Controversial volunteering...

Edric O · January 23, 2003

Well, I agree with their cause, although they *are* going a bit too far... But together with the peace rallies, this just goes to show how much Bush really cares about the people. ::)

News article

Khan · January 23, 2003

Dude is that for real? Weird people, it's not even a worthwhile cause.

emprworm · January 23, 2003

lol, how utterly stupid to put yourself on the train tracks, when a massive locomotive is hurling at you off in the distance.

GhostHunter · January 23, 2003

A American thread by Edirc :O How ironic! ;D

emprworm · January 23, 2003

lol you know the funny thing was...as soon as I say that the author was Edric, I predicted with a 90% accuracy that it would be anti-bush before I even read it. >:D

I almost wanted to start a new thread that said "before I read edrics thread, i predict it will be anti-bush" O0

lol. thats funny. ;D

ordos45 · January 24, 2003

I disagree with placing themselves in the line of fire, but I do agree with their cause. Sort of. A war with Iraq is not in the best interests of America, despite what some idiots in the government might think. I think its foolhardy, yet brave to place oneself in the line of fire. But mark my words, the human shields' nationality will not save them...when the US is forced to fight an urban war in Baghdad, so many innocents will die, and so will (probably) these human shields that are volunteering.

(Just watched an interview with the organizer of the group that was on...either CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC.)

Acriku · January 24, 2003

Perhaps they should focus their time and effort on a cause that will actually suade Bush's mind. He believes in this crusade very deeply...

Edric O · January 24, 2003

Perhaps they should focus their time and effort on a cause that will actually suade Bush's mind.

I'm afraid the only way to do that is to put him out of his misery. ;)

Actually, these people are pointing out a sad state of fact: To the Bush administration, the lives of westerners are superior to arab lives... ::)

Anathema · January 24, 2003

A bit...er, odd, but admirable.

I'd like to hear Bush comment on this.

Desert_Eagle25 · January 24, 2003

I'd like to volunteer to be a human shield please!!! ::)

SurlyPIG · January 24, 2003

It's not like they'd kill civillians on purpose...

If they really wanted to do some good, they'd form pressure groups to suade the government to be more ballsy with the military. In other words, use them in ways that presents more risk to the soldiers, and minimizes risk to Iraqi civillians.

So they'd send in a task force instead of launching a poorly guided missle from 1000km away.

Acriku · January 24, 2003

I think we stopped using poorly guided missiles a long time ago :)

Sneakgab · January 26, 2003

''Actually, these people are pointing out a sad state of fact: To the Bush administration, the lives of westerners are superior to arab lives...''

So? do you see the Al quada targeting Muslims every time they go into Israel?

Edric O · January 26, 2003

Oh, so you're sinking to their level?

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

Bomb Saddam yesterday.

If i were Bush. i'd debate it with are so called "allys"

They know they have weapons in there. its suppose to be an inspection. not hide and seek. ::)

Inoculator9 · January 26, 2003

I think their cause is a bit extremist, but it is slightly admirable in a weird way :- It shows a strange short of devotion. But I agree with their causes direction, war with Iraq is not really in anyone's best interest.

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

war with Iraq is not really in anyone's best interest.

I would agree. no one wants to go to war.

but my view is as simple as this. just as an example.

If someone is holding a gun on you is it in your "best intrests" to shoot him? of course not. but you must defend yourself.

however, what if you find empty ammo in there car. hear they have had a bad history of killing people and geting away with it and commiting the perfect crime. and even hear rumors he was in contact with the beltway sniper.(yeah, yeah, i know, just an example.) and there your classmate?

is it in your "best intrests" to keep away from him?

in the same way. if you hear iraq can't account for weapons. find empty warheads. see them doing stuff like hideing research paper in pig farms. and they probbly already have a nuke or two.

I hope that gives you an idea of my view. :)

Inoculator9 · January 26, 2003

I think your saying that not attacking Iraq would leave loose ends? But I think Iraq is toothless at the moment, and a peacekeeping force with patrols through the Iraqi deserts would be sufficient to keep them innactive. I also just don't believe that they have nuclear or chemical weapons.

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

I think your saying that not attacking Iraq would leave loose ends?

yep, exactly. just couldn't spit it out. :-[

But I think Iraq is toothless at the moment, and a peacekeeping force with patrols through the Iraqi deserts would be sufficient to keep them innactive. I also just don't believe that they have nuclear or chemical weapons.

I wouldn't put it past them. they can't account for stuff we know they did have before. as for a nuke. I wouldn't doubt it!

I know they have chemical weapons. they can't account for stuff. and they have used them on there own people in the past. as a "test" in the past. >:( and they can't account for them now. won't tell us what happend to them. :-

anyway. i guess everones open to there on view. but thats mine.

Inoculator9 · January 26, 2003

Ok, I can make a consession on that. I think it is possible that Iraq has illegal weapons, but it's up to us to prove it. We wont let them prove it, so the burden of proof falls on us. Until it is proven that they have weapons, attacking Iraq will just make the rest of the world look farther down on us.

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

Ok, I can make a consession on that. I think it is possible that Iraq has illegal weapons, but it's up to us to prove it. We wont let them prove it, so the burden of proof falls on us. Until it is proven that they have weapons, attacking Iraq will just make the rest of the world look farther down on us.

Yeah. and thats the hard part. they want to play hide and seek. and they have the bigest advantege.

And they have found some evedence. although not finding the weapons directly. we'r talking stuff like:

Empty warheads

People tiping people off. about certin inspecters comeing

Saddam made a statement "if you though 9:11 was bad you haven't seen nothing yet." that alone is enough to do something.

Finding stuff like reserch papers hidden in pig farms.

Eh. well you'd have to hear the inspecters report! but the list goes on.

They want to play hide and seek. and are not coperating in all areas. I even hear they had to stop a search in a place one time cause it was a musliem worship day. ::)

Anyway. if i were Bush. i'd win militarly then diplmaticly with are allys.(over debate)

But for Saddam. its not open for debate. we told him to disarm and he did not. and he can not account for weapons. that is a very real thing. are we going to wait untill a nuke goes off it new york. is that what it will take to get are attition?

Inoculator9 · January 26, 2003

Thats just it, we really don't know whether he has or hasn't disarmed yet.

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

Thats just it, we really don't know whether he has or hasn't disarmed yet.

We know he hasn't. and even if he has he isn't coperating. and its been a while since i've heard the inspecters report. :-

But they have found evedence. although not direct. let me put it like this.

they haven't found the weapons but they found the cases that holds them! they haven't found the bug but they found its shell. they haven't found the person. but they found his cloths. they haven't found the trash can. but they found trash. they haven't found missles but they have found empty warheads(no example on the last one they have found empty warheads)

they haven't found nothing direct. but he isn't coperateing.

Inoculator9 · January 26, 2003

I don't see how he's overtly uncooperative, as far as I can tell the Iraqis have been as accomodating as could possibly be expected from them.

The cases that were found are several years old if I recall, and never held anything, except for 2 leftovers from the Gulf War.

sneezer3 · January 26, 2003

I don't see how he's overtly uncooperative, as far as I can tell the Iraqis have been as accomodating as could possibly be expected from them.
The cases that were found are several years old if I recall, and never held anything, except for 2 leftovers from the Gulf War.

Still they should have been included in the report.

they haven't exactly been copertive. you'd have to hear the report.. but everbody has a right to there own view. ;)

and no. they haven't been very copertive in some areas.

Sign In

Controversial volunteering...

Recommended Posts

Edric O

Khan

emprworm

GhostHunter

emprworm

ordos45

Acriku

Edric O

Anathema

Desert_Eagle25

SurlyPIG

Acriku

Sneakgab

Edric O

sneezer3

Inoculator9

sneezer3

Inoculator9

sneezer3

Inoculator9

sneezer3

Inoculator9

sneezer3

Inoculator9

sneezer3

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information