War

[platinum_angel]

ok i know that its on everyones mind so lets just get this over with.

i want to know from everyones point of view what they think about war. are you anti or are you pro. do you think that bush is doing the right thing. what do you think of bush in general. do you think saddam is lying or do think he is innocent. do you think the french are doing the right thing by saying give them more time. and most of all give you general opinion on war. we all know that it is going to happen.

don't touch this thread ryan or i will have to open a can of ****-**

[kungfupanda]

well here is a post i put on another forum that prettymuch told my point of view against some anti-war folks:

Hmmm...I don't see much truth or reason to kickingbird's quote. I am backing this confrontation you call war...but for slightly different reasons than Bush. Hussein(sp) is a war-criminal and should be punished. This will give him what is due.

What about the oil? Are you saying, that if you and your country had the chance to take out a war-criminal AND lower your gas prices significanty, you wouldn't take that oppertunity?? It is, to some degree, selfishness and it is nothing to look down upon. If you were devoid of selfishness, I garuntee you would be in a sorry situation, giving everything away to strangers and such. Such an old and trusted survival tool. So, be carefull, lest you make yourself a hipocrite by bashing selfishness.

I am also a firm supporter of Israel for reasons we don't need to discuss here. Saddam, with his weapons, intent, and volitility, he is a sure threat to Israel sometime in the near future.

Whether you believe it or not, Saddam supports terrorism. Why? Because it targets his greatest enemies. Eliminate Saddam and make Iraq democratic, and you severely cut supplies to terrorist...if your'e worried about that sort of thing.

Why "wage war" (if that's what you call it) without the support of the U.N.? Easy, that organization has not stood by a single word it has said aside from not supporting the United States. If they tell Saddam to disarm and he doesn't, they cower and don't follow up. They watch him use gas on his own people, burn oil fields, and and murder thousands...yet they do nothing to inforce their rules and institutions. It is time someone did some enforcing.

So, Bush(who i don't necisarilly like BTW) is a coward because he is in a powerfull position that requires responsability, he stands to eliminate Saddam Hussein(who is a murderous war criminal of epic perportions) when the united nations cowers in a hole? I fail to see where using your power to uphold justice is cowardice. HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE DOES SADDAM HUSSEIN HAVE TO MURDER BEFORE YOU WILL SUPPORT HIS REMOVAL?

Sure there are risk...in fact, Hussein is going to put his people in the line of fire. Thus, their deaths will surely be his fault.

Bush can have whatever reasons he likes BUT...In case you don't get it...killing Saddam Hussein, and morphing Iraq to be democratic is a GOOD thing. This is justice being served, people. Like it or not. And I don't think you are any better than those who you accuse of being cowards. What are you afraid of?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This little contraversial rant is brought to you by: Panda a.k.a. Matt

[ryanhall]

While I'm sure that everyone here has tons of enlightening, interesting, and vital information that they would like to report to the forum, I'm sorry to say that they won't get the chance to do it. As I have said for literally the third time this week, this is NOT a forum for political debate. The end.

[ryanhall]

don't touch this thread ryan or i will have to open a can of ****-**

Unfortunately, I saw this part after I closed the thread. On a related note, I fail to see the threat.

If you don't want me closing your threads, post them in a forum I don't moderate. Of course, then Tim or Terry will get rid of them for me.

Signing off,
Ryan
Despotic Ruler of His Defend.net Forums and Destroyer of All Politically-Oriented Discussions.

[terry]

Ryanhall,

I suppose Tim or Dierdre would have the final say, but I would not seek to limit discussion of political matters. My objection to this thread is that it is not related to the subject of Mixed Martial Arts. It would therefore be my recommendation to move this thread to the Open Access forum on this site rather than close it.

Respectfully,

Terry

[JIMI]

thanks Terry! glad its repoened because i desperately wanted to respond to it. All i have to say is that to anyone who objects this war, please, please, please read the UN resolutions from 12 years ago that Saddam had signed and agreed to. Its quite clear that he has not complied for 12 years with any of the resolutions. And weapons of mass destruction is only a small part of the resolution. There are many other matters in the resolutions that he has never lived up to either. And it is made quite clear that if Saddam does not comply with these resolutions that military action will be taken. Its all there in black and white in the resolutions that the UN drew up! Anyone who thinks that its about oil is sorely misinformed by eurotrash nonsense. If it was about oil, then why didnt the US go after it in the first war? Because it never has been about the oil, rather in turn it has been about the safety of the humans on this planet.

[ryanhall]

Terry,
I'll leave it up to Tim in the future. If politics is OK with you, it's OK with me.

[platinum_angel]

i hate you ryan you choad.

ok sorry terry here's a little add in. how will martial arts play a part in the war which is plretty inevitable. anyone in this forum in the armed forces. i was talking to someone that is in the army and he sayed they use kickboxing.

[ryanhall]

There is no set standard for unarmed combat in the armed forces. Each individual unit may have its own system(s). Secondly, there is not enough time to teach someone to properly fight empty handed using conventional means. Time is rightly taken up with weapons training, drilling, and tactics instruction.

how will martial arts play a part in the war which is plretty inevitable

Whoever is losing will be forced to rely on them just before they die. You heard it here first.

[terry]

Ryan,

Let's talk with Tim about this so we stay on the same page.
My personal take as a moderator is to eliminate the most graphic obscenity in such a way as to have a reasonable parent of a teenage kid NOT consider this site as a bad influence. (This is inherently a subjective judgement I realize.)

I would let 'em rip on politics in this area of the forum. But if we do we may need to moderate this forum a bit more in the future to clean up the occasional mess. To my experience, online political free-speech discussion frequently turns into a bar room brawl of name calling. Left completely unmoderated, that can have the effect of driving the most constructive contributors away. Refer to the message boards on yahoo for an example of non-moderated online political speech.

In any case, that's only my humble opinion. On this site, Tim and Dierdre outrank the 1st Ammendment every time.

Cheers,

Terry

[ryanhall]

Sounds good, Terry. I'll drop you an e-mail so we can figure everything out. Thanks.

Ryan

[Szczepankiewicz]

Wow,

talk about taking a moderator out at the knees....



Platinum

in the army and he sayed they use kickboxing

Use it for what?

They gonna kick someone in the head wearing the LBE and Ruck?



Spanky

[terry]

Originally posted by Szczepankiewicz
Wow,

talk about taking a moderator out at the knees....

Yah, that's MT for you. We go for the legs.

T

[platinum_angel]

well thank you guys for clearing this up on my thread. the reason i made is so that no one would talk politics on other threads and just post it on this thread.

[Szczepankiewicz]

Or MAYBE it's just because you're an idiot?

Just playin' man.

Spanky