 |
|
Zylka
|
|
No, no. I don't think you understand what I'm on to with this realized insult policy. Do you know how much more fun I'm gonna make this place on the basis of past hypocricy - for YOU and ME!?!
WOW!!!#@ewq$!~r@
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jaakko
Gloating about how correct you are with 20/20 hindsight is something that, in your style, would be considered FUKCING ReTARDED!!!11! |
Where's the gloating?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jaakko
Gloating about how correct you are with 20/20 hindsight is something that, in your style, would be considered FUKCING ReTARDED!!!11! |
So if this war goes as well as hoped, gloating and apologizing of both sides isn't in order? THE FUTURE GROWTH OF CIVILIZATION IS BASED AROUND THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF ADMITTING FAILURES AND PRAISING SUCCESSES
Admitting that your argued opinion was a failure underscores and examines why it was unrealistic, that's learning. Gloating is the victors seen reward for "putting up with" opposition to the argued set of ideas used. This is unnecessary. Both can take praise in constructing the debate, right or wrong - because it produced countless new ideas which are put in use in the success
...in any case - either side plans to gloat in the end. To avoid gloating, those wrong must swallow bitterness and simply admit to being wrong in whatever areas, and praise those who argued areas that were part of the success.
Just my take on how humans can defeat poor-winner poor-loser syndrome when it comes to ideological debate
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Serb
I guess I know your weakness now, Pani Zilka.
Don't want to waste my time on you today, dismissed. |
Ok - Yet I think I'll rather waste MY time on a few of your lovely specimens of the English language!
Here, fair goers of Apolyton - is an utterly humiliated paragraph with suggestions for repair from a crack addict. Corrections are in bold:
quote:
Living a few years in Canada hasn't made you a Canadian, yet. You're still a Polish drug addicted (proper spelling for female dog).
[sic]And one more thing.[sic]
I do realize that talented people such as yourself are just unable to understand certain concepts at first try. I've said it many times personally for you, but here is one last attempt:
I'M NOT SERBIAN, AND DO NOT HAVE ANY SERBIAN HERITAGE. I'M RUSSIAN. R U S S I A N, FROM S I B E R I A, not SERBIA |
Oh man. I'm not even sure what to do with half of that atrocious horror, and have simply re-written various chunks out of frustration. Yet it looks somewhat respectable of our fair English language now, no? Any help with this chore appreciated. On that note: how would you have handled editing this little gem?
"but I'll make one more and this time final try"
Serb: Might I offer the consideration of posting on Russian forums, from now on? Whoops, that's right... you're Serbian
Last edited by Zylka on 23-03-2003 at 20:43
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
For what it's worth, there are those of us who object to the war because the Bush administration has grossly vioalted the principles of international cooperation and, indeed, international law that have made the world a better, safer place since WWII. There are those of us who object to the war because it has robbed the US of any ability to speak with moral authority around the world, and replaced that with the schoolyard bully logic of might-makes-right. And for us, even if the war ended tomorrow without a single casualty and with the whole population of Iraq dancing in the streets, the war will still have been a mistake, and one we will be paying for for years. |
Don't forget the ramifications that are to come in future years. The inflamed animosity of the Arab world, the drive of North Korea and Iran, and probably several other states, to get a hold of nuclear weapons to ensure their protection from U.S. invasion, the growing rift of international relations with even our allies, and the very possible upsurge in terrorism. Our actions in Iraq don't exist in a vacuum.
The other thing I lament is the continued impotence of Congress on matters of war. The President is not supposed to be the one deciding these sort of things, Congress is. But ever since Wilson, FDR and finally the War Powers Act, Congress has ceded its responsibility here, and I think that's a real problem.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
For what it's worth, there are those of us who object to the war because the Bush administration has grossly vioalted the principles of international cooperation and, indeed, international law that have made the world a better, safer place since WWII. There are those of us who object to the war because it has robbed the US of any ability to speak with moral authority around the world, and replaced that with the schoolyard bully logic of might-makes-right. And for us, even if the war ended tomorrow without a single casualty and with the whole population of Iraq dancing in the streets, the war will still have been a mistake, and one we will be paying for for years. |
Well put. This will have me thinking
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:27
|
|
I am in the Spiff, Rufus camp:
My opposition to this war is not based on some notion that many wil die: in the poll, i voted for the war to go one month tops, and I have enevr belieevd casualties would be high, and more honestly, even if they were I would not judge the Military phase to be a failure.
My concerns are long term. If, i 5 years the number of terrorist atatcks has gone down, Al Qaeda is weaker, and Iraq has a stable and democratizing government, then I will judge the war to have been a success, and if for some reason the "democracy domino" theory that the admin. keeps pushing somehow comes true I will amdit that I was wrong. But these are things in the future, not things that iwll happen in the next month.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jaakko
Of course, the biggest failures have already taken place, in the form of the US marginalising UN in its pursuit of "preventive self-defence", and the growing rift between many European countries and the US. |
The UN is an absolute failure at best right now. Look at Rwanda, which was about as easy a diplomatic answer as possible - but they did NOTHING. I am just as disgusted with the US for not telling the UN to f*ck off back then and invade the massacre of a country to restore order. I only hope that they will act with more moral decency the next time such a crisis arises (note, I also hope other respected nations will get off their seats to do the same - France, Germany, Britain, Canada, Japan, etc.)
Sadly enough, for massacre like situations only a few current members of the UN should have say in resolve. Otherwise, we have tinpot nutcases who prolong action on these common sense conflicts. I'm not talking about common sense answers coming from conflicts of specific war, I'm talking about savages running through villages with machetes and clubs slaughtering HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of women and children. In such a case, a morally just nation should bloody well volunteer to invade, tell the psychos to drop the machetes or die, and of course - convict as many as possible.
Of course the solution to the Iraq regime isn't so unanimously accepted, but we will eventually prove the right thing has been done - and the right claims were made against the oppressors. With this example, I hope more western countries can tell the UN off while invading the worst of the extremist, oppressive regimes. Note I said worst.
IT IZ TEJH WHITE MANSS BURDEN, RIGHT - THATS IS WHATS IM SAYING!!1
quote:
Also, I don't think the outcome of the war was in any doubt. But as far as civilian casualties go, the hardest fighting is still ahead.
|
The outcome was in doubt, with a disasterous UN estimated 500, 000 full casualties by victory. That's the figure the more intelligent on these boards were constantly spouting. We'll see if it hits even a tenth of that?
quote:
Then there's still the aftermath, on which the Bush administration has given precious little attention, in public at least. |
Governments reveal intention to the public on a "what's in the forseeable future" basis. Do you honestly not think the most wealthy and powerful nation on earth hasn't been extensively planning post war Iraq since day 1? Do you think they plan to just "beat the sh*t out of the brown people real good", put up an American flag and then leave?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
I agree that it hasn't been extensively planned since day 1 on a concrete basis, but rather running through every consideration possible - and redoing that as time moves on and situations change. Of course the US will get something out of the plans which are eventually executed (thankfully offered by the liberated, one would hope) - but the big winners will no doubt be the Iraqi people. I say this in assumption that what they're spending on the war alone is largely comparitive to anything they hope for in return.
If incorrect, do tell me. Can the US realistically secretly drain a liberated Iraq for an amount that dwarfs what they spent fighting for it? Figures?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by obiwan18
Before the war, I kept rooting for a diplomatic solution. Now, I'm backing this position of 'white man's burden.' IF the US is going to act like an imperialist with regime changes in Iraq, they should do the best job possible, and emulate the British. Build up the country to the point where they will be stable enough to hold their own.
So we agree, Zylka.  |
Sarcasm really doesn't register with me anymore, and I'm probably going to get murdered for this, but...
Although "white man's burden" is a lie, "just man's burden" is something to rather consider. Now in our modern situation, "just" on an international level is synonomous with democracy, a well developed economy, and most importantly - the presence of strong civil rights (bltch all you want about how horrible the US is concerning civil rights, I'll see you as even more of a moron if you live there yourself)
Perhaps some of you care to argue that my definition is also synonomous with white culture. Notice how I think it would be great if Japan could police and combat some of the atrocities as well? (All trite references to Japan's imperialist past need only apply in the "I think we're still living in the 1940s" forum)
Who knows. We could possibly see Turkey taking on the burden within 10 years (no, I don't mean by invading inoffensive and tortured Kurds - which would enrage just nations with common sense). 50 years (if you're around), a booming Iraq could be doing its part in wiping out tyranny.
This is just my utter fanatic dream of humanitarian progression - but I'll always hope for the best. Even if the just can meet it halfway, the world is a better place
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
...and to confirm, the moron comment is not intended for poster quoted or anyone specific. If, however, any individual screams hypocricy of the United States judging severe civil rights abuse - I will consider them a moron.
I simply can not believe that some people will turn away from the horrific monsters of the world by saying - "BUT LOOK AT THE USA, THEY'RE BAD TO THEIR PEOPLE IN JUST AS MANY WAYS - DON'T FOOL YOURSELVES!"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Kenobi
|
 |
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002
time: 21:27
|
|
Zylka:
No sarcasm.
quote:
Now in our modern situation, "just" on an international level is synonomous with democracy, a well developed economy, and most importantly - the presence of strong civil rights.
|
The only thing better than a war where this all works out, is having this accomplished through diplomatic means, by letting the people take control themselves.
'White man's burden,' is just a term used by Kipling, because if you are better off then the rest, does it not make sense to help those who are worse off?
Now, we do not have the right to invade another country just because we feel that the government should be changed. The US is already past the point of no return.
Finish the war, end it quick, and try to fix everything up like in West Germany under the Marshall plan.
That's what you should have called this thread Zylka:
Marshall Plan for Iraq.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-03-2003 19:28
I'm wasting my time. 
|
|