Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 320

Thread: Fahrenheit 9/11

  1. #201
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Speaking as a vet, I can only compare F. 9/11 to the like of Tokyo Rose and Hanoi Fonda. Support for troops shouldn't be based on what battle they are fighting - because those same troops that you are lambasting may be saving your ass in the future. These days are more like the days of WWII in that the battles are on a global scale. While I am not saying that the rest of the world cannot fight their own battles, a U.S. presence does help the fight on terrorism. Many countries are quick to demand help and aid (usually in the form of money) from the U.S. (just look at all the help requested in many African countries) - the least they could do is show some support. If they dont want to do that, then they can take some advice from my mother - "If you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all!" But that is just my humble opinion.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  2. #202
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Not that I am disagreeing with you, but did anyone in this thread lambast the troops? I don't really wanna search through all 9 pages, but it seems that we are questioning the mission, and not those who actually carry it out (with the exception of the prison scandal, etc). IMO, supporting the troops can be different, as well as seperated, from supporting a president, a war, and so on......

  3. #203
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    I was referring to Michael Moore lambasting the troops.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  4. #204
    WBBs motivational Speaker Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Between a girls ties!
    Posts
    4,593
    the only celeb who really wants to help the common man, and everybody ****s all over him.

    he has to make a circus to get attention and to say what he wants to say, its just like Dr.Phil, the Tv show, they show people who cry and powerfull images, and play scary music when you see a person who has done something wrong walking or something.

    The bottomline is, there is a rich elite full of white guys who is fecking the common man in the behind.

    micheal moore is a common man, he is on the common mans side, he doesnt have extreme powerfull allies, so to get his point across he must use big words and bright colours.

    he is on OUR team, he is not some shabby enron executive or whatever, he is a normal man wanting to hunt these guys down.
    Last edited by Rock; 07-17-2004 at 10:00 AM.
    A big thanks to all my friends in the USA, I am deeply grateful for your hospitality and kindness.

  5. #205
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    everybody has an agenda. He may have started out fighting for the common man, but he is all about the publicity now. Thats just my opinion. I was always told never to discuss politics or religion with friends unless you want to make them enemies! Since I consider all on here friends, I will just hold my tongue. I guess Moore just rubs me the wrong way!
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  6. #206
    WBBs motivational Speaker Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Between a girls ties!
    Posts
    4,593
    why, dont you get it, he is on your team, is trying to help you and your fellow brother, he is really trying.
    A big thanks to all my friends in the USA, I am deeply grateful for your hospitality and kindness.

  7. #207
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    He's not on my team. The way he made the American soldier look is akin to treason. The only compliment I will give Moore is that he hired a good group of film editors. I could take clips from all your posts throughout this site and make it like you said something you never did. I don't speak from my passion, position or opinion but from fact. I am not one to blindly follow an idea. I research both sides of the story. The things said in that movie have some fact to them, but alot of it is just stitched together to send his message. Hell, I coud use a mathematical formula to prove to you that an elephant could hang off a cliff from his tail tied to a daisy, but that doesnt mean it could actually happen!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by GulfVet91; 07-17-2004 at 10:52 AM.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  8. #208
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    He claims to be of the working class? How is this for a few facts:

    Michael Moore is a paradox. A millionaire who boasts of wealth as proving his value -- "I'm a millionaire, I'm a multi-millionaire. I'm filthy rich. You know why I'm a multi-millionaire? 'Cause multi-millions like what I do. That's pretty good, isn't it?"

    He lives in a million-dollar apartment, and boasts of that as well. "I walk among them. I live on the island of Manhattan, a three-mile-wide strip of land that is luxury home and corporate suite to America's elite..... Those who run your life live in my neighborhood. I walk in the streets with them each day" (Michael Moore, Stupid White Men, p. 51).

    He sends his child to a private school -- no sense associating with the working class -- and has some trouble associating with them himself. The New York Post reported on a tantrum he threw in London: "Then, on his second-to-last night, [Michael Moore] raged against everyone connected with the Roundhouse and complained that he was being paid a measly $750 a night. 'He completely lost the plot,' a member of the stage crew told the London Evening Standard. 'He stormed around all day screaming at everyone, even the 5 pound-an-hour bar staff, telling them how we were all con men and useless. Then he went on stage and did it in public.' At his last appearance, staffers refused to work or even open the theater's doors." NY Post, Jan. 8, 2003.

    He supplements his meager income with speaking tours (No more $750 gigs; he charged Cornell students $10,000, , Univ. of Texas ones $25,000, told the Penn State ones he could be had for a modest $15-20,000 a night, and most recently, when Kansas University students asked for him, "Moore -- a noted political activist and Academy Award-winning filmmaker -- had raised eyebrows by asking for more than $30,000 to speak at KU." Ah, the joys of capitalism....) No wonder one former associate of his rated him as " You would think that he's the ultimate common man. But he's money-obsessed."

    And ....

    His major themes are his status as the spokesman of the working class, the vices and corruptions of the money-obsessed, and the evils of the United States.

    It would be easy to denounce Moore as a hypocrite. Many conservatives denounce him as a leftist, when in fact the serious left, the thinking left, generally finds him appalling. He is, in short, the latest in the modern breed of Limosine Leftists -- individuals who, while personally they share the values of 19th century robber barons, find it flattering to adopt a thin (and personally meaningless) veneer of leftism as a pose, in the same manner they pick a flattering hair style or gown. (A left-leaning critic of Moore summed up the situation very nicely: Moore's appeal lies in his giving wealthy, over-educated, whites an opportunity to laugh at working-class whites.)
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  9. #209
    Simply Devious Rastaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock
    why, dont you get it, he is on your team, is trying to help you and your fellow brother, he is really trying.
    He just doesn't get it. What can you do?
    "The only sin which we never forgive in each other is difference of opinion."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson


    Word.

  10. #210
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    how can you say I dont get it? I've given plenty of reasons why he is not on my team.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  11. #211
    Simply Devious Rastaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    how can you say I dont get it? I've given plenty of reasons why he is not on my team.
    US troops are dying over in Iraq for what? For George Bush's political agenda and for oil. Moore wants the soldiers out of there.
    "The only sin which we never forgive in each other is difference of opinion."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson


    Word.

  12. #212
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Have you checked the gas prices lately? If we were out to take oil, we could. If we wanted to enforce our political agenda, we would. Every soldier that dies in a conflict, does so for one reason - love of country. A person doesn't VOLUNTEER for the military on the basis of what political view they think is right. They do it to defend the country. Your point would have more of an effect if a draft was in place and non volunteers were forced to fight. These are men and women who signed a contract to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Anyone who joins the military and is not ready to die, should not join. That would be like saying you wanted to be a police officer, but only if I don't ever have to shoot someone or chance being shot at - it's called inherit risk.
    I am not saying all military people have the exact same view on politics, but if you were to poll a large number of them, you would find out that many of them believe in what they are doing.
    And what is the President's political agenda? I think he has stated pretty clearly that he was freeing an oppressed peope from a tyrannical dictator. I can speak from experience that what we have done is a good thing. Have you ever stood face to face witha pon that was so afraid for his life and the lives of his family that he took his post in a 1950's russian tank that was dug into the ground because it no longer ran to fend off thousands of American tanks rather than not fight and deal with the consequences of his own government? I have. Have you ever seen the exileration of thousands of troops when they were taken prisoner of war because they knew they would be treated better than their own government was treating them. I have.
    Can you not see the similarities between this President and the leaders during WWII? If they did not "impose their political agenda" in Europe, how would the world look today? It's easy to just say:
    "US troops are dying over in Iraq for what? For George Bush's political agenda and for oil. Moore wants the soldiers out of there."
    but what substantial evidence do you have to back that up? If you like, I would be more than happy to post numerous facts that completely shred your statement. I don't say this to be smug or a "flag waver", but to point out that my opinions are based on fact, not generalized statements that are untrue and poorly thought out.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  13. #213
    Simply Devious Rastaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    And what is the President's political agenda? I think he has stated pretty clearly that he was freeing an oppressed peope from a tyrannical dictator.
    If this is the reason, please tell me why he isn't doing anything about tens of thousands of people dying in Sudan? Do you read the newspapers? Did you know that women and children are being massacred there simply because of the color of their skin? Are you really that naive to think that George Bush is in Iraq to free an oppressed people? Even the most steadfast Republicans should know it was never for that reason. Do you have any idea what is happening around the world right now?

    What was that Iraq had that Africa doesn't have? It's not oppressed people my friend. It's oil and political interest.

    You're right. People do join the army to serve their country. I'll be interested in hearing how the US actions in Iraq are making the US a safer place. Thats the one explanation that Bush has been unable to come up with that may cost him the next election.
    Last edited by Rastaman; 07-17-2004 at 04:54 PM.
    "The only sin which we never forgive in each other is difference of opinion."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson


    Word.

  14. #214
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Rastaman
    If this is the reason, please tell me why he isn't doing anything about tens of thousands of people dying in Sudan?
    Last time I checked, the Sudan doesn't pose any type of threat to the world. People bitch when the U.S. get's involved and they bitch when they don't get involved.

    If we wanted their oil, we could have taken it years ago. Do you some influx in the importing of oil to the U.S.? Where is one small piece of evidence to back up your claim that this is about oil? By saying that the Sudan doesnt have oil and Iraq does is a poor excuse for our reason to go to Iraq. Please, enlighten me!

    Iraq has one primary eport - oil. So in a sense, this is a war about oil. If Iraq is to continue as a country, their oil industry must continue. That's why U.S. soldiers are dying - protecting the oil. I don't think there are Chevron and Exxon tankers sitting in port saying "woohoo! free oil for us!" As the President also clearly stated

    To what political end does Bush prosper by freeing Iraq? Do the Iraqi people vote for him? A more important question to ask is "How does stabilizing Iraq affect the Middle East?" A democratic country smack dab in the middle of terror city can be beneficial on a global scale. It has been proven that 1000's of terrorists trained in Iraq under Hussein's leadership.

    I would say by my posts, I am well versed in current events, so yes, I do read the newspapers. The question is, do you?

    I repeat my statement - prove to me that this war is about oil
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  15. #215
    mind/body zen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    386
    What sux about Iraq is that the U.S. should have requisitioned oil resources to help fund their venture until the occupation was over, or atleast until sovereignty was officially regained.
    But nooo......... All the crybabies would have pissed and moaned about imperial aggression.

  16. #216
    Simply Devious Rastaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    Where is one small piece of evidence to back up your claim that this is about oil? By saying that the Sudan doesnt have oil and Iraq does is a poor excuse for our reason to go to Iraq.
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    Iraq has one primary eport - oil. So in a sense, this is a war about oil.
    Thanks for making my point for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    A more important question to ask is "How does stabilizing Iraq affect the Middle East?"
    Oh, is that what is going on right now? Sorry, I guess I get confused with all the killings and terrorist attacks that are occurring now on a daily basis. Read the papers and watch the news and you might get an idea of how the Iraqi people now feel about the americans in their country. They ain't too supportive, trust me.

    Thank God for the stability the US presence in Iraq has given the Middle East. /Sarcasm. This will be my last response since I'm being dragged into an argument with someone who is completely out of touch with reality. I am willing to discuss the pros and cons of the American presence in Iraq, but I will not get drawn into a ridiculous debate about whether the US is in Iraq because of it's oil and whether the US is bringing stability to the region by being in Iraq. The answers to both questions are obvious.
    "The only sin which we never forgive in each other is difference of opinion."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson


    Word.

  17. #217
    mind/body zen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by Rastaman
    I am willing to discuss the pros and cons of the American presence in Iraq, but I will not get drawn into a ridiculous debate about whether the US is in Iraq because of it's oil and whether the US is bringing stability to the region by being in Iraq. The answers to both questions are obvious.
    No offense, but I suspect you are giving up because you fear losing grip on the 'position' you seem to be holding on to so tightly.
    Let's all keep an open mind, atleast a little, when debating politics intelligently.

    The answers to both are not obvious.

    The information you get varies greatly depending on your source. I personally believe that most Iraqis (by percentage) would not choose to go back to the way things use to be, they are just unhappy with the way things are right now. But that is just my opinion and I have not spent any time on the streets of cities and villages in Iraq. The news media focuses on the problems and if you use that alone to form your opinion, you are definately not fully equiped.

    The war in Iraq was partially about oil, but not controlling it directly. However, Iraq scores more geopolitical points of importance because of it's oil. However, I still beleive that Iraq was invaded primarily as a part of the (quote) War on Terror (unquote) even though no direct proof of links between Al Queda and Hussein exist.

    We should be trying to help Suddan, but what is even more Ironic is the United Nations. It seems like the U.N. only stands for anything when it stands against the U.S.

  18. #218
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    Every soldier that dies in a conflict, does so for one reason - love of country.

    I would say this is a very opinionated generalization.

  19. #219
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Rasta - you are as good as Moore - you just quoted part of what I said to make your point! He would be very proud of that. My touch with reality is solidly grounded. I was just giving my side in the spirit of a good 'ol debate. That you feel the need to dimiss me and just call me out of touch with reality is somewhat of a disappointment. I was hoping to be enlightened by factual data that states this war is about oil. Since you say it is so obvious, I am sure it will be easy to explain.
    Slim - after I read my post, I realized that my statement was a little generalized. What I should have said was that every soldiers death in conflict, though tragic, happens, as it always has been througout history. If a soldier joins the service for any other reason other than love of country (and hence their willingness to follow their commanders, up to, and including the Commander-in-Chief), that maybe they are in the wrong line of work.

    I definitely did not come on here to make enemies. Like I have stated in earlier posts, I just state the facts that I know and always look at both sides of the story. I never made any personal attacks on any person on here. Calling me out of touch with reality is a little too much. While my passion for this topic is strong, I am not going to be pulled into a "name calling" battle.
    Oh, and telling me once again to watch the news or pick up a newspaper is a little silly. You would think by now that it is evident that I watch the news and read the papers on a regular basis. Just because my side of the debate isn't the same as yours, doesnt mean I am an uneducated, spaced-out hermit who has no contact with the outside world.
    What say we call the debate a stalemate and lift some heavy iron?
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  20. #220
    I want some crack! TBone4Eva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Greenbelt, MD
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by zen
    What sux about Iraq is that the U.S. should have requisitioned oil resources to help fund their venture until the occupation was over, or atleast until sovereignty was officially regained.
    But nooo......... All the crybabies would have pissed and moaned about imperial aggression.
    Without getting into why we went into Iraq, Yes, originally that was one of the selling points for the war. We would invade, but the Iraquis would be able to pay for the recontruction through the oil revenues. Though, it's been hard to get any real amount of oil out of Iraq when the piplines are being blown up almost every month. For some reason, we seemed to have had no idea just how bad the infrastructure had been allowed to degrade. More than half the country doesn't have power and those who do only have it for several hours a day. The security situation makes it impossible to rebuild much. So, barely any of the $18 Billion that was set aside for reconstruction has been spent.
    The half-million citizens of the District of Columbia, like citizens of the fifty states, bear all of the obligations of American citizenship: they are required to obey the laws passed by Congress; they pay federal taxes; they serve in the military; and they fight and die in our wars. Yet they lack the most basic right that should accompany American citizenship—the right to full voting representation in Congress. This makes the United States the only nation in the world with a representative, democratic constitution that denies citizens of its capital representation in the national legislature. In fact, no fewer than 183 nations provide their citizens the type of representation citizens of Washington, DC are denied.

  21. #221
    I want some crack! TBone4Eva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Greenbelt, MD
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    Slim - after I read my post, I realized that my statement was a little generalized. What I should have said was that every soldiers death in conflict, though tragic, happens, as it always has been througout history. If a soldier joins the service for any other reason other than love of country (and hence their willingness to follow their commanders, up to, and including the Commander-in-Chief), that maybe they are in the wrong line of work.
    I believe economics plays a very important role in this as well. Maybe more so than ideology. So, isn't this more the fault of the armed services relying far too much on using economic benefits to attract recruits?
    The half-million citizens of the District of Columbia, like citizens of the fifty states, bear all of the obligations of American citizenship: they are required to obey the laws passed by Congress; they pay federal taxes; they serve in the military; and they fight and die in our wars. Yet they lack the most basic right that should accompany American citizenship—the right to full voting representation in Congress. This makes the United States the only nation in the world with a representative, democratic constitution that denies citizens of its capital representation in the national legislature. In fact, no fewer than 183 nations provide their citizens the type of representation citizens of Washington, DC are denied.

  22. #222
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by TBone4Eva
    I believe economics plays a very important role in this as well. Maybe more so than ideology. So, isn't this more the fault of the armed services relying far too much on using economic benefits to attract recruits?
    Recruiters can be deceiving, but the resposibility lies with the person signing their name on the dotted line. I know I read everything they gave me before i signed anything. Thats almost like blaming the car industry for the death of a person killed by a drunk driver.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

  23. #223
    Banned Slim Schaedle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,722
    I still don't see how Moore "lambasted" the troops. The film primarily focussed on Bush and the administration. Moore did direct attention to the troops that seemed "gung-ho" about killing and whatnot. (troops favoring certain CDs when patrolling or singing "burn motherf---er, burn") On the other hand he interviewed those troops who were opposed to what they were there for, etc. Seems like he got both sides of the story on that. Where was the lambasting of troops?
    Last edited by Slim Schaedle; 07-18-2004 at 10:51 AM.

  24. #224
    I want some crack! TBone4Eva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Greenbelt, MD
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by GulfVet91
    Recruiters can be deceiving, but the resposibility lies with the person signing their name on the dotted line. I know I read everything they gave me before i signed anything. Thats almost like blaming the car industry for the death of a person killed by a drunk driver.
    I think you misunderstood what I was saying. You touched upon the fact that some soldiers may have signed up for the wrong reasons and this would have an effect on their willingness to follow the chain of command. I'm saying one of those reasons is because the military often emphasizes the economic benefits of joining the service. For example, the Army is always throwing big numbers out there in their recruitment efforts like $40,000-$50,000 for college. So, I was asking you if you thought the military was relying on this approach too much as it's causing people to sign up for what you called, "the wrong reasons". In other words, shouldn't the military be saying, "Don't ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"?
    Last edited by TBone4Eva; 07-18-2004 at 11:02 AM.
    The half-million citizens of the District of Columbia, like citizens of the fifty states, bear all of the obligations of American citizenship: they are required to obey the laws passed by Congress; they pay federal taxes; they serve in the military; and they fight and die in our wars. Yet they lack the most basic right that should accompany American citizenship—the right to full voting representation in Congress. This makes the United States the only nation in the world with a representative, democratic constitution that denies citizens of its capital representation in the national legislature. In fact, no fewer than 183 nations provide their citizens the type of representation citizens of Washington, DC are denied.

  25. #225
    Wannabebig Member GulfVet91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa
    Posts
    55
    Tbone - Sure they promote money for college, etc., but they also say that that is one of the perks and not the primary reaon for joining. Believe me, I called my recruiter a few choice words by my second week of basic training - but that is just life. You will get that type of deceiving talk by any company in the world. I guess it just seems a little easier since the majority are young, impressinable kids. It should be implied that they are doing it for their country and not the other way around.

    Slim - I felt that the only troops that he portrayed supporting the war were the gung-ho, blood thirsty crazies. Daily I see interviews with soldiers who say that their lives were changed for the better by their expeience in Iraq. They talk about the Iraqi gratitude they receive and are shocked by what the media portays it as. So maybe "lambasted" was the wrong term to use, but now we are just getting into semantics.
    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.
    - General George Patton Jr

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •