looters rule baghdad

[mosaik]

i'm sorry. i won't be debating with you all anymore.

this has gone well past the point of reason. i could post conclusive photo evidence of US marines raping iraqi women with the stars and stripes draped over her head while other marines shot her babies and you guys would celebrate and whoop it up.

it's frightening to see how your sickening nationalism has disabled your capacity to think.

this is insanity. reading the responses in this thread made my head hurt. i can't deal with people who are this fucking irrational and this fucking blind. i'm sick of arguing with you guys, it's pointless, you don't read, you don't think, you just wave that god awful flag.

well you can do it without me, i'm not visiting this topic again. i haven't learned anything in the 3 weeks we've been debating this and what's more, i'm starting to get a real hate on for amerika.

[dumbandjaded13]

i'm sorry. i won't be debating with you all anymore.

this has gone well past the point of reason. i could post conclusive photo evidence of US marines raping iraqi women with the stars and stripes draped over her head while other marines shot her babies and you guys would celebrate and whoop it up.

it's frightening to see how your sickening nationalism has disabled your capacity to think.

this is insanity. reading the responses in this thread made my head hurt. i can't deal with people who are this fucking irrational and this fucking blind. i'm sick of arguing with you guys, it's pointless, you don't read, you don't think, you just wave that god awful flag.

well you can do it without me, i'm not visiting this topic again. i haven't learned anything in the 3 weeks we've been debating this and what's more, i'm starting to get a real hate on for amerika.

you constantly speak of how you just want us to "see your side of the argument" when all you do is try to force us to believe the way you do... you search out the most negative parts of the war and post them, all the while ignorning the positive sides that ARE HAPPENING whether you choose to believe so or not.

You should be sick of arguing, cause thats all you look to do when discussing the war, you dont "Debate", you argue

Having your own opinion is great..
Showing your own opinion is even better.
Force-feeding your opinion to everyone and degrading others (in other words, being close minded, which is IRRATIONAL) is not too cool.... too bad you want be visiting this post again to read my response to your whining.

Oh yeah, and you havent learned anything because you wont let yourself learn anything... you make it sound as if we wear rose-colored glasses... well your just fucking blind...

[Sufjan Stevens]

What the hell do you want us to say? We have no fucking control over the Iraqis rioting, do we? So what if we don't show the same disgust as you do for those people acting like idiots over there? It's not under our control. I am so damn sorry you think that the opinions of a guy in Michigan, a guy in Texas, and a guy from North Carolina would make the rioting stop if, and only if, we just followed you like sheep. You expect everyone to have some insightful response to a story of yours on a stupid OLP message board. Wake up, life doesn't work out like that. If you want intelligent conversation, take your soap box, but it on a street corner, and start reading these stories off to people walking by you. See how many people even bother to listen. Be happy some one gives a damn about what you say.

[dumbandjaded13]

another excellent point.... ditto

[thirdhour]

I kinda have to agree with doug on this one. You guys didn't even stop to think about how much this is going to hurt this already war-torn nation before laughing about it. I'm not asking you to change the fucking world, just have some compation for other human beings.

[Bandalero]

what's hurtful about this? this is a form of celebration seen around the world. it's juvinile and reckless but it happens. it's human nature for it to happen. no one is laughing, no one is justifying it, we simply saw and compared it to what happens elsewhere in the world.

[mosaik]

am i full of shit or what? here i am already.

but the gloves are off. i'm prepared to be a total fucking dickhead now.

on to dumbandjaded's post... very good choice of names there my friend...

ahem: let me give you a lesson in the fine art of debate. in a debate over an issue such as war, the people debaing each choose a side, or a position. then they form a little thing called an argument and they compare their argument with the other person(s). they do not flail, whine and scream about "opinions". in a debate, one person is wrong and the other is right. one person will win and the other will lose.

the fact is, nine times out of ten in this forum it's my argument against your opinions. you guys do not know why you support the war. need proof? check out the "Iraqi War Quiz" topic i posted and see how many folks actually bothered to respond. One. and Corey, i'm happy you posted but some of your answers were a little off.

Go ahead and make a simillar quiz, only pro-war. I can answer all the questions, any you could possibly think of.

i am so tempted to flame you d&j, the nasty words are on my fingertips but i'm holding off... i am not closeminded. i'll need you to prove that, otherwise it's a baseless allegation. if you can't prove that i'm close minded in your next post i'm going to let you have it right back.

i'm blind? wrong! i am the only one who can SEE what is actualy going on! you say positive things are happening in Iraq and i respond with a thread that shows that the whole country is in a state of chaos! IS THAT POSITIVE?

which brings me to reno, who seems to think it is.

they're not fucking celebrating. they're stealing. celebrating = good. stealing = bad.

it's gotten so bad that vigilante iraqi's are taking justice into their own hands. thank god somebody over there has a fucking concience.

what do i expect you to say? I expect you not to make light of it. if i take a shot at somebody's military friend or make fun of the dead amerikan nazi soldiers over in iraq, you guys will have a spaz. it's so disrespectful, you'll say. it's wrong.

alan if you really think i want you to follow me like sheep, then you haven't been fucking listening.

jesus. what did i want? i want to understand why anybody would support the murder that's going on in iraq. I wanted to LEARN. not sit here and have the suffering of the iraqi people made into a fucking college football game.

if you guys give me shit in your response to this post, you can all KMA. all my patience is used up.

[dumbandjaded13]

am i full of shit or what? here i am already.

but the gloves are off. i'm prepared to be a total fucking dickhead now.

on to dumbandjaded's post... very good choice of names there my friend...

ahem: let me give you a lesson in the fine art of debate. in a debate over an issue such as war, the people debaing each choose a side, or a position. then they form a little thing called an argument and they compare their argument with the other person(s). they do not flail, whine and scream about "opinions". in a debate, one person is wrong and the other is right. one person will win and the other will lose.

the fact is, nine times out of ten in this forum it's my argument against your opinions. you guys do not know why you support the war. need proof? check out the "Iraqi War Quiz" topic i posted and see how many folks actually bothered to respond. One. and Corey, i'm happy you posted but some of your answers were a little off.

Go ahead and make a simillar quiz, only pro-war. I can answer all the questions, any you could possibly think of.

i am so tempted to flame you d&j, the nasty words are on my fingertips but i'm holding off... i am not closeminded. i'll need you to prove that, otherwise it's a baseless allegation. if you can't prove that i'm close minded in your next post i'm going to let you have it right back.

i'm blind? wrong! i am the only one who can SEE what is actualy going on! you say positive things are happening in Iraq and i respond with a thread that shows that the whole country is in a state of chaos! IS THAT POSITIVE?

Sure, your definition of debate is great... but the fact is you seem to think that if YOU win a debate, that the winning side is totally correct and the losing side is completely wrong... that is the way you have made it sound... you probably can out debate most everybody on the board because you care so much about this issue... but that doesnt make you right... for instance, youve proven my point again about being close-minded... the WHOLE country is in a state of chaos? WHAT?

Sure, there are looters galore in bahgdad, and thats definitely not the best thing... but there are actually people on the streets of bahgdad playing kickball, talking to each other without fear of being taken away to prison, conversing with troops about BOTH sides of the war.... and talking about Saddam freely... i find that positive, i mean, ive never been in a game of chaotic kickball, nor have i been in complete chaos when finally being able to speak freely... probably cause i have always had the right to speak freely....

people in the run-down cities like Umm Qasr and Basra were overjoyed to have loaves of bread and water... but i guess its chaotic and negative to actually be able to eat and drink clean water... or is it chaotic to actually be able to fly a flag representing your own religion, like the Shiites (sp?) in southern Iraq? Im not denying that several things need to be done in Iraq for it to function fully as a free country.... but you will not ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that something good actually has come from this war, and is probably still to come... there are alot of chaotic things going on, definitely... but there are positive things happening that you ignore... making you appear closeminded.

Do you even know if im against the war or for it? My comments have challenged the way you have viewed the war, but i think you assume im for the war.... do you actually know?

Only one response to your Iraq War Quiz post? Is that the one with like 37 different points? There are so many i get them mixed up... but im sorry if i dont have the time to come on here and read every post of yours and respond to it.... i wont accept the fact that only one person responded to one of your posts as proof... i dont want to waste my time here reading all 37 posts and then arguing them to someone who is too closeminded to really care what you say anyway... i dont think im the only one who feels that way... so maybe that is the reason you only had one response.... just a thought

And i apologize, but i cant really find a clever way to "insult" you with your own name

[Sufjan Stevens]

I don't support murder. I have agreed with you on nearly every point you've made about this war. The looting is coming to an end now, people are starting to enforce laws there to end the robbing and random building fires. I'm done now.

[starvingeyes]

but the fact is you seem to think that if YOU win a debate, that the winning side is totally correct and the losing side is completely wrong

elementary logic. any one statement can either be right, or wrong. not both, not 90% right or 90% wrong. either right or wrong.

therefore, if you are debating and you have found yourself proven wrong, you are wrong. that's it.

you probably can out debate most everybody on the board because you care so much about this issue... but that doesnt make you right

no, what makes him right is that none of you can prove him otherwise. simply saying somebody is not right on an issue does not make it so. if you wish to make a claim of this nature, you need to be able to support it somehow.

but there are actually people on the streets of bahgdad playing kickball, talking to each other without fear of being taken away to prison, conversing with troops about BOTH sides of the war.... and talking about Saddam freely

prove it. i've neither heard nor seen anything to substantiate this claim. from the reports i've read, there are 3 types of people in baghdad right now,
looters, people who are hiding from the looters, and us troops.

but you will not ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that something good actually has come from this war, and is probably still to come...

ha. good? good like chalabi? until i see some hard evidence to the extent that the iraqi people will be permitted to govern themselves, i will acknowledge no such thing.

i dont want to waste my time here reading all 37 posts and then arguing them to someone who is too closeminded to really care what you say anyway

hearsay. you cannot substantiate your allegation that he is closed minded, which makes it worthless.

and a note about opinions: unfounded ones are intellecutally worthless. mark twain called them "corn pone opinions". you should consider thinking about why you believe what you do some day.

[Bandalero]

i'm glad to see the Iraqi people venting....however it's through rioting, not the best form of venting. as some of you might know it's good to let out your anger and your emotions, especially when you are indeed celebrating something. is it wrong? no. is rioting wrong? yes. should they celebrate in an approprite manner? yes, they should be doing something constructive. not deconstructive.

this just proves what i said in the Phil. warfare topic, that regular people don't think rationally, they do what they think is best for them when in all actuality it does nothing to help their cause and it diminishes the quality of life for everyone when you don't make rational decisions. In a time of chaos, celebration, and looting you do not have time to think rationally, you just protect yourself and if you wish to, you go out and raise hell like the rest.

[Corey]

elementary logic. any one statement can either be right, or wrong. not both, not 90% right or 90% wrong. either right or wrong.

therefore, if you are debating and you have found yourself proven wrong, you are wrong. that's it.

Not even close. If I say that the sky is blue and the grass is red, am I 100% wrong? The grass is red part is wrong but I'm right about the sky being blue. But because I'm wrong about the grass being red, am I wrong with everything else that I ever have to say? No. I'm just wrong about that ONE point.

What if I say, Hamburgers taste good. Am I right, or wrong? You think hamburgers taste bad. Are you right or are you wrong? Only one of us can be right, correct?

no, what makes him right is that none of you can prove him otherwise. simply saying somebody is not right on an issue does not make it so. if you wish to make a claim of this nature, you need to be able to support it somehow.

He is right merely because noone at the ClumsyMonkey disputes it? We are but a microscopic sample of the World. I'm sure someone out there coud prove him wrong. I agree, someone shouldn't claim you're wrong without having a reason, but that doesn't mean that because they don't you are automatically right.

prove it. i've neither heard nor seen anything to substantiate this claim. from the reports i've read, there are 3 types of people in baghdad right now,
looters, people who are hiding from the looters, and us troops.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/ ... index.html

True, things look a bit grim at the moment but it is getting better. The point here, though, is that there are other types of people besides the ones you've listed.

ha. good? good like chalabi? until i see some hard evidence to the extent that the iraqi people will be permitted to govern themselves, i will acknowledge no such thing.

Hmm... you're taking a position without evidence that they WON'T be permitted to govern themselves. Isn't that the same thing that you're accusing others of doing?

[dumbandjaded13]

but you will not ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that something good actually has come from this war, and is probably still to come...

ha. good? good like chalabi? until i see some hard evidence to the extent that the iraqi people will be permitted to govern themselves, i will acknowledge no such thing.


hearsay. you cannot substantiate your allegation that he is closed minded, which makes it worthless.

and a note .

Corey did an excellent job of pointing out the problems with your response to my post, but here are just a couple more..

So you are saying what determines if something "good" comes out of the war depends on whether or not Iraq governs themselves... so, intuitively, practicing the religion you choose, being free to walk the streets, and having the freedom to speak however you wish about your government are things you consider "not good" outcomes of the war....

read my previous post again, and you might see an example of why i formed the opinion about him being closeminded... and if you need more substance to that, you should read his posts, thats all i had to do.

[starvingeyes]

Not even close. If I say that the sky is blue and the grass is red, am I 100% wrong? The grass is red part is wrong but I'm right about the sky being blue. But because I'm wrong about the grass being red, am I wrong with everything else that I ever have to say? No. I'm just wrong about that ONE point.

the grass is red and the sky is blue are two different statements of fact. either of them can either be right or wrong.

as for the hamburger thing, the subjective experience of tasting a hamburger cannot be stated as fact. however, when you and i bite a hamburger, we both taste the same thing, we just experience it differently. if someone were to say that hamburgers taste like asparagus, for example, that statement can be debated.

He is right merely because noone at the ClumsyMonkey disputes it? We are but a microscopic sample of the World. I'm sure someone out there coud prove him wrong. I agree, someone shouldn't claim you're wrong without having a reason, but that doesn't mean that because they don't you are automatically right.

i agree. however, the best basis for determing "rightness" in a discussion of this sort, i believe, is the person whose argument resists all attacks. that is what philosophy is all about.

Hmm... you're taking a position without evidence that they WON'T be permitted to govern themselves. Isn't that the same thing that you're accusing others of doing?

i am taking the position supported by the evidence.

true or false: it appears likely that chalabi will be handed the reigns.
true or false: chalabi is in the back pocket of the americans.
true or false: overthrowing one government to replace it with a US-friendly one is not uncommon throughout the history of the united states.

So you are saying what determines if something "good" comes out of the war depends on whether or not Iraq governs themselves... so, intuitively, practicing the religion you choose, being free to walk the streets, and having the freedom to speak however you wish about your government are things you consider "not good" outcomes of the war....

how do you know any of this will actually happen? even in the us you are subject to certain restrictions on all of this. secondly, iraqi's were largely free to do alot of those things before hand. the growing middle class in iraq functioned very similar to that of it's counterparts in other nations. it's not like the people there were living in total police state squalor while saddam drank their blood. he was awful, yes, but not as awful to the vast majority of his own people that the us propaganda would have you believe.[/quote]

[Corey]

the grass is red and the sky is blue are two different statements of fact. either of them can either be right or wrong.

as for the hamburger thing, the subjective experience of tasting a hamburger cannot be stated as fact. however, when you and i bite a hamburger, we both taste the same thing, we just experience it differently. if someone were to say that hamburgers taste like asparagus, for example, that statement can be debated.

And that is exactly my point as well. Some things that people say can be wrong while other things they say may be right. You cannot bracket an entire individual's debate as "wrong" just because a few points may be wrong or even the majority of their points are wrong. Some things they say can still be right.

i agree. however, the best basis for determing "rightness" in a discussion of this sort, i believe, is the person whose argument resists all attacks. that is what philosophy is all about.

No major argument here. However that sounds fairly democratic. The person who is able to resist most attacks is right.

I have never really studied philosophy although I was a student of sociology for a while and many of my arguments are based off of that. In my opinion, philosophy deals with theory where as sociology's findings are based off of observation.

i am taking the position supported by the evidence.

true or false: it appears likely that chalabi will be handed the reigns.
true or false: chalabi is in the back pocket of the americans.
true or false: overthrowing one government to replace it with a US-friendly one is not uncommon throughout the history of the united states.

That is all substancial. Using the word "appears" shows that it is not hard-cold evidence to begin with. Even so, how can you prove that Chalabi will do the bidding of the US? You can't. You're assuming. Lastly, just because a government is US friendly, doesn't mean the US runs the place. Your "evidence" falls in the same realm as the "evidence" to counter your points.