Thread: Warning... crazies ahead.

Aaron,
Maybe you misunderstood my post - no, the fact that I knew people in the WTC as did you, doesn't change anything. I think you glossed over the balance of my post and did not read it carefully enough. I will reitterate my point in a second as it may have not been clear enough but first, I have to get into your answer as to why it was our fault.

By your argument that the terrorists were financed by our oil money and therefore it was our fault - I would then say that your country and EVERY OTHER country which uses oil was also at fault! Can you seriously use that argument? If we didn't purchase oil, would this have not happened? Let me also ask you if there was someone in your town, or group of friends - or hell, someone just off of the street and they were arrogant, does that give you the right to punch them square in the nose? Does that somehow justify it? I think the problem is other countries say we are arrogant because we are so successful. It's merely an apperance of arrogance due to our success and their jealousy.

Does the fact that a girl is wearing a short skirt give you the right to rape her? Does it in any way justify it?

If I have a better car than you or more money (not saying I do ) and buy expensive things, does that give you the right to take them from me?

Of course not - they are absurd questions! So was your argument.

Also, my statement about Canada and her citizen's passive nature was not as clearly written as I had wished. Basically what I was saying is Canadians can afford to be passive and in many cases, in opposition to our attempts to make the world safer due to the fact that they are right next door to the strongest nation in the world. Your country can afford to be against us - it's merely weighing its options:

Option #1: Take a stand and support the US
Problem with option #1: The Terrorists will hate us and we may become the next target

Option #2: Take a stand against the US and the 'illegal' war.
Problem with option#2: The US will not be pleased but with its shared borders and long relationship, they will soon get over it.

It's quite obvious that they've chosen the easier path. We would never commit a terrorist act in a Canadian city. It's plain as night and day.

As far as your original post and the insensitive nature with which it was written...Do you actually, in your heart, believe that it was our fault? Our arrogance caused it? Ignorance, maybe but arrogance? We have never been more vigilant. We will try our very best to protect our country so this will never happen again. Your country will also benefit by association, as always.

I can only promise you this: We Americans are proud of who we are, how far our country has come in such a short time and our future has never been brighter. No country has helped others more and without strings attached. Simply look at all the aid and forgiven debt we have around the world. We are a good and moral people who are willing to stand up and fight for that in which we believe. If that offends you, well all I have to say is too bad. If that really offends you, then it is has proven to be jeaolosy. Nothing more or less.

- Jeff

Originally posted by jzgt
I think you glossed over the balance of my post and did not read it carefully enough.
- Jeff

I think he's glossed over the entire arguments, taking speculation as fact.

BTW Jeff... an excellent post!

Originally posted by Aaron Cake
Administrator Aaron:
ddt: Watch it. I will give you the exact same warning I would give someone else if they were insulting another in this manner on the forum: 3 strikes and you're out. You've swung and missed twice in this thread so far. Please keep that in mind. This is a friendly place, and personal attacks on anyone are not tolerated. Part of my responsibility is to deal with them in a fair mannor, regardless of whether they are directed at me or not.

Aaron please. I only counted once, unless you took offense to the haircut joke. As far as personal attacks go that's just the way I go about things. You're obviously not budging on your opinions and I took great offense to what you posted. In fact why are personal attacks not allowed but you can attack and stereotype an entire country?

Listen if you want to ban me, ban me. I connect through a proxy anyways and will just choose another. My username and post count really don't mean a thing to me.

Regular Aaron:

[ddt: To attack someone for their opinion is quite American. I am voicing my opinion here, as are you. Do you see me attacking you because we don't share opinions? To call me an "idiot" because I think differently only proves your own shortsightedness.

No Aaron, you insulted an enitre country's worth of people, and since I'm one (imagine this) I took offense as well.

Me calling you an idiot (idiot - A foolish or stupid person) proves only that I think you would have to be a fool to believe what you are typing. Maybe it's just because you don't live in this country, feel what we feel, believe in what this country stands for, etc.

Honestly... I think it's sad.

I too will now gracefully bow out of this argument. I will leave you with one statement.

The time for protest is over. We are at war. Those interested in making a difference now should go volunteer at a day care or a nursing home.

Aaron, I had a long post typed and ready...when I hit the 'submit reply' button, the site was apparently down, so it was lost forever. I will reconstruct it as best I can:

I can't let you do a 'driveby' post just because you deem political discussions a waste of time. Had you simply said that and not responded to my post, I would've been ok with that. The fact is, there are many generalizations and misconceptions in your last post which cannot go without a rebuttal.

1st:

I am not saying it was 100% the fault of the US. The "fault" of the US lies in the government not taking the appropriate actions, and the fact that there are reasons why other countries dislike Americans.

If we can agree that there was no justification for a terrorist attack on the WTC, then why would the fact that other countries dislike America have any place in your argument? It is simply a justification for, or an insinuation of a justification for, and a attack on us. Again, I did say that we mishandled some information by not communicating with our various intelligence branches, however, that cannot constitute blame for an attack.

2nd and 3rd:

I may be slightly wrong with my numbers here, take this with a grain of salt.

The population of the US is roughly 290,000,000, about 4.7% of the world
The US imports about 50% of it's oil
The US uses roughly 25.5% of the worlds oil production (1999 stats)

Bottom line: 4.7% of the populatin of the world is using 25.5% of oil production...hmmmm....Could not find stats for Canada.

As they are related, here's 3rd:

If you didn't purchse oil, the current "war" with Iraq would not be taking place. Odds are Sept 11th would have taken place regardles (who knows?).

Ok, we are the most industrialized nation, with the highest standard of living, right? Well, wouldn't it stand to reason that the most industrialized nation with the highest standard of living would use the most oil? Makes sense to me. Why should we lower our standard of living to lower our standings as the highest oil consumer? We're not exactly taking away your oil, or the oil of any country - the oil producers are processing as much as they need (or just enough to keep the price high). The relation of your 3rd point of 'The war on Iraq wouldn't be taking place otherwise' is also false. Have a look at the oil producing nations production versus US oil imports and you'll find that we get 5x the oil from Saudi Arabia then we do from Iraq, 4x the oil from Venezuela, twice the amount comes from Nigeria. It's only temporary anyway...When we develop the next energy source, your country, as well as the rest of the world, will benefit as usual.

4th:

By far, most Americans have this attitude:

-I'm an American! I can do whatever I want!
-I'm an American! You're wrong and I'm right!
-I'm an American! I can tell you how to live!
-I'm an American! I don't have to accept responsibility for my actions!
-I'm an American! Where's my gun?

Come on, Aaron - is this really how you see Americans? How do we intercede in your life? How are we telling you how to live?
You do have on thing right, however. The most important point at the top of your list - "I'm an American! I can do whatever I want!" You are correct - barring criminal activity, we can do pretty much anything we want. Can the rest of the world's countries say that? That is a major difference. We believe freedom is good for everyone, not just the 'enlightened few' of Europe and North America. If you relate that to 'I can tell you how to live' well then, yeah, I guess you're right - I do want everyone to be free.

5th:

Canada does not ruffle feathers like the US does...Which, by the way, has tried to invade Canada twice.

Make the world safer...That's an interesting statement... Sort of like Viet Nam? Or Cuba?

Again, Canada DOESN'T HAVE to ruffle feathers. The US will take the stand for her citizens. As far as Vietnam goes, there could've been another route taken. If it had been fought differently, it would have been a different situation entirely. Cuba and the non invade clause was a mistake, too. I am not saying that the US doesn't make mistakes - we have and I admitted to that in my last post.

6th:

War of 1812, Phesian (spelling is probably very wrong) war...

But the point remains. We have taken the safer path. Our government does not see the point in fighting the US's "war".

That's great, and I'm sure it was appreciated, but these are different, more dangerous times. The costs of action have a greater possibility of reaction by the terrorists. They probably would have had trouble sailing a clipper into a pair of large buildings back then. Canada doesn't have to take a stand - you admit the country is 'taking the safer path'. Not the more moral path...not even the better path, just the 'safer' path. That is sad, don't you think?

7th:

My original statment was light hearted and general, very much open to interpretation. To be clear, I am not saying the US is 100% at fault for others actions. What I am saying is that there are REASONS why terrorists dislike America. Those reasons must be examined. Also, the US government had a very good indication of Sept. 11th before it happend...yet nothing was done?

That is where the problem resides...why did you make a statement which was 'light hearted' and not heartfelt? Do you actually believe it or was it merely a passing thought?
Again, you state that there are reasons why terrorists dislike the US - how can this possibly have any place in your argument if there is no justification for such an attack???

8th:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will try our very best to protect our country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the expense of others...

At the expense of others? Who?
Be concrete, here - make a statement. Being vague will not make your point. To whom will the cost be greater? We are sacrificing American lives. The difference is we are willing to stand up, fight and die for our beliefs at the ultimate benefit of others.

9th:
***WARNING, SARCASM ALERT!***

I'm overjoyed.

You should be overjoyed. You live in a free country next to a like minded free country which happens to be the strongest in the world. Do you deny that, without the US as the strongest nation sharing a border with Canada that you would remain free? That we would remain free? Who knows what nation would be in power today and what language you'd be speaking. The fact is, never in the history of the world has there been a stronger nation which has used its power LESS.

10th:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can only promise you this: We Americans are proud of who we are,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Oh, there is absolutely no doubt of that. And therein lies the root of the problem (not saying Canada is innocent, because we certainly aren't).

Aaron, there you go again, saying that since we are proud and we let you know it, that is the root of the problem. You are, once again, justifying a terrorist attack.
Why are you so threatened by a proud American?
I am not ashamed to say that I am proud to be an American. Maybe you are reading into that statement.
I am not saying "I'm proud to be an American and all other countries suck."
You can say you're a proud Canadian and it won't offend me. Why does it offend you when I mention my American heritage?
Why should I not be proud to be an American? Is it wrong to be proud of your country? Please explain this to me.

11th:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If that really offends you, then it is has proven to be jeaolosy. Nothing more or less.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Please don't attempt to read my mind, because you don't know how I think. I am not jealous. I do not get jealous. That may be hard to believe, but it is true.

That is fine, you may not be jealous. I'd like to ask you then, what is it? Is it contempt? Do you think we are a bad country? What is the reason. At least give me something concrete with which we can discuss. Excuse the language but, grab your balls and make a statement. Maybe it is that nature of an American that you dislike - our honesty. We are willing to say when something is not right and stand up and put it on the line when it counts.

The state the world is in right now is similar to when you go out to dinner with a bunch of people and when the check comes, everyone has their hands in their pockets, unwilling to pick up the check. They reap the benefits and don't want to take up responsibility of the cost.
Don't worry, we will free the Iraqi people, give them back their homeland and you will see a happy, prosperous nation.
Canada - well, she can keep her hands in her pockets.

- Jeff

Why should Iraq not have weapons?

How old were you during desert storm? Have you forgotten why we went over the first time?

The reason we will not allow him to keep his nation in his terrorist grip is because he has already proven that he is unwilling to be a peace loving nation. I realize that there are many countrys that have horrible weapons but the reason you carry a big stick is to keep everyone from playing dirty, not use it to try to take over your neighboring country.

Bottom line, He tried to invade an innocent country.. The world slapped him on the wrist and came up with some "rules" he now had to follow. Very simply, he did not follow these rules even though he was given chance after chance. The US is not there just because we decided one day it would be fun. We are there because he has jerked the US and the UN around for 12 years, all the while killing and oppressing his own people (even using the very weapons of mass destruction on his own people).

I am so f'ing sick of everyone making it seem like the US started any of this crap!!!

Mike

Imation,
When is the reason for a why a terrorist attacked, ever justification for a terrorist attack? I don't care if it happens here in the US, Israel, France, Germany - anywhere. The location doesn't matter. What would we suceed in doing by asking "Why do the terrorists hate us?" It is a exercise in futility.
Let me ask you to please state, oh let's say, twenty of your 'hundreds of reasons' why they hate us.
Why do you think we are taking major steps in destroying these terrorist groups? Does that not prove our resolve? Many times, unfortunately, it takes something close to home to happen before you are moved to action. I believe that we are in the first stages of the war to rid the world of terrorism. That is a GOOD thing. Terrorists are bad. I don't really care why they hate us. The fact is, they always will. The only thing to do now is rid the world of them and make it harder for them to congregate. We have most of the world's countries with us.

When you ask me why I say the US is not arrogant, yet we attack another country and try to remove its leader, I say this: This is not a new war. This is merely the resumption of the previous war. He has not abided by the cease fire agreement and therefore, we have the right to continue the battle. If you do not think this is true, please read the first UN agreement and you will see that this is the recourse we have available.

You say that is is arrogant for the US to attack another nation without the consent of the UN but I ask you, is it not the duty of American officials to protect the US and her citizens? You say you believe that Iraq has WMD - do you not think Saddam would use them if the opportunity presented itself? What would stop Saddam from giving these WMDs to a terrorist for use against anyone in any country? Do you trust him not to? I know he is a benevolant dictator but... I also find it funny how you make trivial, the 1,000,000+ Iraqis he's killed over the years.

You state that the US is trying to disarm Iraq of its bio weapons yet you also state that Iraq has the right to have them? Are you serious? Do you describe Saddam Hussein as a clear thinking, rational person? Do you trust him with those weapons? You, luckily, do not have to do so. You, fortunately, live in a country which is far enough away from a scud missle attack. It is quite easy for you to make those statements from SC. Yes, we have nuclear weapons yet, are we a threat to use them? We do have biological weapons - do you fear we will use them? Do you believe that the US is more dangerous to the world than Iraq or some other dictator ruled country with WMD? I am amused that you equate our leaders and the other leaders of the free world with maniacal dictators from around the world.

Yes, the UN can make a decision to remove the Iraqi leader, however, after several UN resolutions and a statement from the head UN weapons inspector stating that Iraq is not cooperating, it has become irrelevant. They refused to do anything about the violations. They would continue to do the same today, had we not taken action. The results would've been typical - he'd give up some weapons when the heat was too much to bear. Hans Blix even said that the inspections would not even be occuring had it not been for the US military presence. Read his reports to the security council. The facts in the reports state that Iraq is not cooperating, yet he will not say that they are not complying. If you read the reports, you will see what I am talking about. I recall one sentence where he states that Iraq is not cooperating and then in the very next sentence he says they are in compliance. I have no doubt that we will find the WMD. That is not the main focus at this time in the campaign. It is too dangerous to go about and look for them while our troops are fighting off sporadic resitance. When we have stabilized the nation, then we will continue to search and locate the weapons in question. Why, I ask, do you think it was necessary for Iraqi soldiers to have chemical suits, chemical antidotes and biological immunizations, such as small pox, on them when the surrender or are caught? I know you say you believe that Saddam has the weapons, but even the Iraqi soldiers knows who will USE them.

- Jeff