Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    A vast majority of Iraqis voted for a government that opposes attacks against American troops.
    Was Saddam or any or his Bathist party one of the choices?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    k let me write a hypothetical scenario:

    China in year 2100 decides that Mr.George W W W W Bush. is a tyrant and is oppressing his own people. George W W W W Bush shares the exact same characteristic as the present president. Now China is not conquering the US but invading it for the best benefit of the US however some americans think that he is not insted he is giving them what they want, a strong country with strong morals. On the other hand we have another half of the population who thinks Mr.George W W W W Bush is indeed interfering with their freedom of speech, freedom of choice and freedom of privacy and therefore they support the invasion of the Chinese....

    So would you resist the Chinese army then yes or no?
    So you wouldn't qualify someone who gasses thousands, tortures thousands and kills millions as a tyrant then? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Haha! Point proven. Somebody who one moment defends the idea that people should identify with their own, spews forth a diatribe when someone asks if Whites too can express the same sentiment about their communities and nations.

    It's a problem to be sure....this anti-White racism.
    Those groups used to support each other. So once again, what do white people do for you?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oilcan)
    So you wouldn't qualify someone who gasses thousands, tortures thousands and kills millions as a tyrant then? :rolleyes:
    Interesting you should ask that....why dont you pose the same question to the people supplying him with the weapons used to kill the people.....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Interesting you should ask that....why dont you pose the same question to the people supplying him with the weapons used to kill the people.....
    Sorry I didn't know that methods of torture, mustard gas and executions went off by themselves. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Was Saddam or any or his Bathist party one of the choices?
    The interim prime minister of Iraq was a former Baathist. Not that this matters; Sunnis make up only 20% of Iraq's population. Even if they were allowed to vote for Hussein, the Shia coalition would still get their 60% of the vote.

    k let me write a hypothetical scenario:

    China in year 2100 decides that Mr.George W W W W Bush. is a tyrant and is oppressing his own people. George W W W W Bush shares the exact same characteristic as the present president. Now China is not conquering the US but invading it for the best benefit of the US however some americans think that he is not insted he is giving them what they want, a strong country with strong morals. On the other hand we have another half of the population who thinks Mr.George W W W W Bush is indeed interfering with their freedom of speech, freedom of choice and freedom of privacy and therefore they support the invasion of the Chinese....

    So would you resist the Chinese army then yes or no?
    You discredit yourself by comparing Bush to Hussein.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oilcan)
    Sorry I didn't know that methods of torture, mustard gas and executions went off by themselves. :rolleyes:
    So it's k to have supplied the weapons because the main thing is who chooses to use them...do you say the same things about drugs?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    So it's k to have supplied the weapons because the main thing is who chooses to use them...do you say the same things about drugs?
    Please do expand on this, as you make very little to no sense.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    The interim prime minister of Iraq was a former Baathist. Not that this matters; Sunnis make up only 20% of Iraq's population. Even if they were allowed to vote for Hussein, the Shia coalition would still get their 60% of the vote.



    You discredit yourself by comparing Bush to Hussein.
    Im not comparing anyone here...Im giving you a hypothetical scenario...If you choose to interpret it as a comparison between Saddam and Bush that is your own issue that you have to deal with.

    You keep avoiding the question.....You said that you expected people to defend their own country therefore...Do you support the Iraqi resistance towards the american army...YES OR NO?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oilcan)
    Please do expand on this, as you make very little to no sense.
    You too but I dont ask you to expand yourself further....out of sympathy I guess..
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    Those groups used to support each other. So once again, what do white people do for you?
    I don't know what you mean by 'those groups used to support each other'. You mean cultural/social and ethnic groups? They don't now?

    Whites do plenty for me, more than members of other races, largely because I live in the West and Whites created my civilisation and the technology and culture that I live with. What's the point?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Interesting you should ask that....why dont you pose the same question to the people supplying him with the weapons used to kill the people.....
    You would have to ask the French and the Germans then.

    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    I don't know what you mean by 'those groups used to support each other'. You mean cultural/social and ethnic groups? They don't now?

    Whites do plenty for me, more than members of other races, largely because I live in the West and Whites created my civilisation and the technology and culture that I live with. What's the point?
    Do whites do more for you than your country?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    I don't know what you mean by 'those groups used to support each other'. You mean cultural/social and ethnic groups? They don't now?

    Whites do plenty for me, more than members of other races, largely because I live in the West and Whites created my civilisation and the technology and culture that I live with. What's the point?
    Being white is just a by-product of climate and since mankind originated in Africa as Science at present teaches what difference does being white make?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    You too but I dont ask you to expand yourself further....out of sympathy I guess..
    I just think your marshalling something to support your own flawed thesis.

    All I'm saying is that because America and ourselves supplied the weapons, you seem to think that we first-handedly killed them and you base your argument on this thus proving you have very little to stand on.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    You would have to ask the French and the Germans then.
    So you also refuse to ackknowledge that the US supplied Saddam with weapons..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    McNamara was Sec. of Defense during Vietnam.
    ok, allow me to ammend. The quote was from WWII (or rather from the documentary, The Fog of War)in reference to WWII. He served with LeMay in WWII in the Air Force.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oilcan)
    I just think your marshalling something to support your own flawed thesis.

    All I'm saying is that because America and ourselves supplied the weapons, you seem to think that we first-handedly killed them and you base your argument on this thus proving you have very little to stand on.
    K then by using american law...who gets the harshest punishment..the person in possession of drugs or the ones dealing them? (I cant use the analogy of guns since apparently in the US they are considered to be legal and like personal toys nowadays, hence the highest number of deaths)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Btw Bismarck if you feel somehow unconfortable with the answer to the question I asked you about 5 times now please feel free to PM me it if you want, I won't copy and paste it anywhere .
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    K then by using american law...who gets the harshest punishment..the person in possession of drugs or the ones dealing them? (I cant use the analogy of guns since apparently in the US they are considered to be legal and like personal toys nowadays, hence the highest number of deaths)
    People selling drugs is illegal; countries selling weapons is not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    People selling drugs is illegal; countries selling weapons is not.
    The question was on whoever has the highest moral blameworthiness on supplying weapons to Saddam...unless you agree with supplying a tyrant (which is the words you used) as legal then I don't know what contribution you are making.

    I'd rather see you answer the question I asked...
 
 
 

2,821

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.