I would have thought because of the nature of this site, there would have been more anti war people.
just goes to show you......................
georges
hell bent on war
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
I don't see anyone on this thread being pro war. All agree that Saddam should be gotten rid of but disagree as to how. To say Americans are pro war, and war mongers is so unfair. I am not joining in any more discussion here, because as an American I feel very much hostility toward Americans on this website.
Hi Tori - I agree with you there is no one on this forum (so far as I know) who is pro-war. I know I am not pro-war but I am pro-peace and I think the only way we could possibly have achieved it was thru this war.
In the few posts you have made you have made valid comments and I hope you choose to stay and contribute to the forum as well.
I personally think there are a lot of bad vibes coming off this thread now so I am not going to post on this thread but I do intend to post elsewhere and I hope to meet both Tori and David elsewhere on the forum on another thread.
In the few posts you have made you have made valid comments and I hope you choose to stay and contribute to the forum as well.
I personally think there are a lot of bad vibes coming off this thread now so I am not going to post on this thread but I do intend to post elsewhere and I hope to meet both Tori and David elsewhere on the forum on another thread.
-
tom.d.stiller
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: ... between the lines ...
- Contact:
Tori, Paula
when I say "pro-war", I do not suggest anybody principally being pro any war. We have a war at hand, and some think it was inevitable, or necessary, and back up this war (I may say that this is, in a way, pro-war, though the same person might feel this war is a bad thing?), some think this war could and should have been avoided (I may label them anti-war, though some of them might think that in some situations waging a war is inevitable?). This doesn't include pressing a pro-war stamp on anybody's head.
I said this just for a clarification, though you will probably have known it.
I don't intend to leave this thread, though - as I have to admit - I feel that it is a bit out of control, and I've stated this before. I should regret to lose your valuable voices, but this decision obviously is yours. However I look forward to meet you in other threads, and I'm confident that there are topics we won't disagree on.
I'd rather have if you kept on posting even in this sometimes somewhat poisonous area.
Tom
when I say "pro-war", I do not suggest anybody principally being pro any war. We have a war at hand, and some think it was inevitable, or necessary, and back up this war (I may say that this is, in a way, pro-war, though the same person might feel this war is a bad thing?), some think this war could and should have been avoided (I may label them anti-war, though some of them might think that in some situations waging a war is inevitable?). This doesn't include pressing a pro-war stamp on anybody's head.
I said this just for a clarification, though you will probably have known it.
I don't intend to leave this thread, though - as I have to admit - I feel that it is a bit out of control, and I've stated this before. I should regret to lose your valuable voices, but this decision obviously is yours. However I look forward to meet you in other threads, and I'm confident that there are topics we won't disagree on.
I'd rather have if you kept on posting even in this sometimes somewhat poisonous area.
Tom
Paula,
It is a still somewhat touchy issue with "liberals" of a certain age here in America. In Europe the collectivists are frankly called "socialists" and "communists." But in this country they complain that they are being maligned when they are so identified. It makes them squirm.
David's posts (and I do think he writes well) contain the old collectivist maxims in a new shape and form. Rather "like a disreputable product that needs a new brand name, our liberal friends have to find yet another new guise for what they're peddling." My "insult" (and I shrug my shoulders) was to remind him of this.
And lest anyone think I posted my message because I am "pro-war" they could not be more mistaken. I am against this war. But I am willing to consider that the pro-war members of the Forum may have a few points on their side.
It is a still somewhat touchy issue with "liberals" of a certain age here in America. In Europe the collectivists are frankly called "socialists" and "communists." But in this country they complain that they are being maligned when they are so identified. It makes them squirm.
David's posts (and I do think he writes well) contain the old collectivist maxims in a new shape and form. Rather "like a disreputable product that needs a new brand name, our liberal friends have to find yet another new guise for what they're peddling." My "insult" (and I shrug my shoulders) was to remind him of this.
And lest anyone think I posted my message because I am "pro-war" they could not be more mistaken. I am against this war. But I am willing to consider that the pro-war members of the Forum may have a few points on their side.
NEHOC ~
Perhaps I haven't had time to search thoroughly enough, but as yet, I've been unable to find a post by David [the one you refer to as "victim"] directed to you. However, that's what happens when you underestimate another's intelligence and knowledge. Clearly a blatant error on your part. However, should David remain away, it is everyone's loss, so I can't even say "that's what you get" or "your loss to have done so."
I'm very curious why you would sit idle for so long, only to jump in with an insult, that you knew [or could certainly reason] would be perceived as that, to anyone living Stateside..... rather than contributing your own views regarding pro-peace/anti-war [however you see it] and the points that you feel the "pro-war" [we're all wanting Saddam eliminated] have, regardless of your overall disagreement with their position on this war. A curious decision on your part. I have my theories, but won't go into them. Your two, other un-related posts have been, "This thread is infantile" and "Yes, but it's my opinion that counts." What a loss for everyone if David is the one to stay away.
~ Elizabeth
Perhaps I haven't had time to search thoroughly enough, but as yet, I've been unable to find a post by David [the one you refer to as "victim"] directed to you. However, that's what happens when you underestimate another's intelligence and knowledge. Clearly a blatant error on your part. However, should David remain away, it is everyone's loss, so I can't even say "that's what you get" or "your loss to have done so."
I'm very curious why you would sit idle for so long, only to jump in with an insult, that you knew [or could certainly reason] would be perceived as that, to anyone living Stateside..... rather than contributing your own views regarding pro-peace/anti-war [however you see it] and the points that you feel the "pro-war" [we're all wanting Saddam eliminated] have, regardless of your overall disagreement with their position on this war. A curious decision on your part. I have my theories, but won't go into them. Your two, other un-related posts have been, "This thread is infantile" and "Yes, but it's my opinion that counts." What a loss for everyone if David is the one to stay away.
~ Elizabeth
Last edited by lizzytysh on Mon Apr 07, 2003 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Andrew McGeever
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 10:02 pm
Dear Kush,
"Let it Be"......if only.
The aftermath of this inevitable military victory will have repercussions throughout the Middle East and Europe too, for the rest of my lifetime, and that of my family.
"Pax Americana" will rule Iraq, but it has never , I repeat NEVER been interested in democracy: business is more important. And yes, they've done the business, blasted the sitting targets to smithereens.
Saddam will probably commit suicide, as against being captured.
This is a $100 billion job, so I'm told, without the money necessary to "rebuild Iraq".
Kush, I think the "post-war" scenario will reveal the true intentions of the "liberators". That is what scares me the most, or am I just being a sad "European"?
Kush, you quoted the words of Paul McCartney, from the "Let It Be" album, which was recorded before "Abbey Road" but released after.
Both albums are wonderful.
I am not "English"; rather an "old European". What a grumpy lot we are!
Yours, scared,
Andrew.
"Let it Be"......if only.
The aftermath of this inevitable military victory will have repercussions throughout the Middle East and Europe too, for the rest of my lifetime, and that of my family.
"Pax Americana" will rule Iraq, but it has never , I repeat NEVER been interested in democracy: business is more important. And yes, they've done the business, blasted the sitting targets to smithereens.
Saddam will probably commit suicide, as against being captured.
This is a $100 billion job, so I'm told, without the money necessary to "rebuild Iraq".
Kush, I think the "post-war" scenario will reveal the true intentions of the "liberators". That is what scares me the most, or am I just being a sad "European"?
Kush, you quoted the words of Paul McCartney, from the "Let It Be" album, which was recorded before "Abbey Road" but released after.
Both albums are wonderful.
I am not "English"; rather an "old European". What a grumpy lot we are!
Yours, scared,
Andrew.
Lizzytysh,
My Dear Young Lady,
I was not aware that one must wait to be addressed directly before posting on a given subject.
I was only taking your advice. Do you not recall your words to another member: "And I say, despite any/all of the shock value, enter or exit here in whatever manner you like."
So much for consistency.
My Dear Young Lady,
I was not aware that one must wait to be addressed directly before posting on a given subject.
I was only taking your advice. Do you not recall your words to another member: "And I say, despite any/all of the shock value, enter or exit here in whatever manner you like."
So much for consistency.
To The Absent David,
It is remarkable that someone who penned the words: "...you can almost see the snappy salute and hear the marching of the jackboots in the cadence of the prose" would then take offense at the "tinkling of The Internationale".
Jackboots? Oh, dear, does that mean what I think it means?
Dear Fellow Travelers, try not to be so fragile.
It is remarkable that someone who penned the words: "...you can almost see the snappy salute and hear the marching of the jackboots in the cadence of the prose" would then take offense at the "tinkling of The Internationale".
Jackboots? Oh, dear, does that mean what I think it means?
Dear Fellow Travelers, try not to be so fragile.
-
tom.d.stiller
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: ... between the lines ...
- Contact:
NEHOC ~
Your Dear Patronizing Old Man ~
My comment regarding your not being addressed had to do with your explanation to "......Who May Be Interested" and that your post was a "riposte" and that you did not think "the victim would even feel the blade going in." My point was not that you had no right to comment to something not addressed to you, but that your use of "riposte" ["a fencer's quick return thrust following a parry(to ward off a weapon or blow; to turn aside something); a retaliatory verbal sally: retort; a retaliatory maneuver or measure"] and its meaning suggested already-existing, active engagement between you and David, i.e. that you were responding, via your quick knife to something he'd said to you, and I was finding nothing. The nature of your post would have led me to believe he had said something to you [I couldn't imagine his having done any name-calling or anything that might accomplish the same goal, hence I went looking to see what this "riposte" was in response to, found nothing, and commented on that.
It's absurd to think that I don't consistently believe that one need not wait to be addressed before speaking here. If everyone waited for that to occur, we'd likely as not still be on page one for the entire Forum. My curiosity remains as to why, to date, you've only jumped in with negativity.
~ Lizzytysh
Your Dear Patronizing Old Man ~
My comment regarding your not being addressed had to do with your explanation to "......Who May Be Interested" and that your post was a "riposte" and that you did not think "the victim would even feel the blade going in." My point was not that you had no right to comment to something not addressed to you, but that your use of "riposte" ["a fencer's quick return thrust following a parry(to ward off a weapon or blow; to turn aside something); a retaliatory verbal sally: retort; a retaliatory maneuver or measure"] and its meaning suggested already-existing, active engagement between you and David, i.e. that you were responding, via your quick knife to something he'd said to you, and I was finding nothing. The nature of your post would have led me to believe he had said something to you [I couldn't imagine his having done any name-calling or anything that might accomplish the same goal, hence I went looking to see what this "riposte" was in response to, found nothing, and commented on that.
It's absurd to think that I don't consistently believe that one need not wait to be addressed before speaking here. If everyone waited for that to occur, we'd likely as not still be on page one for the entire Forum. My curiosity remains as to why, to date, you've only jumped in with negativity.
~ Lizzytysh