me.
1239 post s
19-Jun-2007
4:47 AM
|
I was reading in the paper yesterday that georgie-boy wanted to use nuclear weapons on afghanistan in response to what those non-afghan saudi-arabians did to the WTO buildings. The source is Chris Meyer AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES from britain. George says this is not a war on the afghani people, this is a war on the taliban. It's not a war on Islam, it's a war on terrorism.
George is as bad as Osama Bin laden. Or worse.
Do you know who I would use nuclear weapons on? Nobody. Ever. Unless you see people as diseased cattle. Only a fascist who believed the enemy were subhumans could contemplate using nuclear or depeleted uranium weaponry. I think you should assassinate all your leaders, before it's too late.
Last Edited on 19-Jun-2007 4:52 AM
|
jopaku
236 post s
19-Jun-2007
5:08 AM
|
oh, your such a humanist!
|
jopaku
237 post s
19-Jun-2007
5:13 AM
|
I am not worried about killing my leaders, it's other peoples leaders that need to be killed to prevent me (and you) from being killed.
After all this time, don't you get it?
And by the way, how can anyone kill anyone, if we don't have any weapons?
|
jopaku
238 post s
19-Jun-2007
5:21 AM
|
Top ten list,
Countries that need to be bombed1.Iran
2.Palestine
3.North Korea
4.China
5.Russia
6.Venezuela
7.Syria
8.Pakistan
9.Lebanon
10.Cuba Did I leave anyone out?
|
JB
1655 post s
19-Jun-2007
8:12 AM
|
I'm speechless at jopaku's list above. For so many reasons. But on the most basic level I am astounded by the paranoia -- and hatred for humans, the earth, life.
|
JB
1657 post s
19-Jun-2007
8:13 AM
|
Jo writes, "And by the way, how can anyone kill anyone, if we don't have any weapons?" EXACTLY!
|
jopaku
239 post s
19-Jun-2007
3:01 PM
|
O.k., maybe Cuba doesn't need to be bombed. A small scale invasion will probably suffice. I was just thinking how much easier it would be for Starbucks, McDonalds, etc, to build their stores if half the country is demolished. I took France off the list, I am going to give them another chance, based on their recent elections.
|
jopaku
240 post s
19-Jun-2007
3:05 PM
|
The weapons comment was to ME, who seems to always be calling for some sort of violent uprising. It would help if the huddled masses had guns, don't you think?
|
me.
1240 post s
21-Jun-2007
5:18 AM
|
Uhhhh hhhh hmmmm. Laaaa! "Whut the wrrrld... needs now
Is love, sweet love
It's the onlay thin'
That there's juss too liddle uv..."
|
me.
1241 post s
21-Jun-2007
5:30 AM
|
See that's the difference between you and me, Jo.
I don't want to indiscrimnately murder anyone. I want to kill the killers. Rob the thieves (rich).
I don't care that they are or aren't white, christian, or from the church of the hypocritically confused.You did a list. Here's my list of people, individuals who deserve to die: Kennedy
The romanovs and courtiers
All Nazis and such "national-socialists" including Khmer rouge (american ally), romanian guard, and other catholic fascists such as in slovakia and poland
American militia types
All those traitors and landowners who flee to america to avoid justice. You see? I want "JUSTICIA"! You just need peace. You're suffering. The only person you need to kill is the bit inside you that's making you feel bad. If you're working class, then join the champions of the working class.
If you're american, then do yourself a favour and make america better, so that no-one wants to destroy it.
If you're a god-fearing christian, then stop following the anti-christians, start reading your own holy book. It says "do unto others, as you would have them do unto you."
This means no more mass murder. Sorry old Chum!
"sooner a camel pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man get into heaven"
Distance yourself from these chuches that praise the rich
"Jesus threw the money lenders out of the temple"
Capitalism, the lending of capital in return for usurious profit, is forbidden to christians. Stop supporting capitalism. It's not ME saying this. This is your God talking. Do you fear him more than the evil doers?
|
jopaku
267 post s
4-Jul-2007
10:00 AM
|
It's been brought to my attention, that my list was found to be offensive, to some(body).
Obviously it's not to be taken literally, but it does convey my thoughts that military intervention is required to facilitate change.
I can't think of any examples where that hasn't been the case. Not everyone in the world has the real opportunity to vote out a ruling party.
Can the leaders of the nations on my list be reasoned with?
JB, you have come close to acknowledging that military intervention is needed in Darfur. Why does it take such an extreme example for you to acquiesce?Remember, it was a coalition of pacifists and isolationists who tried to keep us out of WW2. I think that coalition still exists today, but with a larger, widespread, enemy at hand. Call me paranoid if it makes you feel better, but when someone says they are going to do something, and then makes repeated attempts to do so, you need to pay attention.
That's what I meant(on another thread) by saying that the peace movement is the biggest deterrant to peace.
|
JB
1704 post s
4-Jul-2007
3:36 PM
|
I know your list wasn't literal, but it sure wasn't funny. Call me crazy, but invading countries for dubious reasons, installating puppet-governments, and bombing countries full of actual human beings -- mostly not involved with the government -- are cop-out, cowardly, and ultimately evil actions. And hell yes, a coalition of intervention to stop the genocide in Darfur should have happened long ago. But instead we ignored Darfur and invaded Iraq.
|
