USA vs Iraq...solutions?

[funkmastaT]

Fleet 500, man shut the f*** up, apparently you got no clue what's happening in the world. That's the lowest price for gas in this world. Man, I wish the oil prices will really be jacked up in the US, maybe to European prices and then maybe then stupid Americans will realize what other people had to be living through. Apparently you (most Americans) have nothing better to do than complain and think only of yourselves. And that's in relation to that Americans didn't go to the Iraq to take care of the Iraqis but to get their precious oil to keep the prices low.

Stupid Americans? Yes we only think of ourselves only eh?(some canadian lingo for you). Thats why we donate tens of millions to world aid? I'm not going to respond in this thread again because it becomes an anti-american thread. And I'm sick of people talking trash about the U.S.

[Fleet 500]

Stupid Americans? Yes we only think of ourselves only eh?(some canadian lingo for you). Thats why we donate tens of millions to world aid? I'm not going to respond in this thread again because it becomes an anti-american thread. And I'm sick of people talking trash about the U.S.

I'm sick of it, too. I would reply to Mr. Wolf03 but it doesn't make sense to argue with someone who doesn't make sense.
BTW, what happened to the rule of not attacking other members?

[Fleet 500]

Because GWB is ensuring the employment and profits fo an arms and oil industry largest in the world. YOU are paying for those fat-cats to make MONEY out of a so-called "peace action"

Because the environmentalists (liberals) won't allow offshore U.S. drilling and drilling in Alaska. With any luck, drilling will be allowed soon in Alaska and it would be about time.

[Matra et Alpine]

Because the environmentalists (liberals) won't allow offshore U.S. drilling and drilling in Alaska. With any luck, drilling will be allowed soon in Alaska and it would be about time.

It's called "protecting the environment" and "liberals" |= "environmentalists" - expecially in an international forum where it's NOT biased by the US political system

The Valdez proved how fragile an ecosystem can be.
THAT is why they want to restrict Alaska, because if it goes wrong their it is too finelt balanced for it to recover.

Especially whilst the US is the largest consumer, the largest polluter driven by cheap fuel prices

[Matra et Alpine]

Stupid Americans? Yes we only think of ourselves only eh?(some canadian lingo for you). Thats why we donate tens of millions to world aid? I'm not going to respond in this thread again because it becomes an anti-american thread. And I'm sick of people talking trash about the U.S.

You should study deeper on the US commitments and DELIVERIES on world aid. It's NOT anything to be proud of. Yes it's a lot of money, BUT compared to what poorer nations contribute as %age of GDP, the US is NOT a significant contributor ( unless somthing in return is evident )

" In 2003, U.S. foreign aid came to just 0.34 percent, well below the world leading Dutch at 2.44 percent. Other big contributors are Ireland (1.83 percent), Norway (1.49 percent), and Switzerland (1.09 percent). The U.S. would have to triple foreign aid just to reach the lowest of these contributors."

NOW, it is NOT to belittle the significant monies in aid provided with the US government pitching something like $10B and private firms adding $20B or thereabouts - there is ALWAYS debate on whether the latter is "real" aid or programmes with one company paying another to "be there" making profits , but lets leave that aside.

BUT when Holland can provide $20B of GOVERNMENT AID, why SHODL the US be permitted to only contribute $10B ?? Look at the relative so-called "value" of those societies and their population !!

It will be interesting to see if Bush will be willing to suport Blair as much as it has been doen the other way over Iraq when the G8 summit comes around and Blair tables some fairly radical "balanced trade" and "debut removal" support programmes for under-developed nations.

[whiteballz]

I'm sick of it, too. I would reply to Mr. Wolf03 but it doesn't make sense to argue with someone who doesn't make sense.
BTW, what happened to the rule of not attacking other members?

these guys arent attacking you so STFU. they are peacefully dismanteling your entire argument. and handing it back. very civlilised in my eyes.

now, this is my understanding, but in iraq there several hundred australian spec opps troops sweeping towns and citys BEFORE the main drive from america, this is direct from the ADF info center, where my mother worked during the invasion.

also, not only does america have the "best" trained military force in the world, but they have the most too. how many spec opps divisions do they want?

SEALS
RANGERS
DELTA
and ive probably forgotten more.

IMHO americas spec opps dont have much to preen themselfes about.

from my knowledge of iraq:
more americans died in friendly fire accidents then from firefights with the royal guard - the two australian soldiers that did die in the invasion were patroling with an american humvee when bomb went off.

SAS also deserve an honorable mention for their lessons learnt in ireland. they learnt how to deal with people, face to face with their sunnies OFF. as im sure australians and all the other countries have done. all except half the american army.

[Pando]

Matra. Thank u thank u thank u! I looked at this thread for the first time right now and I'm glad to see someone are setting things straight. One thing that I would especially like to point out was Matra's reply about how the US couldn't control the whole Iraq, ever. I'm surprised ppl even concider this, think how you would react. If an seemingly stronger enemy would take control of your country, the more resistance they try to silance the more resistance ther'll be. People that are not "threats" become "threats" once you kill/capture their friends/family, and every person are connected to other ppl. So for every "rebel" you kill, you piss off a bunch.

[Fleet 500]

It's called "protecting the environment" and "liberals" |= "environmentalists" - expecially in an international forum where it's NOT biased by the US political system

The Valdez proved how fragile an ecosystem can be.
THAT is why they want to restrict Alaska, because if it goes wrong their it is too finelt balanced for it to recover.

Especially whilst the US is the largest consumer, the largest polluter driven by cheap fuel prices

They're talking about drilling in only less than 2,000 acres out of a total of 19 million acres. With today's technology, we can take out the oil without harming the environment. Liberals think *everything* we do "hurts the environment." The caribou in Alaska (who are thriving) would disagree.
BTW, if drilling in Alaska shouldn't be done so we can "protect the environment," why don't people like you mention drilling done in the other parts of the world? Like Canada, Mexico, Venezuela?

[Fleet 500]

Matra. Thank u thank u thank u! I looked at this thread for the first time right now and I'm glad to see someone are setting things straight. One thing that I would especially like to point out was Matra's reply about how the US couldn't control the whole Iraq, ever. I'm surprised ppl even concider this, think how you would react. If an seemingly stronger enemy would take control of your country, the more resistance they try to silance the more resistance ther'll be. People that are not "threats" become "threats" once you kill/capture their friends/family, and every person are connected to other ppl. So for every "rebel" you kill, you piss off a bunch.

The U.S. isn't trying to "control the whole Iraq." Where did you get that from!
The U.S. is attempting to form a democracy so Iraq can be a free country with their own democratic government. And the first steps have been taken (removing Saddam and the first free elections).

[Fleet 500]

these guys arent attacking you so STFU. they are peacefully dismanteling your entire argument. and handing it back. very civlilised in my eyes.

from my knowledge of iraq:
more americans died in friendly fire accidents then from firefights with the royal guard - the two australian soldiers that did die in the invasion were patroling with an american humvee when bomb went off.

I mean verbally attacking. And you have just added yourself to the list. You see, it's called manners- something you obviously were never taught. Saying STFU is considered rude. In the 5 years of posting on all kinds of message boards, I have never told anyone to shut up (btw, are you realted to Robert Blake?). But, then, I was taught manners and how to talk to people properly.

Where is the moderator of this board? Aren't the rules enforced?

Yes, some have died in friendly fire. That happens in every war. There was quite a bit of that in WWII. Does that mean we should have just given up because some were killed by friendly fire?

[whiteballz]

saying STFU is hardly a personal attack!

your mums a fat ***** would be a personal attack, which of course shes not, because i do not intend to personaly attack you.

i told you to shut up because no one was attacking you or verbaly assaulting your oppinions, people respond on these boards with little intent to harrass, im sure you understand that dont you? you should.

yes, about the manners thing, i was never tought about these manners. i mean, as a member of the student rep council and former health promoting schools president i know nothing of talking to seniors with respect.

i react fairly and in my oppinon you deserved that tiny insignificant prick of an "attack"

i just hope i didnt damage you too much, wouldnt want to damage your ego or your reputation would it?

[Fleet 500]

Posted by Wouter Melissen: 3-07-05
"Personal attacks on any of the members or moderators from now on are immediately punished with a ban."

Posted by 6'bore: 3-07-05
"So you're saying that people who make new threads or posts specifically to flame another member will be banned? If so, it's a good idea."

Posted by Wouter Melissen: 3-07-05
"Yes sir."

Posted by 6'bore: 3-07-05
"I think that's a good idea then. Hopefully this site will become friendlier therefore giving it a better atmosphere."

Yes, it is a good idea... when does it start?

[whiteballz]

have i made a thread to personaly flame you or call you out?

if we all went around asking the mods to remove or ban someone that told them to shut up they would just give up anyway. get over it, it wasnt even an attack.

[Fleet 500]

yes, about the manners thing, i was never tought about these manners.

Yeah it shows.

Time to put you on my ignore list because I like to talk to people only if they know how to treat others. You obviously don't- you even admit it.

[junaman]

Wow that's just about the lamest comeback I've ever seen....

You ever heard of sarcasm???

O and isn't misquoting someone completely a ban????