The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
another WAR 2003 Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 31st March 2003
  #451
Gear Addict
 

Jon
I have to say I hope you're right about Dubya, and I'm willing at my weakest moments to slightly entertain the thought that he may be an unwitting dupe, the the rest of the pack no way. That still scares me ,cause ther's nothing more dangerous then an ill informed zealot. However most of the time I think dubya is so crooked he has to screw his socks on and so dumb that he couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the instrucitions were written on the heel. He's not bright enough to come up with the plan but he's hip to it for sure. Really it's not a sophisticated plan, it's some what akin to that ape with the bone in Kubrick's 2001. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to bomb the bejeezus out of folks to keep them in line and send a message to a few others. And when you think about it in those simplistic terms it's just a
hollywood movie, unfortunately the suporting roles are almost always played by the women children and old folks. Damn him if he's just that stupid double damn him if he's that calice. Take care Logan
Old 31st March 2003
  #452
Lives for gear
 
Midlandmorgan's Avatar
 

Logan...exactly what do you base your professional opinion of Bush's intellect, honesty, and character on? I do apologize if you have personally met the man, administered him an IQ test, asked him to hold your money but he lost it anyway, and needed someone to wipe his nose...but I venture to say you haven't.

But alas, you base your opinion on media...I have never met him, but I am very good friends with many people who grew up with the man, some of which serve in the Government now...these friends I trust implicitly, and their opinions are what I base my judgement on...that is unless you are saying that anyone from Midland Texas is too stupid to know the truth as you claim it to be. (If you are, then there is no point of reading any further) In all fairness, I haven't judged your intellect or character based upon what you've posted here: what qualifies you or anyone else to judge President Bush's?

Oh...and for what it's worth: we are not bombing the bejeezus out them...we are hitting select military target...Look at Geissen, Dresden, Berlin, and other German towns circa 1945, or Hiroshima and Nagasaki...that my friend is bombing the bejeezus out of someone...we have 10,000 times that capability now, but choose not to use it...opting instead for the current plan of hitting only military sites. If we are going to argue perspectives, at least use a valid scale of measurement...that being said, the US has resisted, in spite of terrorist attacks on Coalition troops, in spite of the ever increasing evidence of chemical weapons, in spite of murdering our POWs on prime-time TV...

how's that for being stupid and inept? What would YOU do in a similar situation?
Old 31st March 2003
  #453
Lives for gear
 
bassmac's Avatar
 

Nice post M.

I have no first hand (or second hand) experience with President Bush, but the thing that impressed me (when I voted for him) is the fact he's fully aware, and acknowledges whatever shortcomings he may have, and is smart enough to surround himself with some very bright and talented advisors to help fill in the gaps. I'll always take that kind of man over a hard headed know-it-all, who really doesn't.


thumbsup
Old 31st March 2003
  #454
OK it seems that the US & UK have teamed up for a future carear of baddy bashing, call it the "worlds police force". 47 other countries have pleged support in various ways

Many here that are pro war hawks have come accross quite the expert in the ill's of the Iraqi regime and the plight of the Iraqi people.

Lets say, for the point of this exersize, that Saddam is the totally valid "target number 2" after `Bin Laden being the established target number 1.

I put up a challenge up to all the hawks.

Nominate the next "bad bunch" that needs or deserves the might of the US & UK military to make it 'get with the program" or be brought to heel.

DO please name one...

I put it to you that you cant.

I put it to you that you WILL however be able to tell me who the next evil baddie most deserving to be bashed is, once a comprehensive PR job has been done on you by the US & UK governments.

This is a PR war IMHO.

OK,

Q - who or what organization should be next? A valid, target number 3, and why?

Go ahead, prove me wrong! Hawks, show me that you aren't just spoon fed Rumsfelds "hypnotic elixir", after all, you all know the deal about Iraq.

Lets see you!

Try to stick to the simple questions...

Who? & Why?

it's a simple enough challenge!

Old 31st March 2003
  #455
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Jules,

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
Many here that are pro war hawks have come accross quite the expert in the ill's of the Iraqi regime and the plight of the Iraqi people.
I suppose you are not a "pro war hawk" because presumably you believe in saving or improving human lives, the basis of peace.

None of us are experts, and none of us have access to classified information that the experts might have, but if I've been brainwashed by a good PR job, I'd sincerely like to hear your point of view with regards to:

1. What would your opinion be about Saddam's regime?

2. Would it be advisable for the US and UK to pull out now and leave Saddam in place?

3. What do you propose as the best course of action at this point to improve/help the plight of the Iraqi people, including the Kurds, the Shiites, and the POW deserters?

I promise to read your reply with an open mind!

***************************************

As to your challenge question....you are basically asking for a crystal ball guess at the future. The next engagement, whenever and wherever it is, might involve WMD or terrorism. It may be a state, but it just as likely may be a diffuse, nebulous organisation. No one knows in advance who is going to actually succeed in obtaining WMD, or start threatening to use them, or do the next high-profile terrorist act, or start actively funding it or paying $25,000 to the parents of martyrs who kill you. Sometimes the threats don't materialize where you expect they might. Then you have the question of how to respond...among other things, response depends on who is targeted and how global the threat is perceived to be by the various countries. Some threats might be dealt with regionally, for instance if Russia, China and Japan put some pressure on their N. Korean neighbor. Threats could require a global, multilateral, unilateral or coalitionary response. It depends on a case by case basis.

That I can't foresee the future does not mean, IMHO, that I've been duped by a clever government PR job. Especially when I am more exposed to non-US media than to US media.
Old 31st March 2003
  #456
Lives for gear
 

First, Jules, let me ask a question for clarification of yours.

Do we, or do we not have the right/duty to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and if/as they become virulent beyond our current imagination, chemical and biological weapons?

IMO, this is the critical question of our time. The world in years to come will be affected immeasurably by our corporate answer. If the answer is "Yes", then we are in for some unpleasant times over the next decade. Likely every bit as dangerous as things ever got in the last century.

If the answer is "No", then I have no idea of what sort of legacy and quality of life we leave for our children and their children.

Good God, what if by the year 2020 nuclear weapons are much more readily available in any number of countries and any organization in the world with some cash can make it's voice heard not with 10 pounds of C4 in an Israeli deli, but with 50 Kilotons of backpack nuke in any city in the world? That is the reality that awaits us in one all too likely scenario. I wish it were merely sensationalism on my part. It is not, IMO. Do you think the Palestinian conflict is the only or last one to be? There will be an endless supply of causes to come.

History does not have any real guidance for us here. We have no precedents for this. Technology, if not arbitrarily controlled by someone, will soon put power in the hands of a disaffected few that has been unimaginable throughout all of human history before 1945.

First only one country had nuclear weapons, then two, then three, then five, now seven, eight or nine (no one is certain). And for 58 years now, no one has used nuclear weapons in anger. Would anyone care to predict another 58 years if there is no determined effort to prevent their spread? Nevermind the fact that technology could well make biological weapons even more fearsome at some point.

So my question is, does anyone have the right to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons? And if so, who?

That has much bearing upon your question, IMO.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #457
Jon & Brian you both swerved the question, it was real simple!

I will study your lenglthy avoidances and get back to you. in due course.
Old 31st March 2003
  #458
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
Jon & Brian you both swerved the question, it was real simple!

I will study your lenglthy avoidances and get back to you. in due course.
I didn't dodge at all, Jules. I asked for clarification.

If you say we have the right/duty to control nukes, it's simple.

Number 3 is N Korea and Number 4 will be Iran. It will be very ugly.

If you say we do not have the right/duty to control nukes, then we all chill out and hope that what I believe would be the inevitable consequences never materialize. That would be the most wishful of thinking, however, IMO.

I cannot predict the future. I can't even predict the winner of the Superbowl here on the GS forum. I'm just guessing, like everybody else. But I'm afraid we may not have the belly for what needs to be done, and consequently, will leave our children (I have 3 beautiful daughters I love dearly) to deal with a much worse world than we inherited.

I'm reminded of Gandalf speaking to Frodo in the mines of Moria.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #459
"I'm certain you'll say this is a non-answer, because it depends on a case by case basis, really. That does not mean, IMHO, that I've been duped by a clever government PR job."

No Jon I will just say that the PR broadcasts haven't started yet, so you have no clue to the answer, but when the PR machine starts rollin' your are sure to have my answer!

Brian, MASSIVE avoidance there and your twisting and turning to evade the question will take a long answer to unravel..But I will. Meanwhile here's an old family saying handed down to me, "it's rude to answer a question with a question"

heh

OK, I am done, not as long as I thought.

"Do we, or do we not have the right/duty to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and if/as they become virulent beyond our current imagination, chemical and biological weapons? "

Not if the persuit of the 'limiting' goals via military ineptly kicks a MORE deadly hornets nest, leading to WW3, and NOT when political means might work better.

And now Brian, back to my original question, can I press you (or any other pro Bush hawk) for an answer?
Old 31st March 2003
  #460
Lives for gear
 

Jules,

FWIW, I'm choosing not to take offense at being labeled a pro Bush, pro war Hawk.

I figure you're a pretty good guy and don't mean it too unkindly.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #461
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Yeah, same for me -- I didn't vote for Bush and don't consider myself particularly pro-war.

I feel I answered your crystal ball question as truthfully as I can. Sure, it might be N. Korea or Iran, but it depends on what these countries actually DO in the future.

Again, I would sincerely like to know what you would propose for the situation at hand with respect to the questions in my last post. They require no future-gazing on your part and would move you from merely criticizing others to the more pro-active position of actually proposing solutions.
Old 31st March 2003
  #462
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules

Not if the persuit of the 'limiting' goals via military ineptly kicks a MORE deadly hornets nest, leading to WW3, and NOT when political means might work better.

So you're not really talking conceptually or here, so much as technically and tactically?

That is, if the military action is shrewd and effective rather than inept, you're in favor? I'm not sure I follow you accurately. Could you clarify?


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #463
Old 31st March 2003
  #464
Lives for gear
 

One more thing, Jules.

MASSIVE avoidance? I think not.

What I'm trying to determine is if you believe there is any case in which military force is appropriate as the remedy?

If not, all answers to your question are morally wrong for you. Strawman.

But if you do believe there can be a real justification, then I can only answer if the criteria for future intervention can be allowed by you to potentially be something other than "PR", which you assume in your original question. I am trying to establish that criteria.

And BTW, Jesus answered the Pharisee's questions with a question of his own, as a condition for his reply, on more than one occasion. As much as I might revere your family's ancient traditions regarding questions, I'll have to give the nod to Jesus for role model.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #465
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
No Jon I will just say that the PR broadcasts haven't started yet, so you have no clue to the answer, but when the PR machine starts rollin' your are sure to have my answer!
How does that jibe with my being exposed to the anti-American French media all day? I'm in Paris, remember?

My clients are French-Arab Muslims who are doing lock-out mix sessions since the start of the war and we watch more Al-Jazeera than CNN. I've enjoyed talking with them and hearing their views.

Hoo boy, Jules, you're going to have to do better than that.
Old 31st March 2003
  #466
OK I now have to deal full time with both your evasions.

"So you're not really talking conceptually or here, so much as technically and tactically?

That is, if the military action is shrewd and effective rather than inept, you're in favor? I'm not sure I follow you accurately. Could you clarify?"

To clarify, if military action in 'dealing with' Nuke / Chem / or Bio threats, can trigger a WW3 then political means may be a better route. Anyway, with such high stakes, careering off to kick ass globaly without the backing of the world is, unasked for, imperious and dangerous.

Say you had a friend that had given up smoking for years but had a lit ciggarette in his mouth that was a danger to his non smoking & health, would you

a) Go up and say "hey, thats a dumb idea". For his own good?
2) Nag at him until he put it out? For his own good?
3) Set up 1000 yards down the road, with a high powered rifle with a telescopic sight and shoot it out of his mouth for his own good?

Any how, I take it the question is a bust, no answer from Brian & Jon.

My point?

I think Bush & Rumsfeld HAVE more plans in the pipeline for global ass kicking, it's just the PR machine they use hasnt gotten going on them yet
Old 31st March 2003
  #467
"One more thing, Jules.

MASSIVE avoidance? I think not.

What I'm trying to determine is if you believe there is any case in which military force is appropriate as the remedy?

If not, all answers to your question are morally wrong for you. Strawman."

You spin, you twist & turn, look for escape routes.....

THE QUESTION PLEASE?

Sheesh!

(I will have to see if I can get some background on your biblical Q&A tactic!)

Old 31st March 2003
  #468
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
"One more thing, Jules.

MASSIVE avoidance? I think not.

What I'm trying to determine is if you believe there is any case in which military force is appropriate as the remedy?

If not, all answers to your question are morally wrong for you. Strawman."

You spin, you twist & turn, look for escape routes.....

THE QUESTION PLEASE?

Sheesh!

(I will have to see if I can get some background on your biblical Q&A tactic!)


I've given you my prediction of the next two counties, in order.

Now I'm confused. Are we still speaking English here?

BT
Old 31st March 2003
  #469
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
Any how, I take it the question is a bust, no answer from Brian & Jon.
Brian and I both actually replied to your question. I wonder what you wanted to hear.

So, you going to take a stab at my questions?
Old 31st March 2003
  #470
1. What would your opinion be about Saddam's regime?

Nasty bunch I am sure.

2. Would it be advisable for the US and UK to pull out now and leave Saddam in place?

Thats like asking shall I continue to make a sandwich or shall I put the mayonase jar back in the refridgerator, after dropping it! It's a mess! At this stage, who can say? It would have been advisable to have not split from the UN in the first place.

3. What do you propose as the best course of action at this point to improve/help the plight of the Iraqi people, including the Kurds, the Shiites, and the POW deserters?

At this point in time I would say they are all MORE in peril now than before Saddam was attacked. How to resolve the mess? I suppose press on with the military action. I put it to you that you didnt care a rats ass about the people you mention above a few months back. I doubt a single Iraq citizen even crossed your mind 6 months ago and that you would have more sorrow over hearing about a friends pet dieing than hearing a year ago that an Iraqi had died at the hand of Saddam.

Now they are "cause de jour" served to you in a sesame seed bun.
Old 31st March 2003
  #471
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 

Interesting speculation:

When the hostilites eventually do end, will WE be still talking to eachother?
Old 31st March 2003
  #472
Sorry Brian, I did miss North Korea & Iran buried in your answers!
Old 31st March 2003
  #473
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules


(I will have to see if I can get some background on your biblical Q&A tactic!)


Mark 11: 27-33 is one instance.


BT
Old 31st March 2003
  #474
Lives for gear
 
5down1up's Avatar
 

1000s of iraqis who left their country once are going back home to fight , not for saddam , for their homeland .
if the other " evil empires " decide the same , its obvious that the u.s will get a KICK in the ass . if the mideast sticks together , the american troops are trapped & dead .
they had a fat lip before this **** started they even called their own war strategy " excellent ".
you wanna bring freedom to iraq , those people dont even know what freedom is . over 50% of the iraqi population dont know anything else than saddam . the only thing invaders like britain brought to iraq was pain . collonialism times are over .

stop it , now
Old 31st March 2003
  #475
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by 5down1up
. if the mideast sticks together , the american troops are trapped & dead .
Thanks for that sentiment. It's heartwarming, for those of us who's countries are actually involved.

Peace and love to you, as well.


Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #476
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 

As an American and a human being i really really want to believe that the war is a just one, being fought for altruistic reasons, and that the result will be a better world.

But unfortunately (unlike some of our more youthful members) I am old enough to remember how the US government consistently lied to me (and everyone else) about why we were in Vietnam (using a lot of similar arguments), how we were winning the war, the massive (or should I say fantastical) enemy casualty numbers, etc. Anyone who wants to see a classic case of a deliberate policy of government disinformation and deceit need only read "The Pentagon Papers". (Remember, they were released not by a liberal left-winger, but by a hawk who was a major architect of the war who, upon spending time in Vietnam, was shocked to find the whole endeavor was built upon a fabric of lies, including the Gulf of Tonkin "incident".)

I hope things are not the same now as then. I hope the policy of governmental fabrication and lies is no longer. But how can the average citizen really know? Are we supposed to ignore history and doom ourselves to repetition?

I'm not condemning the US government, nor giving it blind support. I honestly don't know, and only historical perspective may ever give us the real story. And, rightly or wrongly, I can certainly understand how citizens of other countries around the world may not be willing to blindly trust the US governement's motives. I'm not sure i do either.
Old 31st March 2003
  #477
Lives for gear
 
5down1up's Avatar
 

brian :

i am not trying to say " i´ve told you before " with a smile upon my face and counting the points i made cause i was probably right !

historys repeating all the time ... especially what we call evil .

sending +-20 year old kids into the dessert to fight for some personal belongings is the WORST idea you can have if you call yourself a leader . cause its obvious that those guys aint gonna have much fun over there .
sure we could say , well they decided to join the army ...
but if they would be raised with a little more brain between their two ears , they would have said :

you mr.bush can go there , we dont give a **** .

but thats another story how industrial leading countrys grow their "no brained robots" ... would like to know how many soldiers eating dust right now are usually living in beverly hills .

i call it simply BLACKMAILING

that bush isnt very intelligent is already proofen . that probably the average american isnt very intelligent is proofen a long time ago . the american still keeps thinking " if i wanna fly , i can do it "
so , try it ...

this is not leadership , this is obviously LYING

bin laden was supported by the u.s
saddam was supported by the u.s

YOUR GOVERMENT CREATED THOSE MONSTERS ,
maybe it was done on purpose , so if they ever have bad economy , they pull the same old trigger ... WAR MAKES $$$
and its not a bad bonus having some resources as well .
the same goes with israel . jewishs are holding a lot of money in the u.s , thats why they support em . if mexico would be israel the borders would be W I D E open .

but the u.s goverement again havent planned that this war can affect the u.s as well . why didnt they fight russia . why didnt they take out saddam in gulf war 1 ??? they told the iraqi people to march against baghdad , thats what they did , the only persons who were missing was the u.s. A LIE AGAIN !!!
those people dont trust you anymore and that more than understandable . you cant play god , a lot of other leaderes tried that before , and failed .
Old 31st March 2003
  #478
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by 5down1up

that bush isnt very intelligent is already proofen . that probably the average american isnt very intelligent is proofen a long time ago . the american still keeps thinking " if i wanna fly , i can do it "
so , try it ...

Where do I even start here. You start this thread off with a post containing, "**** OFF BUSH".

According to you, he's "proven" to not be very intelligent.

Average Americans "were proven a long time ago to probably not be very intelligent" as well.

But we're also jerks because we dominate the world both culturally and militarily, yes?

IMHO, you've tied yourself into illogical knots so badly with overwrought, psuedointellectual philosophy that you seem incapable of seeing your own incongruity.

Hey, somebody go back through these posts and compile all of the insults and accusations heaped upon Americans and their government. It's become quite an impressive list, I believe.

I think the unintelligent Americans here are doing a pretty decent job of not retaliating in like fashion, for the most part.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 31st March 2003
  #479
Lives for gear
 
5down1up's Avatar
 

you remember when someone said :

"**** CHIRAQ" for testing a-bombs , theres nothing to argue about , **** him [ DOT ] !!!
there is NO other point of view !!!

evil is not falling from the sky , its presented by men and sold as theres a need to be , and i keep still saying , NO ITS NOT .
there is no need for a compromise , thats just a human idea for not suffering so hard , but they still will .
you can make every story 100000³ pages long , but the message will always be real short .

if i wanna say **** BUSH i say it **** HIM [ DOT ] !!!

i wanna see people telling their opinions and not just following a stupid idea . he has no power at all without the people . close to everybody could beat the **** out of bush in 2 minutes .
he is NOBODY . he denies EVERY idea that is not grown in his garden . he doesnt care about our world . and if a country calls themselves NO.1 i wanna see some NO.1 action&ideas not just some stupid stuff a 5 year old could have done better !!!!!!!!!!!!

the u.s is wasting electricity , they still drive cars which eat the oil , the industrial standarts in fact of polution are a joke , they dont give a **** .

so at least , i can say **** BUSH


and if i say they , i dont blame you !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old 31st March 2003
  #480
Gear Maniac
 
ultima's Avatar
 

5down1up....!!! Hear Hear.......

I wholeheartedly agree...

March for justice......take a look will you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I honestly find it amazing that there are actually people trying to justify this war......dont we learn anything from history????

bottom line......More killing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
mastermix / Mastering forum
5
Nick A. / So much gear, so little time
9
Nu-tra / So much gear, so little time
40

Forum Jump
Forum Jump