Comments

rextilleon wrote on 1/19/2003, 8:17 AM
Yeah, but he might make you glow in the night-----
DGrob wrote on 1/19/2003, 9:19 AM
At which point you won't need a 401k. Problem solved.
FuTz wrote on 1/19/2003, 10:22 AM
but...what's a 401k ???
rextilleon wrote on 1/19/2003, 10:53 AM
Retirement fund---I think that Igloo was referring to Enron, World Com et al. Isn't this the same Igloo who tacitly supports stealing software? See a bit of inconsistency there?--but then again, everything is relative.
riredale wrote on 1/19/2003, 11:43 AM
I'll bet Saddam uses Premiere.
tadpole wrote on 1/19/2003, 3:02 PM
lol riredale!

"Saddam didn't steal my 401k".
thus.. Saddam is ok with me!… sure.. he can murder at will, dip people in pools of acid, cut the ears and tongues out of all that oppose him, drop chemical weapons and massacre thousands of women and child, fire rockets at will into Israel , Iran and Saudi Arabia at will, fund and support terrorism (not for ideological beliefs, but simply for his own personal satisfaction he gets from the suffering/discourse it causes), and continue to oppress and terrorize his own people and the entire region...(the list goes on and on)

But… if he were EVER to engage in unethical business practices….. oh YEAH,, then its ON….



silly-silly protestors
rextilleon wrote on 1/19/2003, 3:49 PM
The peace protests yesterday weren't exactly massive----That's because most Americans are logical and protective of other Americans---Great country--Great NLE---
shawnm wrote on 1/19/2003, 4:06 PM
>>"Saddam didn't steal my 401k".
>>thus.. Saddam is ok with me!… sure.. he can murder at will, dip people in pools of >>acid, cut the ears and tongues out of all that oppose him, drop chemical weapons
<snip>

<break from editing>

This would all be perfectly fine with us if he'd just let us build the friggin' pipeline. CNN... when you absolutely, positively need to avoid reading... accept no substitutes. BTW the Kurds have close ties to Al Qaeda and Saddam despises them both, should we invade Iraq and bomb the Kurds - cause if they're not with us....

>>silly-silly protestors

Democracy is completely useless without the right to dissent, just be thankful "someone” has the stomach to test that right.

</break from editing>

Shawn


craftech wrote on 1/19/2003, 5:48 PM
"I'll bet Saddam uses Premiere."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No Dazzle!
MyST wrote on 1/19/2003, 6:12 PM
Yeah, and a cracked version of Premiere at that!!

M
theigloo wrote on 1/19/2003, 6:38 PM

Good to see you can create a stir in the Vegas forums, even on a Sunday.

Felas, we got a live one here.
craftech wrote on 1/19/2003, 7:07 PM
Maybe he'll end up with his "Final Cut" this time around.
FuTz wrote on 1/19/2003, 11:15 PM
************************************************************************************
>>"Saddam didn't steal my 401k".
>>thus.. Saddam is ok with me!… sure.. he can murder at will, dip people in pools of >>acid, cut the ears and tongues out of all that oppose him, drop chemical weapons
<snip>

<break from editing>

This would all be perfectly fine with us if he'd just let us build the friggin' pipeline. CNN... when you absolutely, positively need to avoid reading... accept no substitutes. BTW the Kurds have close ties to Al Qaeda and Saddam despises them both, should we invade Iraq and bomb the Kurds - cause if they're not with us....

>>silly-silly protestors

Democracy is completely useless without the right to dissent, just be thankful "someone” has the stomach to test that right.

</break from editing>

Shawn

************************************************************************************

Shawn, who the hell is your pusher ??? LOL
shawnm wrote on 1/20/2003, 12:07 AM
>>Shawn, who the hell is your pusher ??? LOL

Witty... I assume that you don't know what I'm talking about. But in case you do and you're just taking issue with something I said, please tell me - what did I say that isn't true?

Shawn
Cheesehole wrote on 1/20/2003, 1:43 AM
futz: if you look back in time a little bit (they call it history although US television media avoids this concept because it doesn't fit in 30 second sound bytes) you'll find that the US was supporting Saddam when he committed many of the horrible crimes listed above. the statement, 'this would be perfectly fine if he'd just let us build the pipeline' is consistent with US foreign policy. the demonization of Saddam is for the benefit of the general public, to ensure support for a war. anyone who pays attention to US foregn policy knows that we don't care what crimes a leader has committed so long as they are giving us a good deal on their country's resources, whether it be oil, cheap labor, or anything else. in fact the US prefers to deal with military dictators (and has supported and defended plenty of corrupt regimes in the past century, some much worse than Saddam) because they deliver economic and political stability, which is required for a US corporation to set up shop and start reaping (raping?) the region of it's resources.

I find it interesting that so many can go through life slurping up the spoon fed 'information' dispensed by corporate sponsored media outlets like CNN without realizing how dumbed down, narrow minded, and one sided their version of the news is.

the idea of the US government sending the armed forces around the world to kill all the bad, evil, dictators who do mean things to people is pretty humorous. but an imminent assault on Iraq for what can only be selfish political and econimic goals is far from humorous. not only are we approaching the 6 trillion dollar mark (or have we passed it already?) of debt which will be passed down to our children (can anyone even conceptualize a number that big?), but we are being asked to swallow the crap that the state department is trying to shove down our throats about weapons of mass destruction and evil, and this from Donald Rumsfeld himself! (the guy who went to Iraq in the late 80's to normalize relations having full knowledge of Sddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds)

to me it's not a question of why people are protesting, it's a question of how we can get to this point without the entire country protesting? it's more than the fact that innocent people will be murdered, it's an affront to our intelligence. it only takes a couple hours a day to learn about history, read the foreign press, listen to the BBC, read books... is no one else doing this? are we a nation of people who accept the information that lands in our lap without question, rather than actively seeking out the real story? I hope not. I just think the markeplace of ideas is dominated by a handful of closely related interests and most people just kind of go with the flow.
tadpole wrote on 1/20/2003, 2:06 AM
So off topic but can't resist!!! (i've lived/worked in middle east for 3 years, as well as studied the history, culture and religion of the region & I feel it crucial for Americans to be informed on more 'worldly' issues as they WILL begin to effect our lives)

Can imagine this thread going on and on... i'll do my best not to post any more follow-ups - as this is a video editing board.

-shawnm
>>>This would all be perfectly fine with us if he'd just let us build the friggin' pipeline. CNN

FIRST -
Ah? A pipeline through Iraq?? CNN said this??? I think CNN is aware Unocal, Delta Oil nor any other faction, has or had any plans to run a pipeline through Iraq. Yes, we all know about the oil reserves in Kazakhstan sector of the Caspian Sea, but Afghanistan was the key (along with Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey) not Iraq…
Which made for great fodder though for the antiwar folks during Afghanistan operations – cuz of course, the US had NO other reason to go into Afghanistan besides this pipeline – the fact that they were TRAINING terrorist there to KILL Americans of course had nothing to do with it - ? (silly)

2 birds with one stone in my book.

Interesting how the antiwar folks tote this great buzz-word ‘blood for oil’ over from Afghanistan conflict to Iraq – expected though, since “buzz words” / slogans are so fun

EVEN if there is this huge conspiracy where US agents were actually behind the sept 11th attacks and generating anti-west hatred in Arabic states ALL for the simple goal of generating propaganda so we could take out Saddam Insane and get our hands on Caspian Oil … WOULDn’t the then ‘side effect’ of removing this evil monster from power be a humanitarian effort in the end? I could personally care less of the ultimate reason coined for taking out this psychotic megalomaniac - weapons of mass destruction, oil, blood, pizza – whatever – THE RESULT is what matters in this case, not the reason.

(side note – if the US has such an insatiable appetite for oil at ANY COST (as mentioned in yesterdays rally), why wouldn’t the US marched into Baghdad after Desert Storm? )

As for [Saddam's brutality and genocide >>>would all be perfectly fine with us..

This is not perfectly fine with me or anyone else who respects human life –
DO you HONESTLY think that the people who make up the Government of United State have NO concern for human life only oil? Bad things happen in this world that can only be resolved by military action – and the mere mention of “military” or “war” brings a VERY ill informed, idealistic public screaming & crying out in protest. The other large portion of the public is just too far removed from what’s happening on the other side of the world to care – after all, they got their 401Ks to worry about. Unfortunate as it is, no public support, no action.

(one example : look at the SLAUGHTER which occurred in Rwanda in 1994 – 800,000 wiped out – Could we have stopped it? Yes. Of course this would involve US forces KILLING people, so people WOULD have protested it “no Vietnam!! Vietnam!” “stop US imperialism!!”… mean while, 800,000 people are gunned down and literally bludgeoned to death with machetes in a door-to-door fashion . Protestors would’ve then gone home happy knowing that they prevented a “WAR/military intervention” which would have probably taken 5,000 lives)


Difference between Rwanda and Iraq situation is very different in many ways.

Main difference, is that the majority of the American public SUPPORT the action – because they’re educated on issue and understand that it DOES effect them – gas prices (pocket book) and nuclear/bio/chemical weapons (their very lives)…

We CAN act in this situation (since we have public support) and we MUST act because he is plotting to KILL AMERICANS… yes he IS.



>>>the Kurds have close ties to Al Qaeda and Saddam despises them both, should we invade Iraq and bomb the Kurds - cause if they're not with us....

Ahhh.. again….. CNN the source on this?– mostly ‘keep my box on fox’ news these days, so haven’t watched CNN in a while…have they been taken over by antiwar propagandists?
(btw, although I watch and like Fox news, I am by know means a conservative)

True – Saddam hates the Kurds. In fact, if it wasn’t for the No-fly zones ,enforced by coalition forces, there would be no Kurds in Northern Iraq. (last time Saddam flew over Northern Iraq he dropped nerve gas on villages) No love between Kurds and Saddam – Don’t think the Kurds are too trusting of us after we failed to back them (in conjunction with CIA agents) to remove Saddam in 1995 amongst other things like supporting Saddam in Iran/Iraq war. Al Qaeda links? Well what middle-east country doesn’t? I would very much argue the strength of these ties - the Kurds want Saddam out, period – we will be more then welcome to go into Baghdad – too even mention that Kurds (or Shiites in the south) will be oppose the removal of Saddam sends a very strong signal that you need to find a better news source.

>>>>Saddam despises Al Qaeda?????
Oh . PAAAAAleease!!! Saddam wants to hug and snuggle and kiss Al Qaeda - they kill Americans and he absolutely LOVES them for it! If Saddam made a weapon(which he has wet dreams about making), he would give it over to terrorists faction in a heartbeat- FACT. Would groups like Al Qaeda deal with Saddam? OF COURSE they would! Just today an alleged Bin Laden release called for Muslims to stand together to fight off the evil crusaders. Iran let Saddam hide military equipment in their country during desert storm even after the thousands of Iranians he murdered when he invaded Iran – they stick together and are as convinced that Bush is the devil as these Washington/Worldwide protestors …… this just makes me sick!


>>>Democracy is completely useless without the right to dissent, just be thankful "someone” has the stomach to test that right.

yes, true. Although i feel the protesters in Washington the other day, are SILLY - since they were EXTREMLY uninformed on every issue (and i was the one with the stomach for being able to watch the whole thing on cspan) , they do have a part in society....
the key to democracy, as well as every other proven system, is BALANCE.. ying n yang..Got those on the right, and those on the left, which insures their respective ignorance cancel each other out and meet somewhere in the middle.

BUT - DEMOCRACY WOULD NOT EXIST if it was not for those that FOUGHT and gave their lives so those protesters COULD march and speak their minds - all possible ONLY ,and ONLY through WAR (unless you think a sit-in protest would've convinced Adolph Hitler/Saddam/ Mussolini/ Hirohito / Milosevic / king George III / Saloth Sar / Stalin ETC to magically have a change of heart, ala The Grinch Who Stole Christmas????????)

reality check time.
Sr_C wrote on 1/20/2003, 2:07 AM
"This would all be perfectly fine with us if he'd just let us build the friggin' pipeline."

Please......Hasn't the "It's all about OIL" line been a tad played? IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OIL!!!

Fact: When we used to get oil from Iraq it was less than 2% of our nation's supply (hardly critical) The current administration has said from the beginning that our goal should be to produce our own oil supplies and not rely on the Middle East at all. But those efforts are blocked by the same people protesting the current situation.

Where were these protestors when the previous administration attacked Iraq? Silent, they were. Hypocrits, they are.

Saddam has broken a decades worth of agreements and treatys drafted by the UN. According to all accords, action could have been and should have been taken years ago. The previous two administrations had the chance to bring down this dictator. And they failed.

The goal is to liberate Iraq from an evil, opressive regime.......please remember that.

There are two lessons that we were given recently. One is North Korea and the other is 9/11.

9/11 is what happens when we turn our heads and pretend that here aren't bad people in the world.

North Korea's nuclear threats are what happens when we appease those bad people rather than bring them down. (like we are about to do in Iraq)


Cheesehole wrote on 1/20/2003, 2:53 AM
>>i've lived/worked in middle east for 3 years

if you saw the report on Fox news you only saw what they chose to air. there were probably very intelligent protesters there too, but how can you sum up these issues in a 15 second interview? no matter what you say, you'll come off as an idiot. I'm sure there are plenty of people on these boards who know how that business works. you can edit a video to say whatever you want as long as you have enough footage. Fox airs whatever will get people to keep watching those advertisements.
Cheesehole wrote on 1/20/2003, 3:22 AM
>>>IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OIL!!!

we wouldn't have any interest in the region if it didn't have oil. the impending war in Iraq is about a lot of things. your emphatic assertion is not backed up by history.

>>>Where were these protestors when the previous administration attacked Iraq? Silent, they were. Hypocrits, they are.

you are generalizing. you can't possibly know what is in the mind of every protester. you can't categorize an entire group of people as 'hypocrits' because they (in your perception) didn't act fast enough, or often enough... actually you just did so I guess you can. but I promise you they are not all exactly the same. if you didn't see protests before, it's because they weren't presented to you on the television. you are also suggesting that the situation now is the same as it was when Iraq invaded Kuwait. I hope you don't really mean that?

>>>The goal is to liberate Iraq from an evil, opressive regime.......please remember that.

okay since you asked nicely ;) I'll just ignore reality and 'believe' that the US Military is on a humanitarian mission. I suppose the attack on Afghanistan was a feminist mission? ...kidding.

>>>There are two lessons that we were given recently. One is North Korea and the other is 9/11.

the lesson I learned from 9/11 is that it only takes a handful of people to kill a whole bunch. oh but wait, I already knew that. maybe it was that the perception of America as being evil to some people can have disastrous effects. or maybe it was that the CIA shouldn't go around training terrorists to help them acheive short term goals. or was it that US intelligence isn't worth what we are paying for it? or perhaps the real lesson was that America is full of racist biggots, ready to kill anyone with a 'towell' on their head.

there are lots of lessons, but if you paid attention to history, you'd see they were all presented before. personally I wasn't surprised in the least that we were attacked. What astounded me was the blatant ignorance of the American public (I swear they are proud of it), which was highlighted in the weeks and months following the attack. it wasn't so much that they were turning their heads to bad people in the world, it was more like they just realized there WAS a world outside America.

i'm generalizing of course. not everyone fits into that category. just the ones that get on TV.
tadpole wrote on 1/20/2003, 3:37 AM
Dangit Cheeshole ! now I have to break my promise of not posting anything else on this thread! Lol

>>the demonization of Saddam is for the benefit of the general public, to ensure support for a war

Um, sorry but are you implying that the US government is somehow controlling the world media in an attempt to portray Saddam Huessin in bad light??

I kind of think, he can take care of that one on his own. “Demonization”?? – for the love god he is the DEMON, the BEAST,, the friggin ANTIchrist if there ever was one. This is one of the most ruthless, evil mofos to every walk the face of this earth.
THIS man killed his own son who tried to escape the country and dragged his dead carcass through the streets of Baghdad by a meat hook!!! He has cut the eyeballs out children in front of their parents to extract confessions! He has ACTUAL people and his parole with the title “women violators”/RAPISTS.. for the purpose of controlling his power through shear terror!……
I’m not even going to continue ….. protestors in the US were holding up a sign with Bush portrayed as the devil – horns and all… excuse me, who is the one getting demonized here??? (btw – no big fan of Bush, in fact I think he is a dummy, but he does have the balls to do what is necessary – heck from Texas man! lol)

As in the matter of Foreign/Diplomatic relations - It’s not exactly a very simple business, although it does appear that way to those on the sideline. Sure, the US did support Saddam about 20yrs back – This isn’t because we liked him, it’s a simple matter of choosing the lesser evil. OR wait?? We should just go in their GUNS blazing and remove all the evil governments (which is basically the entire middle east) – yeah, sure that will work, American public would love that – not too even mention what the Arabs would think of that.

(although if USSR wasn’t around, looking back, it think it might have been a good idea.)

We had to choose – IRAN was the threat at the time. Islamic extremists took over power and were ticked off at US support of their previous government (again, should we not have had established diplomatic relations with the previous government because simply because we didn’t agree with them?) and they were after us. Recall the Iran hostage situation? Abduction/murdering of US civilians throughout the middle-east? The state funded bombing of US embassy in Lebanon and marine barracks in ‘83?

It so easy to criticize US foreign Policy – particularly with the 20/20 hind sight. I’m not saying I believe they did a good job (look at the current situation in the middle east) but it wasn’t black/white. And remember, we were concerned with the cold war back then, that was the priority. Also, the foreign policies the US established were for the benefit of the United States – not some intangible evil organization – come on, too many Bond films. What country foreign policy does is NOT tailored for the benefit of their citizens?

Gas prices go up 5 cents, Americans are up in arms going crazy in the street. BTW – most of the world pays about $5 a gallon for gas, aren’t we babies.



>>>>in fact the US prefers to deal with military dictators (and has supported and defended plenty of corrupt regimes in the past century, some much worse than Saddam)

-Please name the regime that is much worse than Saddam’s.
George Bush??? Lol

>>>we are being asked to swallow the crap that the state department is trying to shove down our throats about weapons of mass destruction and evil, and this from Donald Rumsfeld himself!

OMG.. this is what scares me. How, HOW, HOW in the WORLD can people possibly think the Saddam Hussein is not trying to get his hands on weapons of mass destruction? This man will do anything to obtain them – they give him POWER – this man NEEDS power – He does have chemical bio weapons, & he has used them!! Several times! … Oh, wait, no the UN says to get rid of them, he just going to say ok.. you win .. please.

Think if this guy gets his hands on nuclear weapons??? Think he is defiant now?

What about the Saddam’s weapons scientist that defected?. You think these are actors paid by the US government to tell lies about Saddam’s weapons programs to the American Public to generate fodder for a war??

This so frightens me – we got Americans thinking like fundamental Muslim extremists.



Think the Igloo opened a BIG can of worms here!!
;)
Cheesehole wrote on 1/20/2003, 4:03 AM
>>>OMG.. this is what scares me. How, HOW, HOW in the WORLD can people possibly think the Saddam Hussein is not trying to get his hands on weapons of mass destruction?

did I say he wasn't? you are putting words into my mouth. please don't assume anything that I don't say. I'm a very literal person.

>>>This man will do anything to obtain them – they give him POWER – this man NEEDS power

that's what I mean by demonizing. you are painting a picture that simply can't be real. I don't buy it. Saddam may be a really sick brutal person, but I don't know why people have to bring religious imagery and dark forces of evil into it. I don't need to be scared with emotive imagery. that's a form of propaganda and it is very distateful to me. it is reminiscent of Hitler's propaganda campaign portraying the Jews as rats. now someone is going to say I'm comparing Saddam to the Jews right? I find it difficult to debate at this level.

>>>He does have chemical bio weapons, & he has used them!! Several times!

irrelevant. so has the USA. the point I was making about feeding us crap about 'weapons of mass destruction' was the blatant use of unsupportable propaganda.

>>>Oh, wait, no the UN says to get rid of them, he just going to say ok.. you win .. please.

again, you are making assumptions. I never implied that Saddam would disarm for any reason.

>>>This so frightens me – we got Americans thinking like fundamental Muslim extremists.

please explain. you are frightened by me or my ideas? you have expressed high levels of fear in your post. fear is a controlling mechanism. are you suggesting that any deviation from the state department's line is 'thinking like fundamental Muslim extremists'? that would be their opinion. "if you aren't with us, your with the terrorists"
tadpole wrote on 1/20/2003, 4:07 AM
Ah cheesehole...

>>>>if you saw the report on Fox news you only saw what they chose to air. there >>were probably very intelligent protesters there too, but how can you sum up these >>issues in a 15 second interview? no matter what you say, you'll come off as an >>idiot.

Recall I said i WATCH FOX news as opposed to CNN.

I watched the antiwar ralley yesteday on C-SPAN - which broadcasted the entire event, as it happened, in real time.. and i sat there & listened to all the speakers go up, and how the microphone got unpluged as they tried to lower it so Ron Kovic, in his wheelchair (vietnam vet they made the movie "Born on the Fourth of July" about) could reach it.

Yeah, i'm aware how things can be edited up. So i take everything with a grain of salt. When Fox News interviewed former Iraqi military general, Fawzi Al-Shammari, and he told how Saddam executed/tortured political enemies by hanging them by their hair, and dipping them into a pool of nitric acid while he [Saddam] sat there laughing smoking a cigar...MAYBE they cut out the portion of the interview where he told about the wonderful subway party platter he offered to the guests of his 'pool party' after he was done toturing the prisoners??... ya never know! :)

honestly, you need to take IT ALL in - read the paper, watch the news, read the books... then most importantly, one needs to then think and come to their own conclusions.

Really don't see how you can rip on a news channel you apparently have never watched?


and please don't take our disagreement on this subject in a bad way and not answer my future video questions!! you know much more about video than I, i'll give ya that!
=)

Cheesehole wrote on 1/20/2003, 4:26 AM
>>>honestly, you need to take IT ALL in - read the paper, watch the news, read the books... then most importantly, one needs to then think and come to their own conclusions.

absolutely. I wish more people would do that. I don't expect to persuade anyone to agree with me. I'm doing my duty as an American and more importantly as a human, expressing myself even when the tide of opinion is way against me. My hope is that someone will be inspired to turn their TV's off for a while and indulge in the wider world of perspectives available on the radio, internet, and various print journals. anything not paid for by American corporations.

>>>Really don't see how you can rip on a news channel you apparently have never watched?
all the news channels are like that. I didn't mean to single out Fox. I was just responding to a previous post. people say it's conservative, I say compared to what? the opinions expressed in the corporate sponsored media vary so little I find it difficult to differenciate them. I do watch it occasionally but just so I can see things I can't get from newspaper/internet/radio. they have nice cameras. :)

>>>and please don't take our disagreement on this subject in a bad way and not answer my future video questions!!

:) don't worry it's not my way. I wouldn't like a world where everyone agreed. and I wouldn't have many friends if I judged people based on their opinions.
tadpole wrote on 1/20/2003, 6:43 AM
Cheese
You said "..we are being asked to swallow the crap that the state department is trying to shove down our throats about weapons of mass destruction and evil, and this from Donald Rumsfeld himself!"

So I said "OMG.. this is what scares me. How, HOW, HOW in the WORLD can people possibly think the Saddam Hussein is not trying to get his hands on weapons of mass destruction?"

You replied "did I say he wasn't? you are putting words into my mouth. please don't assume anything that I don't say. I'm a very literal person."

Donald Rumsfield "says" IRAQ is building weapons of mass destruction. To quote him, a reporter once commented about Iraq's denial of this, Donny replied "They are lying"

So i guess i reasoned that, since you termed Rumsfield view as "crap" - that you do not believe that Saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction. Are you by chance arguing about the difference between "trying to develop weapons" and "actually physically developing WMD" - semantics in my book.

----------------------------------------------------------------
I said: "This man will do anything to obtain them – they give him POWER – this man NEEDS power"

You replied:
"that's what I mean by demonizing. you are painting a picture that simply can't be real. I don't buy it. Saddam may be a really sick brutal person, but I don't know why people have to bring religious imagery and dark forces of evil into it."

Well, my reply to that, goes along with my statement that
>>>This so frightens me – we got Americans thinking like fundamental Muslim extremists.

These extremists, "simply cannot" accept things simply because they don't want to believe them. That's scary. Many Arabs "simply can't believe" that Bin Laden had ANY connection with 9/11 or any acts of terrorism - despite the fact THAT HE RUNS/RAN TERROSIM TRAINING CAMPS (they know they that!) .. he speaks out on video how HAPPY the attacks made him - BUT.. they STILL refuse to ACCEPT that he had any connection. What the crap is that all about???? that's terrifying to me.

No matter WHAT kind of policy changes the US implements, NOTHING will be able to change these peoples minds - they want to believe that US is evil and is dead set on the descruction of Islam - anything we do to prove/show/do otherwise will be considered "trickery by the evil western crusaders"

OK - i'll give you this. He is not the actual Devil since i don't believe such entity exists. HOWEVER, Saddam himself is the most convincing argument that he/it does is exist, because it is hard to believe the a human being could be so cruel - BUT i can accept that, simply by the fact that he is human and so cruel - (cruel is an inadequate TERM - he is evil - the word doesn't have to bring any religious imagery into the mix(demon, devil, yes, but not evil - i will use EVIL from here out)

Some of those DC protestors were holding up pictures of Bush, with horns and red glowing eyes (yes,not all of them). THIS is called demonizing - What was the worst thing Bush Jr has done in his life? snort some coke in his 20s? Hardly 'demon' material in respect to Saddam.


______________________________________________________________________________
You stated
>>>>>>"I don't need to be scared with emotive imagery. that's a form of propaganda and it is very distateful to me. it is reminiscent of Hitler's propaganda campaign portraying the Jews as rats. now someone is going to say I'm comparing Saddam to the Jews right?"

Ok - I won't take that analogy as you are "comparing Saddam to the jews", but i will try to explain the how the analogy itself is ,ah.. really doesn't..eh.. well make any sense.

Let's take a look, hitler's propaganda "portrayed" Jews as Rats. Now, are the Jews actually Rats? No they are not - This was imagery invented to persuade people that jews were worthless like rats.

Now the footage/imagery of Saddam you classify as Propaganda similar to Hilters campaign, as it was [invented imagery] to protray Saddam as "sick brutal person"/"worthelss person".

See the difference? this isn't invented imagery - this is simply accepted/known/facts video of what he actual DOES - sure its damning, his actions are inexcusable, but they're not invented! you don't need to 'portray'/compare his actions to anything like rats, they simply speak for themselves.

YES, it still can be considered as propaganda, but guess what?
the big kicker - it SADDAM'S propaganda! he created it! its HIS way of controlling his people through fear! He openly makes it KNOWN the acts he does, and actively DISSEMINATES them in order to scare his people into complaince.

So in fact, if you find [dark imagery a] "form of propaganda and it is very distateful to me" [and] "reminiscent of Hitler's propaganda campaign" then your issue is with Saddam, NOT the American media - which simple shows/tells you about it.
Do you think its unacceptable for the media to talk about it, or use it in a discussion? If so, then nor should you use Hilters propaganda in your arguements -because you would be doing the same thing - talking about/referencing the propaganda that other people have developed.
(hope i didn't lose ya there =)
____________________________________________________________________
I said >>>"He does have chemical bio weapons, & he has used them!! Several times!"
You said >>"irrelevant." (followed up by evidence you have absolutley no understanding of the Pacific theatre in world warII (no offense, few do - my grandfather fought there, so i have a unique perspective)

Lets get back to "irrelevant" [that Saddam has weapons of mass desctruction] - its irrelevant that a "sick brutal person" (your own words) who has USED weapons chemical weapons before, HATEs the united states, and could easily give to a terrorist faction which could easily use them against American citizens and would NEVER be able to trace back to him, and he will have plenty of support from people who "simply won't buy it" [that he provided the weapons] because they don't want to believe he would do such a thing... even though he has done it in the past ?????? hmmmmmmmmm.........
Cruel people with these capablities scare me, they don't have to scare you, but they do scare me along with other Americans because it represents a LEGITMATE threat to our country - that's just not even debatable anymore...

__________________________________________________________________________-
You said >>>>"are you suggesting that any deviation from the state department's line is 'thinking like fundamental Muslim extremists'?

No, state department has nothing to do with my conclusions, i make my own conclusions for the record.

____________________________________________________________________

You never answered my question in my previous post: PLEASE answer
you said>>>>"in fact the US prefers to deal with military dictators (and has supported and defended plenty of corrupt regimes in the past century, some much worse than Saddam"

My question was, which regime exactly is this?
(remember, which we also "supported and defended" )

Would really appreciate an answer to this. Very curious to uncover the source of your information.


... good debate, debate is good -
it can get hot - but hopefully nobody takes anything personally

sure this thread is going to go for a quite a while!
I'm going to do my best again to step out after this post..but no promises ;)