POLL: The repercussions of a US attack on Iraq

Discussion in 'Politics' started by candletrader, Dec 8, 2002.

Which of these is most likely?

  1. Co-ordinated large-scale bombings of shopping malls and offices (similar to September 11, but not us

    12 vote(s)
    133.3%
  2. Biological attacks on schools, malls, airports etc

    5 vote(s)
    55.6%
  3. Highly co-ordinated machine gun mow-downs of crowds by suicide gangs

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. One person suicide bombings (similar to that carried out by Hamas) co-ordinated across numerous smal

    30 vote(s)
    333.3%
  5. Devastating car bombs set to go off amongst traffic queues of commuters crawling into work in the ru

    3 vote(s)
    33.3%
  6. It won't be as obvious as any of the above, but it will make September 11 look like a wasp bite com

    26 vote(s)
    288.9%
  7. No repercussions

    95 vote(s)
    1,055.6%
  1. fairplay

    fairplay Guest

    So much for freedom of expression. Is that enough vitriol?
     
    #721     Jan 19, 2003
  2. Um, excuse me, but "far away countries" is quite a relative term, isn't it? The last time I checked ET's servers are not located in Indonesia. You are "far away" from the majority of the ET readership.

    Why should we stop talking about defending our country? As an American whose country has been attacked and thousands of my fellow citizens (and dozens of foreign nationals) killed, the defense of my country will ALWAYS be a concern. The consequences of our actions are quite clear: Failure to act will result in further damage and death on our soil.

    What a joke. Radicalism and fundamentalism have been rampant in Indonesia for a long time now.
    I could care less what "feelings of dissatisfaction" my country's actions to defend itself generate in Indonesia or any other nation. Your feelings being hurt are insignificant to the safety of me, my family, and my country.
    I knew you would make this jump, Fairplay. Just as you are free to express your opinions in a forum of your choosing, so am I. Feel free to create a thread for Indonesians & German Extremists, exclude me, and express all you want.
     
    #722     Jan 19, 2003
  3. wild

    wild

    Quote from hapaboy

    So I ask, if it is Wild's right to cut-and-paste like crazy ON THIS THREAD, is it not also our right to create another thread that excludes him from participation?

    fairplay,

    i wouldn´t mind being excluded from a closed user group of learned American intellectuals and historians who all share the same convictions and opinions (Bush´s, Cheney´s, Rumsfeld´s & Ashcroft´s) ... would you ?

    best regards

    wild


    btw: did you know that in Germany every single human being has the constitutional right of uncensored free speech ... regardless of nationality or tax records ?


    Preamble

    Conscious of their responsibility before God and man,

    Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law.


    Germans in the Länder of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Bremen, Hamburg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, and Thuringia have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination. This Basic Law thus applies to the entire German people.

    I. Basic Rights

    Article 1 [Human dignity]

    (1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.

    (2) The German people therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalienable human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice in the world.

    (3) The following basic rights shall bind the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary as directly applicable law.

    Article 2 [Personal freedoms]

    (1) Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law.

    (2) Every person shall have the right to life and physical integrity. Freedom of the person shall be inviolable. These rights may be interfered with only pursuant to a law.

    Article 3 [Equality before the law]

    (1) All persons shall be equal before the law.

    (2) Men and women shall have equal rights. The state shall promote the actual implementation of equal rights for women and men and take steps to eliminate disadvantages that now exist.

    (3) No person shall be favored or disfavored because of sex, parentage, race, language, homeland and origin, faith, or religious or political opinions. No person shall be disfavored because of disability.

    Article 4 [Freedom of faith, conscience, and creed]

    (1) Freedom of faith and of conscience, and freedom to profess a religious or philosophical creed, shall be inviolable.

    (2) The undisturbed practice of religion shall be guaranteed.

    (3) No person shall be compelled against his conscience to render military service involving the use of arms. Details shall be regulated by a federal law.

    Article 5 [Freedom of expression]

    (1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.

    (2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honor.

    (3) Art and scholarship, research, and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.
    ...

    more at http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm#2
     
    #723     Jan 19, 2003
  4. It will definitely be news to Candle, Madison, Kicking and others that they share my opinion!

    Thank you for your offer! :)

    p.s. How wonderful that you are actually expressing some thoughts other than merely cutting and pasting! Funny how the possibility of being excluded on the basis of your manic, unoriginal pastings has caused you to divert from your modus operandi. I love it!
     
    #724     Jan 19, 2003
  5. rs7

    rs7

    I don't think any thread that goes for over 100 pages will not go off on tangents. And I see no problem with that.

    On occasion, the moderators have changed the title of the threads. On occasion, the threads were closed. But the subjects always seem to re-emerge.

    As for "excluding" anyone from participating in a thread, I think that is going a bit far. While I understand your frustration with Wild's incessant cut and pasting, and his often offensive anti-American points of view, let's not forget that freedom of speech is what we as Americans hold as perhaps our dearest right. So if Wild, or anyone who wishes to complain about the US wants to, then, as i mentioned in my previous post in this thread, they make their case very weak indeed. Because everything they complain about they do with the freedom we are guaranteed.

    Wild posted that in Germany they too have free speech. But look what they suffered to get it.

    America forced freedom down their throats? What an overbearing and imperialistic country we are. We took away Germany's "freedom" to expand, conquer, and commit mass murder, and twisted their arms into accepting democracy. We truly must be an 'evil empire'.

    Peace,
    Rs7
     
    #725     Jan 19, 2003
  6. wild

    wild

    Report: bin Laden Urges Islamic Unity

    Sunday January 19, 2003 9:10 PM


    CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - A statement purportedly written by Osama bin Laden urges Muslims to stop fighting each other and unite against the ``crusader coalition'' that is attacking the Islamic world, according to excerpts published Sunday in a London-based Arab newspaper.

    Asharq Al-Awsat printed portions of a 26-page statement it claims was written and signed by bin Laden, leader of the al-Qaida terror group.

    The letter did not mention any nation, but earlier statements attributed to bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders have accused the United States and Israel of launching a religious crusade against the Muslim world.

    The journalist who wrote the article, Mohamed el-Shaf'aie, told The Associated Press on Sunday that the statement was mailed to the paper from an Islamic source in London with close links to a Pakistan-based Islamic research center known for its ties to al-Qaida.

    The letter attributed to bin Laden says, ``the current situation Muslims are living in requires a deployment of all efforts to fight the Islamic battle against the crusader coalition, which has revealed its real, evil intentions.''

    ``Their target now is Islam and Muslims and not only the (Middle East) region,'' the letter added.

    America has come under attack throughout the Islamic world for a perceived bias toward Israel in the Jewish state's conflict with the Palestinians, and for the U.S. threat to attack Iraq if it retains weapons banned by the United Nations.

    The U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, launched after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in the United States, and U.S. detention of hundreds of men with suspected links to al-Qaida and Afghanistan's previous Taliban rulers have compounded the view in the Islamic world that Washington is attacking Muslims.

    The United States denies such claims.

    Despite numerous written, audio and videotaped statements attributed to bin Laden after the launch of the Afghanistan war, it is unclear where the Saudi-born Islamic extremist is or if he is still alive.

    No al-Qaida affiliated web sites immediately published the latest statement, which normally happens whenever one appears.

    The statement excerpts published by Asharq Al-Awsat urge Muslims to ``wake from their deep sleep ... and stop (acting as) rivals and fire their arrows toward their enemies instead of themselves.''

    It was not clear who the letter referred to, but feuds and disputes are common within the volatile Middle East.

    The statement's author said he was ``surprised by the many different controversies and feuds among Muslims in general and those working for Islam in particular. Such a dangerous phenomenon has become the only thing Islamic-oriented factions agree upon.''

    The letter also defends al-Qaida leaders for unspecified mistakes. ``The honor of righteous men should be protected despite whatever faults they may commit,'' the letter said without elaborating.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2334436,00.html
     
    #726     Jan 19, 2003
  7. wild

    wild

    Quote from rs7


    America forced freedom down their throats? What an overbearing and imperialistic country we are. We took away Germany's "freedom" to expand, conquer, and commit mass murder, and twisted their arms into accepting democracy. We truly must be an 'evil empire'.

    ???

    wild


    FIFTY YEARS OF GERMAN BASIC LAW
    The New Departure For Germany

    American Institute for Contemporary German Studies

    The Johns Hopkins University


    http://www.aicgs.org/publications/PDF/basiclaw.pdf
     
    #727     Jan 19, 2003
  8. 50 years? Nice work. Check in with us after 200 years of a working democracy.
     
    #728     Jan 19, 2003
  9. Rs7, I completely agree with you. My point is not to deny Wild or anyone else a forum for his points of view, anti-American or not. This thread was not titled "Pro-War Viewpoints Only." He can post ad nauseum on this thread for as long as he wants to as far as I'm concerned.

    So let me put it another way: Would it be unreasonable or discriminatory in any way if I start another thread specifically for Americans to discuss American viewpoints on the crisis with Iraq? I don't see how it could be, as Wild could simply start another threat titled, for example, "Wild's Viewpoints on the Iraq Crisis." Wouldn't that be fair?

    The argument comes down to whether or not anyone has the right to choose the participants in a particular discussion without denying another party the same right.

    Babak, as Moderator, what are your thoughts?
     
    #729     Jan 19, 2003
  10. rs7

    rs7

    He will if he can still post links. What I don't get is the redundancy. Why cut and paste, AND then include the link so we can see the same thing again?

    Is this some way of making the point twice as "strong"? Or is it a well conceived conspiracy to saturate all the storage of ET with total nonsense?

    Wild, how about an original thought?

    Achtung!
    Stop the Madness!

    :)rs7
     
    #730     Jan 19, 2003