homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Rants, Raves, Rumors!   » Is it a war? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Author Topic: Is it a war?
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 18:03      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The War on Terror. Is it a war?

Before 9/11 while terrorists always regarded themselves as being engaged in a war, governments were careful to refer to them as criminals. Now however, nearly all politicians across the entire political spectrum seem comfortable with the notion of the War on Terror. But to me it poses some difficult questions.

Can you be at war with an enemy you cannot see?

What is the job of you armed forces in a war like this?

How do you ever know the war has been won?

And indeed can it ever be won?

Calling it a war is also surely a big ego boost for the terrorists?

So do you think it is helpful to call it a war or not?

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cap'n Vic

Member # 1477

Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 18:21      Profile for Cap'n Vic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is a war to steal oil. PLain and simple.

--------------------
(!) (T) = 8-D

Posts: 5471 | From: One of the drones from sector 7G | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Dr Cyclops
Assimilated
Member # 986

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 18:48      Profile for Dr Cyclops   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Those people" do'nt matter to the US economy, so we just ignore them. We buy off the governments, and they pretty much do what they want. Some of them give us oil. The average people in those countries are also upset about the situation in the eastern mediteranian hellhole. Israel would have been crushed several times if it wasn't for the US.

Mix in a bit of fundamentalism and a couple of guys with a ton of cash. What's that spell? T-R-O-U-B-L-E.

American perception is: Human life does'nt mean anything unless it's american life taken by forigeners. Forigeners killing forigeners does'nt matter, americans killing americans does'nt matter.

Here's a bit of food for thought:

BIG defecit + Unsustainable spending - Exports - foreign investment + New round of inflation

My prediction: Fallout of the US Dollar akin to 1929.

--------------------
When the W'rkncacnter came, Pthia was killed, and Yrro in anger, flung the W'rkncacnter into the sun. The sun burned them, but they swam on its surface.

Posts: 499 | From: Upon the slab, Unbroken. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 19:16      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callipygous:
Can you be at war with an enemy you cannot see?

Or, as a local journo asked, can you be at war with an abstract noun?

This whole 'war on terror' thing sucks.

The Geneva Convention protects Soldiers, and Civilians.
So, by decree, the prisoners at Guantanamo are neither Soldiers nor Civilians, they are 'unlawful combatants'.

The US constitution guarantees accused criminals the right to a fair trial, so, magically, 'unlawful combatants' are not criminals either.

The US government justifies denying these people any semblance of human rights, becuase they're "the worst of the worst" (it seems only nice people are entitled to a trial these days, and we can trust the politicians to decide who is nice) and yet, over 100 of "the worst of the worst" have been set free. It turns out they were just ordinary Joes who were turned in by Afghan warlords for the reward money.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Flashfire
Assimilated
Member # 2616

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 20:31      Profile for Flashfire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Have you ever read 1984?

If not, I would advise you to do so, it will explain a lot about why this fiasco is called a "war". People will do things and submit to things in "wartime" that they would never even consider during peacetime. It behooves the administration to declare it a "war" even though it cannot possibly be under any definition of the word as it allows them to get away with unconscionable things that at any other time would get the whole lot thrown out of office. Like the Patriot Act. Or its even more poisonous sibling, Patriot II. Such phrasing allows a politician to dress up obviously self-serving policies with patriotic rhetoric and get them passed in record time. It also allows them to villify any dissenters: "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists." And now, thanks to the Patriot Act, such a categorization may very well land you in prison.

Such declaration turns what should be a rational, logical debate into a visceral, emotional one, with all the consequences you'd expect.

--Flash, who always thought George Orwell's book was a cautionary tale, not an instruction manual.

--------------------
"No silicon heaven? That's absurd!
Where would all the calculators go?"
--Kryten, Red Dwarf
-------------------------------
My Web Comic: NSTA: Semper Vigilantis

Posts: 368 | From: State of Denial | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cap'n Vic

Member # 1477

Icon 1 posted March 25, 2004 20:49      Profile for Cap'n Vic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Flashfire:
Have you ever read 1984?


Um, it is only Van Halen's best album ever !!

--------------------
(!) (T) = 8-D

Posts: 5471 | From: One of the drones from sector 7G | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gibbonboy
Geek
Member # 2426

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 05:52      Profile for Gibbonboy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I listened to an interesting talk Tuesday night on local TV given at the local university by a professor/lecturer of Pakistani heritage.
My politics do not coincide with his or his sponsors, but he did make some very valid points:

1. Despite tyranny and opression, Iraq had a very good healthcare system before the war. Now the U.S. is trying to privatize their system, setting them up for a crisis like that in the U.S. Bush killed more Iraqi children by destroying the healthcare system in Iraq and by starving ordinary Iraqis than Hussein ever did.

2. The "Oil for Food" program was a dismal failure. Saddam Hussein made off with billions of dollars in profits from the smuggling of oil. The U.S. wishes to also privatize the oil industry, putting the profits into the hands of a few "trustworthy" Iraqis, who will then most likely try to run the country as an oligarchy, and will hold no regard for the wishes of the U.S. and its allies.

3. It has to be called a war, because calling it a pre-emptive strike on terrorists would make it a violation of several U.N. treaties. The U.N. does not recognize these types of actions as legal or moral, except in cases of immediate self-defense. We see how close Iraq was to unleashing a rain of nuclear death on the U.S. [shake head]

I wish I had a better memory, or had taped the program. He had a few gems sprinkled in with his rhetoric.
Iraq was a country ruled by a madman. Now it is a country ruled by a large group of madmen. Bush wants the oil to flow, preferably under the supervision of his sponsors and cronies.

It is a war, but the motivations for it, and the future ramifications for the U.S. and its allies are debatable.

--------------------
"It's not the end of the world, but you can see it from here."

Posts: 155 | From: A Very Small Hole in the Forest | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Drazgal
Geek
Member # 984

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 05:52      Profile for Drazgal   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The war has been won when the politicians that insist on calling it a war go out of office.

The war will be won the way the people mean (ie no more terrorism) probably around the same time we end most hostilities. Or in other words a utopian vision of total communism, everyone working for the common benifit of all man, not jsut some or ones self. So in other words, bugger all chance!

Posts: 154 | From: Dundee, United Kingdom | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
BellaDonna
Geek
Member # 2123

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 07:48      Profile for BellaDonna     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's like the war on drugs. Can we ever be rid of them? Probably not. Is there any clear enemy? Not really. The drug lords and sellers probably change daily. When one's killed another steps up to take their place. I think the same idea goes to terrorists. There's always going to be someone who doesn't like the way we (Americans or people in general) do things and feels the need to point their dislike out to us violently. Though obviously this "War on Terrorism" should not be limited to overseas. Remember the Oklahoma City bombing? That was an American citizen, born and raised, who didn't like the way things were done so he bombed a building killing many people.

Personally I don't think hunting Bin Laden down is going to stop terrorism, and being all nice nice to everyone just isn't possible (you trying pleasing everyone all the time-it just doesn't happen). Though I think hunting them down is like going to look for the bully on the playground. We're just asking for trouble.

On a highly selfish note (I'm allowed those every now and then right?) I'm glad they've called it a war. Since we've been "at war" with Iraq since 1990 my husband is classified as a war vetren and gets all the benefits that go along with that. Like free tuition to college. I know, very selfish.

--------------------
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
- Albert Einstein

Posts: 144 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
ooby
Highlie
Member # 2603

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 08:14      Profile for ooby     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You may have already seen this But since we are talking about how we totally won the war on drugs...

--------------------
"haven't you ever wondered if there's more to life than being really, really, rediculously good looking?"

Posts: 680 | From: South Jersey | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
GameMaster
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1173

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 08:50      Profile for GameMaster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Can you be at war with an enemy you cannot see?
Gorilla warfare, snippers, camoflage and soon cloaking devices... We've been at war before with unseen enemies, and so this doesn't even enter into the equation.

What is the job of you armed forces in a war like this?
"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State..." The army will do what it exsists to do, to protect this country from foreign enemies (preceived or real).

How do you ever know the war has been won?
How do ever know if a war is won? WWI was never really won, as it gave rise WWII. The civil war is still being fought in the minds of many in the south.

And indeed can it ever be won?
No war can be won. Can we eliminate terrorism as a whole? no. Can we put down a large terrorist orginization? maybe.

Calling it a war is also surely a big ego boost for the terrorists?
Standing around doing nothing as they crash planes into buildings and bomb US cities without much resistance certianly is a better option.

So do you think it is helpful to call it a war or not?
"A rose we call by anyother name would smell as sweet." It doesn't matter what you call it, and it is declared a war yet for several reasons. Would you prefer us all to call it "Thurackoobialackshabelt"? Go ahead... Personally, if it walks like a duck, and it talks like a duck.... it's duck.

Posts: 3038 | From: State of insanity | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
GameMaster
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1173

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 09:19      Profile for GameMaster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Originally posted by Dr Cyclops:
"Those people" do'nt matter to the US economy, so we just ignore them. We buy off the governments, and they pretty much do what they want.


Some of them give us oil.
Yes, because enviromentalist lobbies won't let us drill for it here. So instead we "rape the land" of other countries (which is appearently not as bad to the enviorment) while giving our money to governments that fund terrorists and butcher their own people.
<tounge in=cheek>
Meanwhile private industries that are working on R&D of cleaner and safer alternitives are being given huge subsidies which the government can't afford because we're in economic peril. *GASP*
</tounge>

The average people in those countries are also upset about the situation in the eastern mediteranian hellhole. Israel would have been crushed several times if it wasn't for the US.
The average people in this country are upset about the situation of having lost the Trade Towers, the average people in this country don't know what the first ten amendments are. The average person in this country hasn't seen Kerry's voting record and compared it to what he spouts.

Mix in a bit of fundamentalism and a couple of guys with a ton of cash. What's that spell? T-R-O-U-B-L-E.
Mix a few Extreamists (not just fundies) and you end up with trouble, even if your just making cookies. The leaders of the terrorist factions teach their "flock" that the way to heaven is the religous war.

American perception is: Human life does'nt mean anything unless it's american life taken by forigeners. Forigeners killing forigeners does'nt matter, americans killing americans does'nt matter.
The extreamists perception is that life doesn't mean anything unless it is the life of an Extreamist... All other life needs to be cleansed.

The Average American perception is "I've seen to much on the news about death to care about that man that was shot down the street... But because their is a war, I care a lot about the men that are killed in Iraq." The death rate of US soldiers in Iraq is lower than the murder in Washigton DC. The liberal media wants you to think that the loss of American life in Iraq is a lot more than it is because of thier political leaning... Most conservitive talk show hosts won't mention any loss of life in Iraq, unless they are faced with a huge news story about it or a caller brings it up, because of their political leaning. The emphasis you put on the death is your choice, don't get mind washed by either side.

BIG defecit + Unsustainable spending - Exports - foreign investment + New round of inflation
= biggest economic growth, larger than even Clinton's. Who would have thought that letting people keep their hard earned money might make for a good economy?

My prediction: Fallout of the US Dollar akin to 1929.
Look at the market... Where is your basis for that?

--------------------
My Site

Posts: 3038 | From: State of insanity | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
nekomatic
SuperFan!
Member # 376

Member Rated:
5
Icon 14 posted March 26, 2004 09:22      Profile for nekomatic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
nice one ooby, beat me to it... [Big Grin]

(edit: that should tell you everything you need to know about what I think about the "war on terrorism"...)

Posts: 822 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged
GMx

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1523

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 10:06      Profile for GMx     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think we should instead start a War On Error. The first "errorist" to be targeted-George W. Bush. This man has done more damage to this country than Osama Bin Laden has. Clinton may have lied about getting a blowjob in the oval office, but how can that lie compare to the lies of the jug-eared Alfred E. Newman moron that now occupies the White House? Lying about WMDs in Iraq so that he and "Big Time" Dick Cheney could take out their personal vendetta and get hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis killed? Lying about his "service" in the National Guard in Alabama? And anytime someone calls them on their inepitude and lies, they take it upon theirselves to drag the person through the mud because they can't take any criticism. So spilling a little semen on a blue dress pales in comparison with all the blood and tears that the Bush "errorists" are responsible for spilling. His bumbling will cost this country for generations.

I'm actually thinking of registering to vote again [Eek!] ( I used to be quite active in voting. I was even a poll worker for years) just to help get rid of this idiot. I just got tired of a system that seemed to be ran by the monied corporations and not the people. At one time my cynicism didn't get me down. I even voted for Mondale, just so I could say I didn't vote for that pinhead Ronnie Raygun.

As for GM's point about the evironmentalists not letting the oil co.s drill for oil here-I say GOOD! Let some big corporation destroy something that man can't build back just so some fatass soccer mom can drive her gas guzzling Suburban Assault Vechicle? No! The reliance on fossil fuels has just got to stop. In this day and age it's just plain stupid and lazy. If we have the technology that lets some rude asshole talk on the phone anywhere he wants, we can certainly develop transportation that doesn't require petroleum. Why haven't we? Because "Big Time" Dick Cheney and his Haliburton cronies, the petroleum industry and the big automakers don't want it to be developed.

GMx - channeling Colonel Panic

Posts: 5848 | From: S-4, Area 51 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
GameMaster
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1173

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 11:01      Profile for GameMaster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clinton may have lied about getting a blowjob in the oval office, but how can that lie compare to the lies of the jug-eared Alfred E. Newman moron that now occupies the White House?
The Clinton Adminstration gave us:
- Cattle Futures
- File Gate
- Who hired Craig Livingstone?
- Who hasn't the president slept with?
- Janet Reno's attack on Waco
- Joclyn Elder's of "If masterbation is taught in the home, then it needs to be taught at school."
- A blown up aspin factory

Lying about WMDs in Iraq so that he and "Big Time" Dick Cheney could take out their personal vendetta and get hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis killed?
exscuse you, Clinton believed that Iraq had WMDs too, and in fact had one of his uncompleted goals of the administration was to remove Sadam from power. Moreover, it was Clinton who slashed the CIAs budget and so we had to use the foreign intelegence.

Lying about his "service" in the National Guard in Alabama?
He graciously even allowed the American people to see his check stubs, which he wasn't obligated to do... Moreover, he never used his "service" record, the Democrates are the ones who brought it up. If you want to look at his service record, look at his record as Commander and Cheif. He's removed Sadam and the Talaban from power, which were two of his three large military goals.

And anytime someone calls them on their inepitude and lies, they take it upon theirselves to drag the person through the mud because they can't take any criticism.
Both sides do that, and always have. Moreover, name someone Bush has dragged through the mud. Seems the only thing I've heard him say about Kerry was quoting Kerry and then quoting his voting record... Intresting how what he says doesn't match what he does.

So spilling a little semen on a blue dress pales in comparison with all the blood and tears that the Bush "errorists" are responsible for spilling. His bumbling will cost this country for generations.
Cost how? Are you talking about exsadrated life loss, as addressed above or are you refering to the growth in the economy mentioned above.

I'm actually thinking of registering to vote again [Eek!] ( I used to be quite active in voting. I was even a poll worker for years) just to help get rid of this idiot.
A vote for Nadar perhaps? I trust you realize how devistating to this country Kerry would be... There would go the economy and the tax cuts. I could use one of those quips about your opinon not mattering because you haven't voted... but I won't.

As for GM's point about the evironmentalists not letting the oil co.s drill for oil here-I say GOOD! Let some big corporation destroy something that man can't build back just so some fatass soccer mom can drive her gas guzzling Suburban Assault Vechicle? No! The reliance on fossil fuels has just got to stop.
The methods that exsist for removing crued oil from the ground today is not as destructive as you might think. The relience on foreign oil needs to stop and can now... The relience on all oil will take some time, and there is a lot of money being tunneled to R&D of these technologies. There have been some great leaps forward, but there is not a reliable and portable alternitve that can replace the current car engine.

In this day and age it's just plain stupid and lazy. If we have the technology that lets some rude asshole talk on the phone anywhere he wants, we can certainly develop transportation that doesn't require petroleum.
Errr, run a car on the voltage of a car phone??? Oh, I know.... travel on Cell-phone transmitions...

Why haven't we?
Because the best we have at the moment for portable power is solar cells or electric/gass hybrids. The hybrids work well if your not carying a large load. The solar is still not viable for sustained speeds. The problem is porable power...

--------------------
My Site

Posts: 3038 | From: State of insanity | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
ooby
Highlie
Member # 2603

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 11:36      Profile for ooby     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GMx:
I think we should instead start a War On Error.

I got your war right here.
The War on Errorism

--------------------
"haven't you ever wondered if there's more to life than being really, really, rediculously good looking?"

Posts: 680 | From: South Jersey | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
greycat

Member # 945

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 12:00      Profile for greycat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GameMaster:
Can we put down a large terrorist orginization? maybe.

That's why I'll be voting against the Terrorist-in-Chief in November -- to try to put down the large terrorist organization that has taken over my country.

Say whatever bad things you want about Clinton; he was no saint, but compared to Bush, he was the fucking Messiah. I'd give him a blow job myself if it would get Bush out of office. Too bad it's not so easy -- especially when so many right-wing pinheads vote a straight party ticket even when the Antichrist Himself is the incumbent.

Posts: 1522 | From: Ohio, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
GameMaster
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1173

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 12:15      Profile for GameMaster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Say whatever bad things you want about Clinton; he was no saint, but compared to Bush, he was the fucking Messiah.
Pardon? Clinton was not better than Bush. I'm not for everything Bush stands for, but out of the current canidates and adding the Clintons for fun... I'd still take Bush to run this country.

I'd give him a blow job myself if it would get Bush out of office.
I would be willings to sell the video for a small share of the profits, but I don't think that will help you get him out of office.

Especially when so many right-wing pinheads vote a straight party ticket even when the Antichrist Himself is the incumbent.
And the left-winger pinheads and their straight party tickets.... Kerry in office would be nightmare.

Posts: 3038 | From: State of insanity | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
TMBWITW,PB

Member # 1734

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 12:23      Profile for TMBWITW,PB     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So it seems this fall we choose between a poke in the eye and a knee to the groin. Not fun. Maybe Nader actually has a chance this year. [crazy]

--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye."
óMiss Piggy

Posts: 4010 | From: my couch | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
dragonman97

SuperFan!
Member # 780

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 12:36      Profile for dragonman97   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TMBWITW,PB:
Maybe Nader actually has a chance this year. [crazy]

NOOOOOO! Nader needs to go away, lest he screw up the election again - the Republicans are almost cheering him on.

--------------------
There are three things you can be sure of in life: Death, taxes, and reading about fake illnesses online...

Posts: 9332 | From: Westchester County, New York | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
eDJ
Geek
Member # 1950

Icon 2 posted March 26, 2004 12:55      Profile for eDJ     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To quote a famous baseball coach Yogi Berra...it's
like deja vu all over again.

There is so much I'd like to say starting with Sen. Joe McCarthy or even FDR(and Pearl Harbour)
in this ongoing series of invisible wars and their rationales. These events begin to look like rigged games at the circus carnival after a while, however, with the leaders reduced to nothing more than barkers calling...step right up!...roll up, roll up, roll up!

Can you be at war with an enemy you cannot see?
To some degree, but it is demands more effort to garner intelligence on such an enemy...and intelligence is most of the battle in any conflict in these times.

What is the job of you armed forces in a war like this? More often as guards and a police force
in a defense effort. Special groups for offensive
efforts and penetration to gain intelligence.

How do you ever know the war has been won?
I would only guess the when political groups are voted out of office or dictators are overthrown.
(due to lack of enthusiasm of leaders)

And indeed can it ever be won? I doubt it, but it
generally is a front for other agendas. As an example, during Vietnam a tremendous amount of money was spent on an ultra secret effort laying cable in the north Atlantic which would detect Soviet submarines. The economy suffered in the USA for sometime afterwards and most people thought it was a consequence of the "war".

Calling it a war is also surely a big ego boost for the terrorists? Possibly, but it pales in
consideration for the ego bost of the leaders of
super powers where the military-industrial sector gains are the greatest for those backing the leader. Orwell's "1984" has been cited, but I would suggest looking at the famous childrens story "The Kings New Clothes" then use your imagination with interpetation. Those controlling the King(and his war) are far from harms way and generally do quite well at lining their pockets, while the spectators suffer at random.(usually to the extent of keeping the newsmedia with fresh fodder to serve as cheerleaders for the war)
Perhaps some days we will call these things "Vanity Wars".

So do you think it is helpful to call it a war or not? In some sectors it is. Abraham Lincoln(the founder of the GOP{grand old party})once remarked "every generation will have its foolish and petty men(women)". Generally the older ones
have investment portfolios and realize larger earnings during cycles of wars. Ever notice how
destroyed nations get aid and are rebuilt after the wars? For the young it is a fight where they will be lucky to emerge intact. As they age many will have investment portfolios...and the cycle repeat itself.(I served when I was young !!! so you young whippersnappers do your duty)

I'm reminded of a comedian named A. Whitney Brown.
He was known for his intellectual monologues and dry wit. In one routine he remarked about wars being so mechanized to the extent that they were being fought with "smart bombs". He quiped, "if the smart bombs got any smarter...they too would refuse to fight!" [Wink]

Presently in the USA it is election year. It is going to be a nasty one I think. Not only is there an abstract war there are abstract politicians. There is much dissatisfactions with the Bush Administration and a movement is growing which I would mention here. The "ABB" movement. It stands for Anyone But Bush. You will see buttons, bumper stickers, and a variety of graffiti spray painted on things such as railway cars, trucks, and stone edifices along the highways. This is what it means.(perhaps for Bush the real terrorist are the ones who perpetate these messages)

 -

eDJ

--------------------
I don't give a shit...I don't take any shit. I'm not in the shit business.

Posts: 131 | From: Ohio | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
eDJ
Geek
Member # 1950

Icon 2 posted March 26, 2004 13:00      Profile for eDJ     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To quote a famous baseball coach Yogi Berra...it's
like deja vu all over again.

There is so much I'd like to say starting with Sen. Joe McCarthy or even FDR(and Pearl Harbour)
in this ongoing series of invisible wars and their rationales. These events begin to look like rigged games at the circus carnival after a while, however, with the leaders reduced to nothing more than barkers calling...step right up!...roll up, roll up, roll up!

Can you be at war with an enemy you cannot see?
To some degree, but it is demands more effort to garner intelligence on such an enemy...and intelligence is most of the battle in any conflict in these times.

What is the job of your armed forces in a war like this? More often as guards and a police force
in a defense effort. Special groups for offensive
efforts and penetration to gain intelligence.

How do you ever know the war has been won?
I would only guess the when political groups are voted out of office or dictators are overthrown.
(due to lack of enthusiasm of leaders)

And indeed can it ever be won? I doubt it, but it
generally is a front for other agendas. As an example, during Vietnam a tremendous amount of money was spent on an ultra secret effort laying cable in the north Atlantic which would detect Soviet submarines. The economy suffered in the USA for sometime afterwards and most people thought it was a consequence of the "war".

Calling it a war is also surely a big ego boost for the terrorists? Possibly, but it pales in
consideration for the ego boost of the leaders of
super powers where the military-industrial sector gains are the greatest for those backing the leader. Orwell's "1984" has been cited, but I would suggest looking at the famous childrens story "The Kings New Clothes" then use your imagination with interpetation. Those controlling the King(and his war) are far from harms way and generally do quite well at lining their pockets, while the spectators suffer at random.(usually to the extent of keeping the newsmedia with fresh fodder to serve as cheerleaders for the war)
Perhaps some days we will call these things "Vanity Wars".

So do you think it is helpful to call it a war or not? In some sectors it is. Abraham Lincoln(the founder of the GOP{grand old party})once remarked "every generation will have its foolish and petty men(women)". Generally the older ones
have investment portfolios and realize larger earnings during cycles of wars. Ever notice how
destroyed nations get aid and rebuilt after the wars? For the young it is a fight where they will
be lucky to emerge intact.

I'm reminded of a comedian named A. Whitney Brown.
He was known for his intellectual monologues and dry wit. In one he remarked about wars being so mechanized to the extent that they were being fought with "smart bombs". He quiped, "if the smart bombs got any smarter...they too would refuse to fight!" [Wink]

Presently in the USA it is election year. It is going to be a nasty one I think. Not only is there an abstract war there are abstract politicians. There is much dissatisfactions with the Bush Administration and a movement is growing which I would mention here. The "ABB" movement. It stands for Anyone But Bush. You will see buttons, bumper stickers, and a variety of graffiti spray painted on things such as railway cars, trucks, and stone edifices along the highways. This is what it means.(perhaps for Bush the real terrorist are the ones who perpetrate these messages)

 -

eDJ

--------------------
I don't give a shit...I don't take any shit. I'm not in the shit business.

Posts: 131 | From: Ohio | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Dr Cyclops
Assimilated
Member # 986

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 18:12      Profile for Dr Cyclops   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let me put it this way:

+/- 3000 americans died on 9-11.

around 6000 innocents have been killed in Afghanistan.

around 10000 in Iraq.

Are american lives more valuable than "A-rabs"?

It certinally seems that way...

also, around 5000 children died in the time it takes you to read this whole thread.

I really don't care if I'm not a patriot for beliveing that all human life has value.

--------------------
When the W'rkncacnter came, Pthia was killed, and Yrro in anger, flung the W'rkncacnter into the sun. The sun burned them, but they swam on its surface.

Posts: 499 | From: Upon the slab, Unbroken. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cap'n Vic

Member # 1477

Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 23:31      Profile for Cap'n Vic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GMx:
I think we should instead start a War On Error. The first "errorist" to be targeted-George W. Bush. This man has done more damage to this country than Osama Bin Laden has. Clinton may have lied about getting a blowjob in the oval office, but how can that lie compare to the lies of the jug-eared Alfred E. Newman moron that now occupies the White House? Lying about WMDs in Iraq so that he and "Big Time" Dick Cheney could take out their personal vendetta and get hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis killed? Lying about his "service" in the National Guard in Alabama? And anytime someone calls them on their inepitude and lies, they take it upon theirselves to drag the person through the mud because they can't take any criticism. So spilling a little semen on a blue dress pales in comparison with all the blood and tears that the Bush "errorists" are responsible for spilling. His bumbling will cost this country for generations.

I'm actually thinking of registering to vote again [Eek!] ( I used to be quite active in voting. I was even a poll worker for years) just to help get rid of this idiot. I just got tired of a system that seemed to be ran by the monied corporations and not the people. At one time my cynicism didn't get me down. I even voted for Mondale, just so I could say I didn't vote for that pinhead Ronnie Raygun.

As for GM's point about the evironmentalists not letting the oil co.s drill for oil here-I say GOOD! Let some big corporation destroy something that man can't build back just so some fatass soccer mom can drive her gas guzzling Suburban Assault Vechicle? No! The reliance on fossil fuels has just got to stop. In this day and age it's just plain stupid and lazy. If we have the technology that lets some rude asshole talk on the phone anywhere he wants, we can certainly develop transportation that doesn't require petroleum. Why haven't we? Because "Big Time" Dick Cheney and his Haliburton cronies, the petroleum industry and the big automakers don't want it to be developed.

GMx - channeling Colonel Panic

Nice work Colonel....err, G. [Big Grin]

Oh, and GameMaster, you are a fucking idiot. Learn to spell. I'd swear you are from fucking Texas.

--------------------
(!) (T) = 8-D

Posts: 5471 | From: One of the drones from sector 7G | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xanthine

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 736

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted March 26, 2004 23:42      Profile for Xanthine     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GameMaster:
[
The Clinton Adminstration gave us:
- Cattle Futures
- File Gate
- Who hired Craig Livingstone?
- Who hasn't the president slept with?
- Janet Reno's attack on Waco
- Joclyn Elder's of "If masterbation is taught in the home, then it needs to be taught at school."
- A blown up aspin factory

This pales before the invasion of two nations that no foreign power has ever been able to effectively control and the consequences of which are the further alienation of those that want to destroy us. It also pales before lies that have sent people our age and younger home in boxes, and pales before the total evaporation of a budget surplus. Clinton did not make me ashamed to be an American. Bush has.

My bitterness towards the way the federal budget has fucked me over is posted elsewhere.

As for Nader, he can go to hell if he runs this year. Voting for Nader is throwing your vote down the drain, or, even worse, to the GOP. I'm no fan of Kerry, but Bush and his tax cuts for the super rich can kiss my sweaty ass. It's not like those tax cuts benefit me at all - I'm too fucking poor.
</rant>

--------------------
And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?
- The Decemberists

Posts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam