|
 mntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
 
Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 6 years, 6 months
|
 Re: What would it take to convince someone  [Re: Xlea321]
#1259926 - 01/29/03 06:05 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
How do you prove a negative?
You show them the place and you would have vidio taped it for proof. Then forensic science would do the rest. That might not prove it was ALL destroyed but it would pretty much tie our hands.
--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all
|
 Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: silversoul7]
#1259933 - 01/29/03 06:07 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
that he had these weapons at the end of the first Gulf War and now we don't know where they are.
I think we know where the majority of them went. And remember chemical weapons can't be stored for years - they become inactive and totally useless after a couple of years. So unless he's buying more (from who?) then all the chemical weapons he had at the end of the gulf war are now inactive.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: mntlfngrs]
#1259940 - 01/29/03 06:10 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You show them the place and you would have vidio taped it for proof
And you really think Powell isn't going to say "We don't know where or what they filmed"?
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
 Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Xlea321]
#1259946 - 01/29/03 06:14 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You show them the place and you would have vidio taped it for proof
And you really think Powell isn't going to say "We don't know where or what they filmed"?
No, I don't think Powell would say that. He's not one of the warmongers pushing this war. But Donald Rumsfeld might say something like that.
--------------------
 
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: silversoul7]
#1259948 - 01/29/03 06:15 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not so impressed by Powell. Pilger called him "the false liberal" which I think is pretty accurate.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
mntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 6 years, 6 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Xlea321]
#1259955 - 01/29/03 06:29 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Sure it might be more of the same BS but don't you think that these are things you would do if you were trying to comply? And if they showed us a destruction sight it would (I'm pretty sure) have some sort of residue that forensics could detect. I mean he should be able to show SOMETHING.
--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 1 month, 13 days
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Anonymous]
#1260110 - 01/29/03 09:01 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Bush convinced me. He has very strong arguments.
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: zeronio]
#1260117 - 01/29/03 09:04 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
He defies all Logiq.
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 1 month, 13 days
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Anonymous]
#1260131 - 01/29/03 09:16 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Proove that he has disarmed.
It's funny that nobody finds nothing wrong with that. Since when do you have to prove to be innocent?
|
mntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 6 years, 6 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: zeronio]
#1260134 - 01/29/03 09:20 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
He must prove that he fulfilled the contractual agreement that he signed. Contracts are a good way to sign away rights that you might have otherwise had.
--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Xlea321]
#1260395 - 01/30/03 01:47 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Alex123 writes:
That have slaughtered 600,000 innocent kids...
That is bullshit and you know it is. Some of the newer members may not have seen the actual words from the UN report (written by the people that actually conducted the studies) that show those figures are incorrect, but YOU have... I have posted them four times now, and each time you have fallen silent. Shall I post them again so you can ignore them again?
...and left the majority of Iraq a wasteland with no public amenties...
Again, bullshit. The majority of Iraq is not a wasteland, or if it is, it is only because it was a wasteland before the Gulf War started. No public amenities? They were last bombed a dozen years ago. Please explain to us how Hussein seems to have no difficulty feeding and equipping a standing army of 600,000, with another half million reserves. How he has no difficulty maintaining his fifty presidential palaces. How he has no difficulty funding his weapons development programs. How freakin' hard can it be to rebuild a water treatment plant or two and replace a few miles of water pipes?
What consequences do you think Bush and his oil corporation masters will suffer for invading Iraq?
They are not "invading" Iraq, they are threatening to finish a war that was put on hold for a dozen years while Hussein flouts the surrender agreement that SHOULD HAVE ended it.
You mean like America?
What was the last country that America conquered and held by force of arms?
You have yet to inform me what punishment Bush is going to recieve.
Here's the deal... you tell me what punishment Hussein deserves, and I'll tell you what punishment Bush deserves. From what you have posted on the subject, I have concluded that you believe Hussein deserves NO punishment other than some bad press, and precious little of that. Here's your chance to prove me wrong.
Why do I not find this "do nothing" stance surprising coming from someone whose stance on any situation is to bury his head in the sand and depend on the kindness of others?
Don't try to defend yourself from armed criminals -- disarm yourself and depend on their mercy.
Don't buy a car with any safety features -- depend on other motorists to never collide with you.
Don't expend any effort trying to get ahead -- depend on the government to seize the goods of others and give them to you.
Don't try to enforce a surrender agreement that has been flouted for twelve years -- depend on a homicidal maniac to change his ways.
Don't try to capture those responsible for an act of terror -- depend on the Taliban to hand him over to you.
Do you hold these views because you are a deeply religious person who believes in turning the other cheek; one who believes that the meek shall inherit the earth? You'd do well here in the Dominican Republic, Alex -- the standard Dominican rationale for doing nothing and hoping for the best, even in the face of all available evidence, is a shrug and a fatalistic "Si Dios quiere," which translates as "If God wills it."
A question for you -- if the UN supported this proposed military action the way they were supported the Gulf War, would you be protesting as loudly? If not, why not? After all, if it is wrong to threaten to "invade" Iraq, it is wrong whether the threat is from a single country or a coalition of countries, isn't it? Come to think of it, you never did answer the questions I asked you three times months ago. Let's see if you are willing to answer them now.
1) Do you agree with the UN decision to expel from Kuwait by force the Iraqi occupation army in 1991?
Yes _______
No ________
2) Do you agree with their decision to leave Hussein in power in 1991 rather than eliminating him when they had the chance?
Yes _______
No ________
And today I add a third:
3) If Hussein continues to ignore the terms of the 1991 surrender agreement should the UN continue to do nothing more than maintain economic sanctions and file more condemnatory resolutions?
Yes_____
No______
pinky
--------------------
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Phred]
#1260596 - 01/30/03 03:41 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Some of the newer members may not have seen the actual words from the UN report
Guys like Dennis Halliday seem to believe it. He was in charge of the Iraq oil-for-food programme and resigned in disgust at the sanctions.
Shall I post them again so you can ignore them again?
You can post them. Whether they will be taken with anything but a pinch of salt is another matter entirely. I think at the last count 3 UN people had resigned in disgust calling the sanctions "genocide" against the Iraqi people.
They were last bombed a dozen years ago.
Horseshit. There have been hundreds of bombing missions since 1991. You are living in a Bush fantasy if you actually believe this garbage. I remember one american military guy saying that after 12 years of bombing raids the biggest problem would be finding something left standing to bomb.
They are not "invading" Iraq
You positive about that?
What was the last country that America conquered and held by force of arms?
As opposed to supporting and arming lunatics to do your dirty work for you? I think at the last count it was around forty armed coups since 1945.
I have concluded that you believe Hussein deserves NO punishment
Don't be silly. Saddam isn't going to be "punished" for christs sake. The people who are going to be punished are the innocent Iraqi people.
Do you agree with the UN decision to expel from Kuwait by force the Iraqi occupation army in 1991?
The UN ordered Israel to leave the west bank 30 years ago. We are still waiting for them to do so. No force has so far been used. Why?
Do you agree with their decision to leave Hussein in power in 1991
Do you mean do I agree with invading any country with a leader George Bush doesn't like anymore? There are dozens of leaders as bad as Saddam. Most of them american allies. Do we invade them too?
If Hussein continues to ignore the terms of the 1991 surrender agreement should the UN continue to do nothing more than maintain economic sanctions and file more condemnatory resolutions?
No, it should lift the sanctions. If Israel can flout the UN for 30 years without a single sanction being imposed clearly there are other ways of dealing with the problem. 600,000 dead kids isn't solving the problem.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Anonymous
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: zeronio]
#1261279 - 01/30/03 08:05 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
The treaty Saddam signed to prevent his own overthrow called for him to disarm, thus the burden of proof is on him. Like Bush said, he has to lay out his weapons and publicly destroy them.
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 2 years, 28 days
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Anonymous]
#1261362 - 01/30/03 08:31 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I disagree...Bush is telling the world that Saddam has these supposed weapons of mass destruction, and this is his primary reason for attacking Iraq. I would say the burden of proof is on Bush to prove that these weapons exist in order to initiate a pre-emptive strike.
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
Anonymous
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Anonymous]
#1261610 - 01/30/03 09:33 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I've repeatedly asked a pro-war person for a link documenting such a strike is legal. No one has obliged. No one in favor of the war ever comes up with anything besides bullshit rhetoric. If you find me a decent case for it, I would be more than happy to read it.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Phred]
#1261627 - 01/30/03 09:39 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Hold your horses there little buddy. I'll be back tonite with a whole damned bag of links about how the USA themselves have violated more UN resolutions than anyone else. Do you think it makes sense that we go around picking and choosing wars to start when someone breaks rules we don't even follow ourselves? The "UN credibility" argument is one of the main ones for war, and holds absolutely no water. And I will prove that when I come home tonight.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Xlea321]
#1261935 - 01/30/03 11:37 AM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Alex123 writes:
Guys like Dennis Halliday seem to believe it.
Gee, Alex, whatever happened to "Making up your own mind after careful thought? Thoroughly esearched before arriving at your conclusions. Making decisions based on other reasons than blindly following what someone else tells you"? Did it ever occur to you that Mr. Halliday might have his own agenda? When I posted (four times now) the excerpts from the actual UN study that showed those numbers were bogus, you didn't even bother to read the actual study. So much for a "thoroughly researched" opinion. So much for not "blindly following what someone else tells you".
You can post them. Whether they will be taken with anything but a pinch of salt is another matter entirely.
So if they are the conclusions of the people who actually conducted the research, they are to be taken with a pinch of salt, but if someone else misreads the studies and reaches an erroneous conclusion, his opinion is to be taken uncritically? Uh huh.
I think at the last count 3 UN people had resigned in disgust calling the sanctions "genocide" against the Iraqi people.
Of course these people never bother to point out that if Saddam had followed the terms of the surrender agreement there would have been no sanctions.
There have been hundreds of bombing missions since 1991.
Of course there have been. But not against public amenities. Please explain to us how Hussein seems to have no difficulty feeding and equipping a standing army of 600,000 (with another half million reserves), maintaining his fifty presidential palaces, funding his weapons development programs, but is somehow unable to rebuild a water treatment plant or two and replace a few miles of water pipes in twelve years?
Don't be silly. Saddam isn't going to be "punished" for christs sake.
So my conclusion was correct -- you believe Hussein deserves no punishment.
The people who are going to be punished are the innocent Iraqi people.
If Hussein had complied with the surrender agreement, there would have been no need for sanctions. He wouldn't even have had to step down. Conditions in Iraq are a direct result of Hussein's actions. He bears full responsibility for them.
I notice that you are still (surprise, surprise) afraid to answer my questions:
1) Do you agree with the UN decision to expel from Kuwait by force the Iraqi occupation army in 1991?
Yes _______
No ________
2) Do you agree with their decision to leave Hussein in power in 1991 rather than eliminating him when they had the chance?
Yes _______
No ________
No, it should lift the sanctions.
Ah. In other words, I was correct again in concluding your stance was (as always) "do nothing". Hussein is not to suffer even (for him) the mild inconvenience of dealing with sanctions.
...clearly there are other ways of dealing with the problem.
Of course there are. FORCE him to abide by the terms of the surrender agreement. Hussein has made it abundantly clear that his preferred method of interaction with other humans is through the use of force. Words mean nothing to him. Sanctions mean nothing to him.
...600,000 dead kids isn't solving the problem.
Even if that number weren't sheer fantasy, the fact remains that the lives of any dead children are the responsibility of Saddam Hussein's actions. Standard Statist ploy... lay the blame anywhere but where it belongs.
pinky
--------------------
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Rono]
#1262231 - 01/30/03 01:31 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Unfortunately the burdon of proof doesn't apply to the USA Government.
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Phred]
#1262941 - 01/30/03 05:42 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Did it ever occur to you that Mr. Halliday might have his own agenda?
So four highly placed UN officials, one actually running the oil for food programme are mistaken are they? You know more than they do? All the evidence and reports they have read lead them to believe 600,000 kids have died and they are so disgusted they resign their jobs. That's pretty hard evidence to fake.
Oh, i get it - you think Dennis is a commy right?
So if they are the conclusions of the people who actually conducted the research
No, the people who conducted the research concluded there were 5000 kids under five dying a month thanks to sanctions. That's why Dennis and the other UN officials resigned.
Of course these people never bother to point out that if Saddam had followed the terms of the surrender agreement there would have been no sanctions.
What world are you living in?
Of course there have been. But not against public amenities.
You really have no idea. They are bombing goatherders walking alone through empty valleys. Bombing missions arn't always like you see on the tv i'm afraid. Don't believe everything you are told.
So my conclusion was correct -- you believe Hussein deserves no punishment.
No, you are profoundly incorrect as usual. Read my reply again.
I notice that you are still (surprise, surprise) afraid to answer my questions:
LOL. Sounds like you know you've lost the argument and have decided to do an evolving and keep repeating meaningless questions instead of making any rational attempt to address the issues.
Hussein is not to suffer even (for him) the mild inconvenience of dealing with sanctions.
Suffer? Make up your mind. You've stated he isn't suffering. The Iraqi people are suffering from sanctions not Saddam.
Of course there are. FORCE him to abide by the terms of the surrender agreement.
And when do we invade Israel and make them abide by the terms of the surrender aggreement pray tell?
Even if that number weren't sheer fantasy
You are living in a dream world.
the fact remains that the lives of any dead children are the responsibility of Saddam Hussein's
Nope, he isn't the guy blocking childrens medicines from entering Iraq. The western groups brave enough to break the sanctions and take in childrens medicines encounter no problem from Saddam. They encounter problems from America pressuring them to stop.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: What would it take to convince someone [Re: Strumpling]
#1262950 - 01/30/03 05:44 PM (22 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Strumpling writes:
Unfortunately the burdon of proof doesn't apply to the USA Government.
You misunderstand one of the terms of the surrender agreement. The UN agreed not to direct their coalition forces to enter Iraq and destroy Hussein's WMD if and ONLY if he would commit to destroy them on his own, and PROVIDE TO THE UN CREDIBLE PROOF of such destruction. The burden of proof was NEVER on the UN (or on America), it was on Iraq from the beginning, and remains on Iraq today.
pinky
--------------------
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Bulk Substrate 
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
wingnutx
1 2 3 4 all )
exclusive58
lonestar2004
SirTripAlot
Too Vanilla
Great_Satan
luvdemshrooms