

	28-10-2002 03:05									#95
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I said that if Iraq continues to make a fool of the UN then there should be a real threat of war if he continues to play games. And I don't want to go to war with Iraq in any case. My answer was to Boris about reasoning with fanatics.

	28-10-2002 03:07									#96
	Put an end to popups!

First of all: saying that since only a few tens of thousand are protesting mean little because they are only a few out of 280 million, or 6 bilion, is absolutely stupid. The biggest political demonstrations ever had at best 1-2 milion participants. Whens the last time 1 million people marched against abortion? If 1 million don't marhc, do we assume that 279,890,000 thousand Americans are in favor of it? And whats the last time anyone amrhced in SUPPORT of the the president? POr wrote mountains of letters to their congresspeople in support of the war on iraq?

I agree that, if not opposition, doubt grows on Iraq, simply because the story can only be pushed so much. The threat has lost some of its urgency, since we don't have round the clock, 'Iraq poised to nuke Washington, gas NY, infect LA, and install Osama as Emperor' sort of news stories every day in the TV.

I think we are going to war, and that since most people everywhere are essentially apathetic, there might be some more protest, but not much. (I say we go to war because Bush wants not only inspections, but a list of 12 or so demands: basically, if Hussein does not become the leader of a democratic Iraq, ten we will invade, and Hussein won't).

	28-10-2002 03:07									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

So you don't believe in war, just in threat of war? Alrighty then....

	28-10-2002 03:07									#98
	Inflate your Upload Space

What about the US and Israel continuing to make fools of the UN. Should we attack them?

	28-10-2002 03:10									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by tandeetaylor So you don't believe in war, just in threat of war? Alrighty then....

"My words are backed by nuclear weapons"

	28-10-2002 03:12									#100
	Put an end to popups!

It's not going to work Che. He doesn't believe in the UN, but continues to use making a fool of them a legitmate reason to create a "real threat of war." Obviously one cannot make this way or that out of his opinions.

	28-10-2002 03:12									#101
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Well thanks for your opinion Boris but I don't agree with it. Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons? And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel? Have another peace march on Washington? Clinton is out of office now btw. The bombing of aspirin factories in not in vogue anymore.

	28-10-2002 03:21									#102
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

So you think it IS our responsibilty to make sure that no other country has dangerous weapons? Can you just ****ing say so? You know, have a decisive opinion about SOMETHING?

quote: And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel?

Ummm..... Nothing.

	28-10-2002 03:27									#103
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Well thanks for your opinion Boris but I don't agree with it.

I'm not Borris.

quote: Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

There are several countries with which the US maintains friendly relations, if not outright alliances, that are violaters of non-proliferation: France, China, Israel, South Africa, India, and Pakistan. Which of these countries should we attack first?

quote: And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel?

Israel's defense is not our responsibility. Furthermore, Israel is exceedingly capable of defending itself, with over two hundred nuclear weapons. Iraq would be committing suicide by attacking Israel with WoMD, and Hussein maybe be stupid, but he isn't suicidal.

	28-10-2002 03:28									#104
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Why don't you let Boris answer for himself? I did not say the the US was respnsible. If you read the previous page you will see my position (which apparently does not suit you). And your heartless answer concerning the theoretical destruction of Israel says quite a bit about where you stand.

	28-10-2002 03:29									#105
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by tandeetaylor So you think it IS our responsibilty to make sure that no other country has dangerous weapons? Can you just ****ing say so? You know, have a decisive opinion about SOMETHING?

I think we should let the Europeans do it. After all they have a wonderful track record of keeping the world from devasting war.

	28-10-2002 03:31									#106
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara [Q] Originally posted by Lincoln Israel's defense is not our responsibility. Furthermore, Israel is exceedingly capable of defending itself, with over two hundred nuclear weapons. Iraq would be committing suicide by attacking Israel with WoMD, and Hussein maybe be stupid, but he isn't suicidal.

I thought were against Israel from defending itself.

	28-10-2002 03:34									#107
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Why don't you let Boris answer for himself?

This is a forum, where everyone talks with everyone, and I don't see why I shouldn't answer your silly post. And I don't think it was Boris you were meaning to talk to anyway.

quote: I did not say the the US was respnsible.

I know. You just basicially said, if we don't who will? Hence my demand that you put up or shut up.

quote: If you read the previous page you will see my position (which apparently does not suit you).

Your position doesn't make any sense. Your position contradicts itself, frequenty. You refuse to clarify your postion because I think you have realized by now that you cannot do so without contradicting something you have said, and admit defeat you cannot.

quote: And your heartless answer concerning the theoretical destruction of Israel says quite a bit about where you stand.

Damn. I was trying to hide my heartlessness.

EDIT: And anyway, as Che pointed out, your question was a hypothetical situation that is unlikely to occur.

	28-10-2002 03:34									#108
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Yea, I know you are not Boris but I was addressing his post. And if you will read this thread Che you will see that I am not suggesting that we attack anyone. And it is intersting that you apparently do not see any threat to the world if there is a WOMD launched against Israel. Do we just "visualize world peace"?

	28-10-2002 03:35									#109
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Sprayber I thought were against Israel from defending itself.

That depends on your defination of defending itself. If you define defending yourself as invading and occupying foreign countries, then yes, we are opposed to Israel defnding itself. However, if you don't define defense that way, then we have no problem with Israel defnding itself.

	28-10-2002 03:38									#110
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara That depends on your defination of defending itself. If you define defending yourself as invading and occupying foreign countries, then yes, we are opposed to Israel defnding itself. However, if you don't define defense that way, then we have no problem with Israel defnding itself.

Ok so Israel should only defend itself from foreign attacks?

	28-10-2002 03:39									#111
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

"Hence my demand that you put up or shut up."

Sorry, I am not going to heed your demands. You can read. You don't like what I said so you want to create a strawman that you can argue with. Create him without me.

	28-10-2002 03:40									#112
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Che you will see that I am not suggesting that we attack anyone.

Then why are you defending this adminstration's drive to war?

quote: And it is intersting that you apparently do not see any threat to the world if there is a WOMD launched against Israel.

No, I don't see a threat to the world if Israel is attacked. I see a threat to Israel. Israel has the most modern, most highly trained military in the region. With the possible exceptions of the Turks and the Egyptians, the Israel's could defeat any "threat" within days. That's merely with conventional weapons. If Israel were about to be defeated, I'm sure there would be some glass craters where major cities and Arab armies once stood.

quote: Do we just "visualize world peace"?

I see the US as the biggest threat to world peace, so visualizing world peace is a start to making it happen.

	28-10-2002 03:43									#113
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Sprayber Ok so Israel should only defend itself from foreign attacks?

Correct, just like every other country in the world. Every signatory to the UN agrees to only use force in international relations to stop foreign aggression. Israel's terrorism problem results from its refusing to deal fairly with the native inhabitants of its land.

	28-10-2002 03:43									#114
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln "Hence my demand that you put up or shut up." Sorry, I am not going to heed your demands. You can read. You don't like what I said so you want to create a strawman that you can argue with. Create him without me.

OK, if you don't want to stand up and take a position, then you can't argue for one. What's your opinion straw man?

	28-10-2002 03:44									#115
	Suffering from ads?

I am not defending the administrations "drive to war". I am defending the administrations drive to call the bluff of the UN. And that is what Bush has done. If Saddam yeilds like he said he would then there will be no war.

	28-10-2002 03:45									#116
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The Administration has made noises about attacking Iraq inspite of that, even if Iraq fully complies.

Anyway, Bush isn't calling the UN's bluff. He's calling Hussein's.

	28-10-2002 03:46									#117
	Tired of ads?

Saddam is a two faced liar... so I don't think he will ever yield...

	28-10-2002 03:46									#118
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Every signatory to the UN agrees to only use force in international relations to stop foreign aggression.

I think that history has already given you several examples where it is hard to define aggression.

	28-10-2002 03:46									#119
	Put an end to popups!

"What's your opinion straw man?"

You created him. Argue with him yourself.

	28-10-2002 03:48									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc I think that history has already given you several examples where it is hard to define aggression.

Ah, the only iffy one was the attack on Afganistan, as by the time we attacked, there was no current agression from theat country. Oh well, too bad for them.