Well SJO I don't think I ever posted anything like that. But that never stops you. BTW I still think you're a dirt bag piece of shit for calling me a racist in that other thread. Any chance you could be "human shield" in Iraq?
Again, the whole missinformation brigade begins. Most rab countries do not have or have even been trying to develop any so called WOMD. The ones who have been are the ones that :
a) we support in our so called COLD WAR.
or
b) Were the victims of our support of some regime during the COLD WAR.
Not to mention the legacy of Colonialism.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements
<strong>Again, the whole missinformation brigade begins. Most rab countries do not have or have even been trying to develop any so called WOMD. The ones who have been are the ones that :
a) we support in our so called COLD WAR.
or
b) Were the victims of our support of some regime during the COLD WAR.
Not to mention the legacy of Colonialism.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Uh oh. zMench joins the Scott-brigade, showing his true colors again. Yawn. zMench, if you want to discuss something, do try an actual argument, with some actual facts instead of stamping your feet like a six year old when someone posts something you don't agree with. Try raising it slightly above the level of infantile schoolboy toilet-wall graffiti.
<strong>I think Mcarthy is in the house.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Sorry. You are relatively new here. Its my way of commenting how Scott and various others argues. I falsely take for granted that everybody here know my posting style from three years of experience
Anders-english translation: Communists=Well said. And now someone will come by and rebuff your post without going into the argument in it. Let me spare them the hassle.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think it is you that should learn a little history. Or maybe you already know it.
Anyways,
Every Arab country has chemical weapons. Most also have biological weapons. Soon they will have nukes. Islam is at war in North Africa, in the Philippines and the South Pacific, in India/Bangladesh, in Southern Russia, even China. In short, everywhere. And once they get these nukes in large enough a number, they will become even more emboldened and attack not by burning down Churches that dared ring their bells on New Year ?s, but burning down whole cities and countries that oppose them. This day is coming. Mark my words.
Maybe whats getting up war-crazy Scott's and ZMench's backside is the chance of a peaceful diplomatic solution. Waaaaahhhh!!...where's my Fox and NBC safe ringside seat of the latest spectator sport of watching arabs being blown to pieces by US bombs?
All together now:
What do we want? BLOOD! When do we want it? NOW!!!
Coming to think about it, you could take a hike into the occupied territories and watch Sharon's brave soldiers picking off a bunch of 8 year old Palestinian kids throwing stones at their M1 tanks in realtime. But perhaps thats not nearly as much slaughtertainment value as sitting glued to the TV with a 6 pack of Budweiser watching a 15000lb daisy-cutter vaporising an entire Iraqi village.
PMS? I've never read you this angry, and all the talk of blood... hehehe Matsu giggles uncontrollably at the thought of feminine hygine. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Just trying to get you to roll in the muck with the rest of us. Never had your friends blown up in your favorite Pizzeria I guess? Lotsa guilty people around, not just Americans and Jews. I'd venture a conservative estimate that more Arabs are killing Arabs in the middle east than any of the infidels.
SJO, we're just kidding, come back, I don't know what your ass smells like, but if it smells like shit, we won't hold it against you, mine has the same problem!
By ZMench " Maybe you?re tired of working? Maybe you?d like it better to be locked in a room and be covered in your Hijab. Maybe you?d like it better birthing litters of kids to a husband that bought you like a dog, and that treats you even worse. Maybe that is what you want. Cause if it is, get your ass over there and live it up. You won?t even have to shave your hairy ass ".
You know ( aside from the fact that women in the middle east are treated very poorly ) when I read crap like this I wonder about the age group I'm talking to. Then I remember that some little boys never grow up.
Trying to solve the worlds problems with the mentality of an 8th grader isn't going to get you very far. Oh I forgot, that probably doesn't seem so long ago to you but to me it seems a little out of place here. The same goes for the rest of this little boy giggle fest. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
You (singular) are all wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, I'm not. Perhaps it is a quaintly Hobsian notion to you, but I think it true. Legality between states is not more than illusory. We speak of it and invoke it often, but it is "diplomacy" moreso than "legality" that we practice. Within a state you can call actions legal or illegal because citizens have differed this authority. A nation exists not to differ this authority but to be authority itself. It cannot divest itself of this habit easily (or at all) when it decides to play "citizen" with other nations.
You can see it wherever diplomats work: that rhetoric is naturally strained, nobody but the least powerful believes it. Even they do not believe it, though what choice have they but to use it as far as it will go?
People think that the UN holds itself together because of a plu-national democratic frame, but that is a lie. Leviathans hold the UN together in the end -- that is all that can happen when you postulate a nation as a citizen. The US is one such beast, China, Russia, the usual suspects... the best you can hope for is a benevolent patriarch, the clamoring of smaller nation states can influence the conscience of larger ones, but the project will forever remain to either rule or be ruled.
Sometimes the American is taken aback by the animosity of other people and quite rightly asks, Who would you have do it? The Soviets; red China? Arrogant, but valid. Given the power and reach of the US, it is a miracle of diplomacy and goodwill that they are as well behaved as they are.
What is happening in the UN today has nothing to do with legality; rather the tesions between the defacto rulers and the ruled are playing thmselves out, nations are feeling their positions, reminding each other of their tolerances. The US wants to school others in "justice" and the others want to school the US in "process."
We are all defending illusions. The only person who can be right is the one who recognizes them as illusions, because you (all of you) believe what you say, none of you can be right about it.*
*regarding "law"
Having said all that, I deserve my turn aswell:
Because I recognize the antagonistics of this system, I'm predisposed to a rather cynical outlook. My participation in this process, or that of one who would see it as I do, can not add anything or advance it with a reliable result. The drama is written in too many parts.
Comments
a) we support in our so called COLD WAR.
or
b) Were the victims of our support of some regime during the COLD WAR.
Not to mention the legacy of Colonialism.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements
<strong>Again, the whole missinformation brigade begins. Most rab countries do not have or have even been trying to develop any so called WOMD. The ones who have been are the ones that :
a) we support in our so called COLD WAR.
or
b) Were the victims of our support of some regime during the COLD WAR.
Not to mention the legacy of Colonialism.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements</strong><hr></blockquote>
Communist!
<strong>
Uh oh. zMench joins the Scott-brigade, showing his true colors again. Yawn. zMench, if you want to discuss something, do try an actual argument, with some actual facts instead of stamping your feet like a six year old when someone posts something you don't agree with. Try raising it slightly above the level of infantile schoolboy toilet-wall graffiti.
Thanks
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: Samantha Joanne Ollendale ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
1/ Your conspiracy shtick *is the one* getting boring.
2/ Did I hide my true colors, ever?
3/ You don?t believe what I wrote is factual?
4/ How is your solution of doing nothing going to help anything, other than making things worse and harder to manage down the road?
5/ You don?t have a hairy ass?
<strong>I think Mcarthy is in the house.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Sorry. You are relatively new here. Its my way of commenting how Scott and various others argues. I falsely take for granted that everybody here know my posting style from three years of experience
Anders-english translation: Communists=Well said. And now someone will come by and rebuff your post without going into the argument in it. Let me spare them the hassle.
<strong>
.
.
Learn some world history before making wild eyed "The arabs are coming" scare tactic statements</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think it is you that should learn a little history. Or maybe you already know it.
Anyways,
Every Arab country has chemical weapons. Most also have biological weapons. Soon they will have nukes. Islam is at war in North Africa, in the Philippines and the South Pacific, in India/Bangladesh, in Southern Russia, even China. In short, everywhere. And once they get these nukes in large enough a number, they will become even more emboldened and attack not by burning down Churches that dared ring their bells on New Year ?s, but burning down whole cities and countries that oppose them. This day is coming. Mark my words.
All together now:
What do we want? BLOOD! When do we want it? NOW!!!
Coming to think about it, you could take a hike into the occupied territories and watch Sharon's brave soldiers picking off a bunch of 8 year old Palestinian kids throwing stones at their M1 tanks in realtime. But perhaps thats not nearly as much slaughtertainment value as sitting glued to the TV with a 6 pack of Budweiser watching a 15000lb daisy-cutter vaporising an entire Iraqi village.
Yeeeehaaaawwww!!! Go Bushy boy, go!
Just trying to get you to roll in the muck with the rest of us. Never had your friends blown up in your favorite Pizzeria I guess? Lotsa guilty people around, not just Americans and Jews. I'd venture a conservative estimate that more Arabs are killing Arabs in the middle east than any of the infidels.
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
<strong>So you're saying we can't talk about SJO's ass?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Should we send a UN inspection team?
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>What do we do if there's a material breach?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Trust me, they wont find any material breach or a smoking gun.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I would recommend they wear them gas masks though.
SJO, we're just kidding, come back, I don't know what your ass smells like, but if it smells like shit, we won't hold it against you, mine has the same problem!
<strong>War is illegal? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it can be. You (singular) are all wrong.
You know ( aside from the fact that women in the middle east are treated very poorly ) when I read crap like this I wonder about the age group I'm talking to. Then I remember that some little boys never grow up.
Trying to solve the worlds problems with the mentality of an 8th grader isn't going to get you very far. Oh I forgot, that probably doesn't seem so long ago to you but to me it seems a little out of place here. The same goes for the rest of this little boy giggle fest. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
<strong>
You (singular) are all wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, I'm not. Perhaps it is a quaintly Hobsian notion to you, but I think it true. Legality between states is not more than illusory. We speak of it and invoke it often, but it is "diplomacy" moreso than "legality" that we practice. Within a state you can call actions legal or illegal because citizens have differed this authority. A nation exists not to differ this authority but to be authority itself. It cannot divest itself of this habit easily (or at all) when it decides to play "citizen" with other nations.
You can see it wherever diplomats work: that rhetoric is naturally strained, nobody but the least powerful believes it. Even they do not believe it, though what choice have they but to use it as far as it will go?
People think that the UN holds itself together because of a plu-national democratic frame, but that is a lie. Leviathans hold the UN together in the end -- that is all that can happen when you postulate a nation as a citizen. The US is one such beast, China, Russia, the usual suspects... the best you can hope for is a benevolent patriarch, the clamoring of smaller nation states can influence the conscience of larger ones, but the project will forever remain to either rule or be ruled.
Sometimes the American is taken aback by the animosity of other people and quite rightly asks, Who would you have do it? The Soviets; red China? Arrogant, but valid. Given the power and reach of the US, it is a miracle of diplomacy and goodwill that they are as well behaved as they are.
What is happening in the UN today has nothing to do with legality; rather the tesions between the defacto rulers and the ruled are playing thmselves out, nations are feeling their positions, reminding each other of their tolerances. The US wants to school others in "justice" and the others want to school the US in "process."
We are all defending illusions. The only person who can be right is the one who recognizes them as illusions, because you (all of you) believe what you say, none of you can be right about it.*
*regarding "law"
Having said all that, I deserve my turn aswell:
Because I recognize the antagonistics of this system, I'm predisposed to a rather cynical outlook. My participation in this process, or that of one who would see it as I do, can not add anything or advance it with a reliable result. The drama is written in too many parts.
<strong>
*regarding "law" </strong><hr></blockquote>
Sounds to me like you're describing all law.