Its "hip" to be antiamerican Watch

This discussion is closed.
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#21
Report 15 years ago
#21
(Original post by Tina)
its not hip to hate them when your country is at war with iraq...thats seen as unpatriotic, not supporting our troops
yes, it is hip to hate them. The establishment (Time magazine's personality of the year was the U.S. G.I.) supports it therefore it is hip to be anti - . Sae as left wingers, look at the stance on Saddam, oh no he is evil said the hip and the left, oh no you cant invade him said the hip and the left ten yrs later, whne he had killed even more civilians
0
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 15 years ago
#22
(Original post by foolfarian)
See the thing is I agree in principle to some of the aims that the white office claims to be going for, but I really don't understand the methodology of how they go about it. Like ignoring the UN, like the whole Steel Tariffs (ie trying it on with the whole EU), like invading Iraq, like awarding the contracts in closed bidding always to companies related to the white house. like banning war opposed countries from tendering contracts (in principle I agree, but there is a deep set hypocrisy with this and preaching free trade).
J
#
yes i see what u mean....terrorism is ignored in some places and its disgusting how saddam went from being an ally to enemy in a space of about 20 years
0
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 15 years ago
#23
(Original post by JSM)
yes, it is hip to hate them. The establishment (Time magazine's personality of the year was the U.S. G.I.) supports it therefore it is hip to be anti - . Sae as left wingers, look at the stance on Saddam, oh no he is evil said the hip and the left, oh no you cant invade him said the hip and the left ten yrs later, whne he had killed even more civilians
he was killing civilians since the 80s! the usa was happy to support him then...they even provided weapons...this is the hypocricy
0
Jonatan
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#24
Report Thread starter 15 years ago
#24
(Original post by JSM)
No, what is wrong with the fence is that it is encapsulating areas which have been stolen, which were fixed after the 1949 war. It doesnt jsut protect them, but splits palestnian communities from their crops and their villages nad their relations. The fence is being built along lines detirmined by Israel, not its countries borders. In no way am i pro or anti palestine or Israel. I am neutral.
Israel has repedetely tried to negotiate peace agreements with the Palestinian self controlled government, the last proposal came from Ehud barack. Arafat has however repeadetely rejected any proposal Israel has made. Tha latest which would give the palestinian givernment the status of a state more than 90% of the west bank and a part of eastern jeruslaem. That Israel now builds a fence inside these territories is adierct consequence of the greate number of atacks against Jewish residents within these areas.
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#25
Report 15 years ago
#25
(Original post by Jonatan)
First things first. Ehud Barack Offered Arafat 90% of the west bank, a palestinian state, a part of eastern jerusalem and economical compensation for refugees as a peace proposal. Arafat on the other hand deemanded that ISrael should give 5 million palestinians Israeli citizenships. This would mean that Israel should have to increase its population with 50% , making it a palestinian majority. When Barack would not accept this requirement, Arafat responded by supporting the last intifada which caused the recent slaughter off palestinians and Irsaelis. He actually went on TV and praised the palestinian militant activists. Now was it Israel who did not do anything for peace?

When it comes to civilian deaths in the gazaa strip. Well, is it stranges innocent civilians get hurt when Hamaz & Co use them as human shields? israel is not deliberetely shooting civilians, but the terrorist organiation base their activities from refugee camps just because they know Israel get criticised if civilian refugees die when they try to get at the terrorists. The palestinian givernment do not do **** to stop these militants so now what option do Israel have? Either they can try to rout out the terrorists, in which case some civilians are bound to get hurt, or they may just sit silently and watch as suecide bomber after suecide bomber strikes at McDonalds restaurants School Buses and Synnagouges. They tried to build a fence in order to stop the suecide bombings, as this was a mean of preventing them without using military action, and what happens? The UN condemms the fence in a resolution!!!!
I totally disagree with "israel is not deliberetely shooting civilians" israel doesn't shoot anyone, individual israelis shoot people. Most soldiers won't do this, but for gods sake think about it. All teenagers except those in religious school have to do national service. THink how many meat heads there will be with something against arabs (especially when some of their families will have died at the hands of bombers)
Of course they will be shooting civilians, what is more worrying is that the army doesn't convict them.
J
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 15 years ago
#26
(Original post by JaF)
I'm not a communist, the avatar was the only onethat appealed to me! As for my signature quotes they just outline my dislike for the importance some people give to religion and to be perfectly honest I think religion has a lot to answer for.

I would say it is an anti american bandwagon, for example all these people who laugh at George Bush and talk about how stupid he is.
People often make their minds up about Bush and America based on stupid insignificant anecdotes rather than taking time to consider the bigger picture.
im anti-bush....doesnt make me anti-american, just because i dont like the government./.....besides half my family live there!
0
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#27
Report 15 years ago
#27
(Original post by Jonatan)
Israel has repedetely tried to negotiate peace agreements with the Palestinian self controlled government, the last proposal came from Ehud barack. Arafat has however repeadetely rejected any proposal Israel has made. Tha latest which would give the palestinian givernment the status of a state more than 90% of the west bank and a part of eastern jeruslaem. That Israel now builds a fence inside these territories is adierct consequence of the greate number of atacks against Jewish residents within these areas.
sharon has recently made moves to cut off all ties with palestine
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#28
Report 15 years ago
#28
(Original post by Jonatan)
Israel has repedetely tried to negotiate peace agreements with the Palestinian self controlled government, the last proposal came from Ehud barack. Arafat has however repeadetely rejected any proposal Israel has made. Tha latest which would give the palestinian givernment the status of a state more than 90% of the west bank and a part of eastern jeruslaem. That Israel now builds a fence inside these territories is adierct consequence of the greate number of atacks against Jewish residents within these areas.
I wouldn't be so against the fence if it didnt deliberately seperate entire communities from their land. Which it DOES - no disputing that!
J
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 15 years ago
#29
(Original post by Tina)
he was killing civilians since the 80s! the usa was happy to support him then...they even provided weapons...this is the hypocricy
I am not taking either side, at the time it was important to their strategic objectives so they supported him. Whereas the left just object on principle. and the hiip object because its always hip to be different, ie anti establishment until it becoems the consensus view and then they change again
0
Jonatan
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#30
Report Thread starter 15 years ago
#30
(Original post by Tina)
he was killing civilians since the 80s! the usa was happy to support him then...they even provided weapons...this is the hypocricy
If I am not completely mistaken Saddam bought the chemical weapons technology from France and Germany. The US supported him with tanks and firearms when he was in war with Iran. This was however before his slaughter of Kurds in the northern region of Iraq, his use of chemical weapons and the unprovoked invasion of Kuwait. It was mainly US forces who defended Kuwait as Saddam invaded them unprovoked, and their main mistake was not to take him out at that time. Furthermore, noone has denied that the US did support Saddam in the war against Iran, but that is no reason why they should support him now after his ruthless acts of genecide in northern and southern Iraq.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 15 years ago
#31
(Original post by Jonatan)
Israel has repedetely tried to negotiate peace agreements with the Palestinian self controlled government, the last proposal came from Ehud barack. Arafat has however repeadetely rejected any proposal Israel has made. Tha latest which would give the palestinian givernment the status of a state more than 90% of the west bank and a part of eastern jeruslaem. That Israel now builds a fence inside these territories is adierct consequence of the greate number of atacks against Jewish residents within these areas.
i think defending either side is a lost cause. However, america should only support israel agaisnt any aggression, not just UN resolutions. If plaestine was a state declaring war on israel, following its policies it would have UN resoltion imposed on it too.
0
Linda
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#32
Report 15 years ago
#32
And it's /in/ to wear palestinian scarves :mad:
0
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#33
Report 15 years ago
#33
(Original post by JSM)
I am not taking either side, at the time it was important to their strategic objectives so they supported him. Whereas the left just object on principle. and the hiip object because its always hip to be different, ie anti establishment until it becoems the consensus view and then they change again
well im objecting on principle./.....and if the "hip" want to support me....i dont mind at all. btw i have a palestine scarf and ive had it for a looooooonnng time.......long b4 it was "hip"
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#34
Report 15 years ago
#34
(Original post by Jonatan)
If I am not completely mistaken Saddam bought the chemical weapons technology from France and Germany. The US supported him with tanks and firearms when he was in war with Iran. This was however before his slaughter of Kurds in the northern region of Iraq, his use of chemical weapons and the unprovoked invasion of Kuwait. It was mainly US forces who defended Kuwait as Saddam invaded them unprovoked, and their main mistake was not to take him out at that time. Furthermore, noone has denied that the US did support Saddam in the war against Iran, but that is no reason why they should support him now after his ruthless acts of genecide in northern and southern Iraq.
Nice of you to give a thought for the brits who died and continue to suffer due to that war.
(albeit because of our own ******* drugs)
J
Jonatan
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#35
Report Thread starter 15 years ago
#35
(Original post by foolfarian)
AS for this 'fence' you seem to forget that when push comes to shove you are fencing in an entire population.
Whats different between that and the Jewish Gettoes? I'm sure the Jews would have been non too friendly with Nazis either.
J
Helllooooooooo? Israel is trying to block people from enetering Israel , the Jewish Gethoes prohibited Jews from LEAVING them. Israel has in no way surrounded the palestinians with the fence, Its only the borders towards Israel which are closed. I canæt beleive people are so ignorant as to compare this fence with the berlin wall or the nazi gethoes. The wall is not trying to stop people from egtting out, it stops people from egtting IN!
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#36
Report 15 years ago
#36
(Original post by Tina)
well im objecting on principle./.....and if the "hip" want to support me....i dont mind at all. btw i have a palestine scarf and ive had it for a looooooonnng time.......long b4 it was "hip"
is it a nice colour/pattern?
Lets face it, no one would want the scar if it didn't actually look good.
J
Tina
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#37
Report 15 years ago
#37
(Original post by Jonatan)
If I am not completely mistaken Saddam bought the chemical weapons technology from France and Germany. The US supported him with tanks and firearms when he was in war with Iran. This was however before his slaughter of Kurds in the northern region of Iraq, his use of chemical weapons and the unprovoked invasion of Kuwait. It was mainly US forces who defended Kuwait as Saddam invaded them unprovoked, and their main mistake was not to take him out at that time. Furthermore, noone has denied that the US did support Saddam in the war against Iran, but that is no reason why they should support him now after his ruthless acts of genecide in northern and southern Iraq.

THOSE ACTS OF GENOCIDE TOOK PLACE AFTER THE FIRST GULF WAR! BUT DADDY BUSH PULLED US TROOPS OUT BECAUSE HE WAS BECOMING UNPOPULAR BACK HOME. NO ONE CARED ABOUT GENOCIDE THEN. UNDOUBTEDLY FRANCE AND GERMANY ARE ALSO TO BLAME BUT THE USA DID SUPPLY CHEMICAL WEAPONS.........IT WILL BE INTERESTING IF THERE IS A FULL COURT CASE THING AGAINST SADDAM......SO WHERE DID HE GET THE WEAPONS FROM? OH WHOOPS WE GAVE THEM TO HIM!
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#38
Report 15 years ago
#38
(Original post by Jonatan)
Helllooooooooo? Israel is trying to block people from enetering Israel , the Jewish Gethoes prohibited Jews from LEAVING them. Israel has in no way surrounded the palestinians with the fence, Its only the borders towards Israel which are closed. I canæt beleive people are so ignorant as to compare this fence with the berlin wall or the nazi gethoes. The wall is not trying to stop people from egtting out, it stops people from egtting IN!
yes it does, it stoips palestinians gettign out and going to their fields etc on he other side. Go and read something objective on pol matters like the Economist.
0
Jonatan
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#39
Report Thread starter 15 years ago
#39
(Original post by JSM)
i think defending either side is a lost cause. However, america should only support israel agaisnt any aggression, not just UN resolutions. If plaestine was a state declaring war on israel, following its policies it would have UN resoltion imposed on it too.
If you take a look at the resolutions imposed on Israel you will see quite an interesting pattern.

US + Israel: Against
Europe: Abstaining
Arab states: In favour

Result: Resolution passed....
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 15 years ago
#40
(Original post by Tina)
THOSE ACTS OF GENOCIDE TOOK PLACE AFTER THE FIRST GULF WAR! BUT DADDY BUSH PULLED US TROOPS OUT BECAUSE HE WAS BECOMING UNPOPULAR BACK HOME. NO ONE CARED ABOUT GENOCIDE THEN. UNDOUBTEDLY FRANCE AND GERMANY ARE ALSO TO BLAME BUT THE USA DID SUPPLY CHEMICAL WEAPONS.........IT WILL BE INTERESTING IF THERE IS A FULL COURT CASE THING AGAINST SADDAM......SO WHERE DID HE GET THE WEAPONS FROM? OH WHOOPS WE GAVE THEM TO HIM!
We did not give him any WMD. Daddy bush puleld troops back because it would have been illegal to invade. They still dont care about genocide - armenians anyone.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you chained to your phone?

Yes (66)
20.06%
Yes, but I'm trying to cut back (132)
40.12%
Nope, not that interesting (131)
39.82%

Watched Threads

View All