1  2  3  |   Order by index

Feb 2, 2003, 10:09pm

Great News!

Alpha World was temporarily open to tourists earlier today in order to show
respects at the NASA memorial.

Thank you to the person(s) who were kind enough to allow Active Worlds
tourists to show their respects in Alpha World.

It is a positive start.

Sincerely, Yanst

Feb 3, 2003, 1:33am

i already said that :\

Feb 3, 2003, 3:01am

And it will probably be repeated a few more times before people actually
start carring.

Feb 3, 2003, 6:49am

[View Quote]
Yes, but he needed to say it as well - you could be Chinese you know, and he
cant let those red bastards comment here without a fight!

F.

Feb 3, 2003, 9:33am

One minor problem... I don't think tourists can read the newsgroups. ;P

[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2003, 9:45am

Sure they can......... anyone can read, only cit's can post....
JB

[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2003, 7:55pm

Have AW open for tourist this next comming year... there is a war comming up
where many innocent ppl will be killed by US army, and maybe even the
international community... Start a memorial for them too aswell for the
soldiers that will not return to their homes...
Also a few hundreds of thousants will die of aids in Africa and other places
in the world... lets pay them some respect too.... And what about the
millions that will die of hunger this comming year... If we had not send up
that many billions of dollars costing piece of metal up in the sky, we might
have been able to save many of their lives... prolly more than 7.... Nature
will strike again all over the world cause we all seem to refuse to do
sumfin structual bout global warming. US upfront that does not even want to
live up the Kyoto guide lines....

Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry too for the astronauts that let their life
up there... but they where just doing a dangerous job and they knew the
risks... I feel sad for their families aswell, who lost their
husbands/wifes, fathers/mothers... but everyday many ppl loose their life
doing their job for much less pay... Why is it that an astronauts life is
worth more than a construction builder, or a sailor, or a truckdriver... or
whatever job u (who reads this) do.

Prolly I am the only one, but more than 7 ppl died that day, so why the big
fuzz about only these 7.
I really ask myself if there r not bigger issiues in the world right now
than those 7 astronauts we should worry about... and think that many of us
even support covernments that r ready to go out and kill a much larger
amount of ppl or allready doing that.

screb


[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2003, 8:15pm

I am very appreciative of NASA. Indirectly because of them, I have taken
refuge in the wilds of Mars until Alpha World is liberated. An explorer's
dream - may NASA people that still visit live long and prosper in Active
Worlds!

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 3:19am

What a vary offensive and unnecessary post Screb.

"many innocent ppl will be killed by US army" in that do you mean "by the US
army"?

Screb, I will tell you one thing, if anybody kills "innocent ppl" in an up
coming conflict that America is involved in, it will be the US Air Force.
And that will be by innocent (there is that word again) human error. I have
been on two PEACEKEEPING tours (missions) as a member of the US Army, and no
'innocents' have been killed by the US (or any other international
contingent of the task force) during those PEACEKEEPING tours. In
Afghanistan, where I have had fellow soldiers and friends deployed to, they
are quite receptive to the US presence. Now, I am not saying that the US
Military has and will not inadvertently harm or even kill innocents, I'm
just saying, please don't make it out to sound like we do on purpose....



LF

Feb 4, 2003, 10:44am

Amen to that..... glad someone here has a little common sense..
JB

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 12:37pm

light form <Light_Form at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e3f4d73$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> What a vary offensive and unnecessary post Screb.
>
> "many innocent ppl will be killed by US army" in that do you mean "by the
US
> army"?
>
> Screb, I will tell you one thing, if anybody kills "innocent ppl" in an up
> coming conflict that America is involved in, it will be the US Air Force.
> And that will be by innocent (there is that word again) human error. I
have
> been on two PEACEKEEPING tours (missions) as a member of the US Army, and
no
> 'innocents' have been killed by the US (or any other international
> contingent of the task force) during those PEACEKEEPING tours. In
> Afghanistan, where I have had fellow soldiers and friends deployed to,
they
> are quite receptive to the US presence. Now, I am not saying that the US
> Military has and will not inadvertently harm or even kill innocents, I'm
> just saying, please don't make it out to sound like we do on purpose....
>
>
>
> LF
>

Oh yes, this will change everything, thanks for enlightening me light form.
Of course it is justified to kill innocent people as long it is not done on
purpose *g*
You cannot seriously call it a peacekeeping operation if USA (with some
European countries) will attack Iraque?
If you say yes, I strongly suggest you get a dictionary and and look up the
world peacefull and hostile, because you must have mixed up those 2 words
somehow.

Furthemore, I think that if USA attacks Iraque withouth the aproval of UN,
UN should be obligaded to prevent USA, whatever it takes. Same if USA attack
Mexico or Canada, we should not stand by and look. I doubt tho that USA will
attack those countries, because then one might need to fight on own land, so
they will probably keep on bombing countries, which names they do not know
how to pronounce and is as far away from them as possible ( Vietnam, Korea,
Iraque, Afganistan etc).
And because I am not anti-american, I need to say this also. If Iraque
attacks some country, we need to stop Iraque with force also.

Drac

Feb 4, 2003, 2:12pm

amen

Feb 4, 2003, 2:14pm

> Oh yes, this will change everything, thanks for enlightening me light form.
> Of course it is justified to kill innocent people as long it is not done on
> purpose *g*
> You cannot seriously call it a peacekeeping operation if USA (with some
> European countries) will attack Iraque?
> If you say yes, I strongly suggest you get a dictionary and and look up the
> world peacefull and hostile, because you must have mixed up those 2 words
> somehow.

It is considered "peacekeeping" due to what _could_ happen if we don't act with our
military at the current situation.

> Furthemore, I think that if USA attacks Iraque withouth the aproval of UN,
> UN should be obligaded to prevent USA, whatever it takes. Same if USA attack

Mmm, the UN preventing the US from attacking? How much of the UN's "peacekeeping"
personal are actually US troops? More than half I'd bet.

> Mexico or Canada, we should not stand by and look. I doubt tho that USA will
> attack those countries, because then one might need to fight on own land, so
> they will probably keep on bombing countries, which names they do not know
> how to pronounce and is as far away from them as possible ( Vietnam, Korea,
> Iraque, Afganistan etc).

I don't even think the British spell Iraq with a ue at the end, I could be wrong. As
for pronouncing it, it's our language we can say it however we damn well please.
Sorry, it's our dialect. Don't want to get the British crazies on us for "destroying
their language."

> And because I am not anti-american, I need to say this also. If Iraque
> attacks some country, we need to stop Iraque with force also.

Well compare it this way; if the US attacks, civilian deaths will tried to be kept
low. If Iraq attacks, I think, civilian deaths will be what they're trying to
achieve. It's better to be pre-emptive then to have another Hitler who feels the
need to cleanse the world of all those whom are different. Hey, Saddam did it once
already, didn't he? Sorry, I can't say the same for Bush.

--Bowen--

Feb 4, 2003, 3:11pm

well ; there is war ( killing ppl ) and there is peacekeeping (trying to
prevent war ) , like the UN soldiers do with the blue helmets . and i bet
those troops arent made of american troops more then 50 % . look at kosovo ,
where germany france UK and USA have about equal amount of personal over
there , same in afhanistan .


"bowen" <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> schreef in bericht
news:3e3fe6ce at server1.Activeworlds.com...
form.
on
the
words
>
> It is considered "peacekeeping" due to what _could_ happen if we don't act
with our
> military at the current situation.
>
UN,
attack
>
> Mmm, the UN preventing the US from attacking? How much of the UN's
"peacekeeping"
> personal are actually US troops? More than half I'd bet.
>
will
land, so
know
Korea,
>
> I don't even think the British spell Iraq with a ue at the end, I could be
wrong. As
> for pronouncing it, it's our language we can say it however we damn well
please.
> Sorry, it's our dialect. Don't want to get the British crazies on us for
"destroying
> their language."
>
>
> Well compare it this way; if the US attacks, civilian deaths will tried to
be kept
> low. If Iraq attacks, I think, civilian deaths will be what they're
trying to
> achieve. It's better to be pre-emptive then to have another Hitler who
feels the
> need to cleanse the world of all those whom are different. Hey, Saddam
did it once
> already, didn't he? Sorry, I can't say the same for Bush.
>
> --Bowen--
>
>

Feb 4, 2003, 5:09pm

B4 u start reading I hafta warn u: It became quiet a long story, but I guess
it will be worth to read:

Yes light form... I did mean "the US army". Lucky for me, that little human
error did not cause Collateral Damage. I suppose u know the expression
Collateral Damage quiet well since the expression was invented by the
Pentagon. "Collateral Damage" was for example used by the Pentagon when one
of those "smart" bombs had entered a shelter for a few hundred civillians in
Iraq and had blown them into 1000 pieces. Israel now loves to use that
expression aswell since the introduction of it by the US. One example; They
thought they had found a place where granates where made in Gaza City. They
blew up about 20 shops and several workshops to get that one place...
afterwards it seemed the place wasn't there... Collateral Damage.... I
don't know if they broadcast things like that in the US, but they do over
here.

I always wonder, what many ppl in the US think why the attaques at the US
took place by these extremists. It is not just because they hate u, and it
is not because Allah tells them. More important is why do they hate the
Western World (wich includes the Netherlands btw, where I live). The main
reason is that the few of us Western ppl (1st world ppl we call them) own
over half of this planet. Besides that we have uge amounts of money that we
all keep to ourselves. If my neighbour rings my doorbell telling me he is
hungry I tell him to fuck off and get a job. That is what we call
"civilisation". Now I have been traveling for a few years and have been to
many places where ppl did not have a 10th of what I have. I could knock
their door and they would share the little food they had right away with me
and offered me a bed. These ppl we call "not civilized" yet.
We have a car, a video, cd-players, dvd even, surround systems, amusement
parks, cinema's, a computer, mobile phone... We wanna go out every weekend,
go on holliday twice a year, travel the world... well u mention it... Even
if u had just half of what I just mentioned ur one of the lucky few. Our
Western world has medicine for almost everything, schools, billions of
Dollars to send ppl up in the sky by plain or even space shuttles... We have
insurances, the farmers have good soil, we have technology for who knows
what. Sometimes we sell a bit of that to the 2nd and 3rd world, but we made
sure the money they payed came in our pockets. never theirs!
The ppl of the 2nd and 3rd world countries had the bad luck that God made
them to be born there... Even worse, some of their parents r Muslim, Budhist
or or Hindu... Well, u would say God had his fun at that moment, but no, he
even gave 'm black hair and a dark, red or yellow skin, so they would be
easy to reccognize by us Western ppl.
So at some point in history we thought; "well... we have everything, but its
not enough yet". We Dutch were great at that, so we went among others to the
US to kill the Indians and made the land ours, we went to Australia, killed
most of the aborigionals and made the land ours. Same story for Africa and
South-East Asia... everything that was worth something we "stole" with our
Armys... We should have known the black mud in the ground would become
usefull some centuries later, cause then we would have occupied those
countries at that point aswell. but we thought its was just dessert, so we
left them. But I hafta say: we have been kind too... we invited some of
these 3rd world ppl to our 1st world ... we called them slaves.
Now in our times things changed a bit... some parts of the world that was no
real use to us we gave back to the ppl that lived there, and since we robbed
their countries empty we left them with nothing. These r the ppl that knock
our doors now and tell us they r hungry. Some food is all they want. Our
answer to them is: "Fuck of and get a job!" Maybe... maybe sometimes when a
few kids of them died of hunger allready and the guy that knocked our door
is to weak to knock again, we give him one dollar so he gets well enough
again to realize that he has been fucked by us. With a little luck he can
live an other year. When he does have anything that might be worth
something, like coffee, tobaco, diamonds, we still concidder it ours. We
give the man even two dollars so he is healthy enough to be able to dig it
out of the ground or grow it for us. Still he ends up with nothing.
Now I told u bout the mistake we made in that desert... The place where the
oil is. Their society grew strong enough in history by trade between
south-east Asia and Europe. Their dessert happened to be in the middle of
that. Their Allah was smarter than our God, cause he left a desert: Oil. Now
u know we 1st world ppl r bad loosers so considdered that oil ours anyway.
We where wrong there.
Bush and the rest of our 1st world now allows North Korea to sell nuclear
weapons in the open to the rest of the world. Bush allows Pakistan to
threath India with nuclear weapons, and allows India to do the same. We all
allowed the Muslim Government in Sudan to kill over 2,000,000 of the
Christian Sudaneese population !!!! Until China said (last year) they where
going to dig for oil in Sudan. Bush knew to stop more or less the war in
Sudan on condition that China would not be allowed to dig for oil there....
The Oil is considdered to be for the 1st world. Not for China!

Saddam is a Basterd yes... but no prove still is there that he has the
weapons, the US claims he has. This while North Korea is selling them in the
open... Why not attack North Korea? or Pakistan? Because there is no oil...
simple as that.
Now the 2nd and 3rd world r rather pissed off about the attitude we have
here in the 1st world. They r mad cause we r never willing to share or help
them with their education or with medicine or what ever. We r not even
giving them worth for the goods they sell, unless its sold by a 1st world
company. This raised some, not many, but a few extremists that r comming for
revenge or at least to shake us awake a bit that things r not in the right
perspective. The ways they choose r not always mine, but lets say that's
"Collateral Damage" they couse. The rest of them is just asking for a little
bit of help... thats all...
Ever wondered why the US is up till now alone in the UN and the rest of the
1st world to attack Iraq?? Could it be Bush is wrong at this point??
Allthough the extremists hardly say they r acting in the name of Allah, be
sure Bush will not hasitate to call out Gods blessings over the comming
bombs at Bagdad. Lets hope for us God will not fail us this time...

screb



[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 8:24pm

Give it up, Bowen. He's just a dope who's just repeating what his country's
media has been telling them about us. At least I get my information from
multiple sources. It's happening anyways. Not like he can stop it.

Vipers...

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 8:27pm

Argumentative flaw:

Peace at all costs means there is nothing worth fighting for. Nothing worth
fighting for means you're a pushover. Being a pushover means that last
century you'd all be under Nazi rule. But considering your comments in the
general discussion group about Jews causing the Columbia disaster, I have
serious doubts as to whether you'd find that situation ideal or not.

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 8:48pm

the problem here is Drac, you are reasoning as a rational, civilised
person. Unfortunately, moslim fundamentalists are neither if anything.
They are blind fantatics going to any length. did you follow the
attrocities muslim fundo's inflicted on their own country men (fellow
muslims)

Imganine those lunatics with Mass destruction weapons. I am totally sure
Saddam will provide them with anything they want, as long as they use it
against 'the west' whatever that maybe in his crazed view.

By premptive strikes against such a 'roque state' US indeed keeps the
peace. They have my full blessing to erradicate any fanatics they want,
and good luck to the iraqi oilfields to them as a reward



"count dracula" <dracula at netsonic.fi> wrote in
news:3e3fd015 at server1.Activeworlds.com:

>
> Oh yes, this will change everything, thanks for enlightening me light
> form. Of course it is justified to kill innocent people as long it is
> not done on purpose *g*
> You cannot seriously call it a peacekeeping operation if USA (with
> some European countries) will attack Iraque?
> If you say yes, I strongly suggest you get a dictionary and and look
> up the world peacefull and hostile, because you must have mixed up
> those 2 words somehow.
>

Feb 4, 2003, 8:55pm

Comments within...

[View Quote] What does the term collateral damage have to do with anything? Are you mad
because it's a politically correct term? If so, then I'm with you.
Political correctness that extreme is just dumb. But why did you bring it
up?

Israel is as much at fault as the Palestinians for the situation in the
Middle East.

>
> I always wonder, what many ppl in the US think why the attaques at the US
> took place by these extremists. It is not just because they hate u, and it
> is not because Allah tells them. More important is why do they hate the
> Western World (wich includes the Netherlands btw, where I live). The main
> reason is that the few of us Western ppl (1st world ppl we call them)

That is _spin_. France, England, Germany, Poland, Switzerland, Spain,
Portugal, Austria, Belgium, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, and others are
considered first world countries. They are in the Eastern world, as you put
it.

own
> over half of this planet.

Eastern World. Western World. Of course the western world owns half the
planet! Think about it! :)

Besides that we have uge amounts of money that we
> all keep to ourselves. If my neighbour rings my doorbell telling me he is
> hungry I tell him to fuck off and get a job. That is what we call
> "civilisation".

Hey, don't lump everyone on one side of the world into one category.
Americans, and probably most people in North America would never do that to
any other country.

Now I have been traveling for a few years and have been to
> many places where ppl did not have a 10th of what I have. I could knock
> their door and they would share the little food they had right away with
me
> and offered me a bed. These ppl we call "not civilized" yet.
> We have a car, a video, cd-players, dvd even, surround systems, amusement
> parks, cinema's, a computer, mobile phone... We wanna go out every
weekend,
> go on holliday twice a year, travel the world... well u mention it...
Even
> if u had just half of what I just mentioned ur one of the lucky few. Our
> Western world has medicine for almost everything, schools, billions of
> Dollars to send ppl up in the sky by plain or even space shuttles... We
have
> insurances, the farmers have good soil, we have technology for who knows
> what. Sometimes we sell a bit of that to the 2nd and 3rd world, but we
made
> sure the money they payed came in our pockets. never theirs!

How do you argue the fact that the United States is the largest exporter of
free international aid to all countries in the world? Yes, they could be
doing more, but so could every other industrialized country.

> The ppl of the 2nd and 3rd world countries had the bad luck that God made
> them to be born there... Even worse, some of their parents r Muslim,
Budhist
> or or Hindu... Well, u would say God had his fun at that moment, but no,
he
> even gave 'm black hair and a dark, red or yellow skin, so they would be
> easy to reccognize by us Western ppl.

What country are you living in? Definitely not the United States,
definitely not Canada. Have you forgotten? The US was created by rejects
that the rest of the world didn't want. People like Tom Paine. And since
then it has grown into one of the largest melting pots in the world. You
can go into any major city and find at least one person descended from or
native to one of almost every country in the world.

> So at some point in history we thought; "well... we have everything, but
its
> not enough yet". We Dutch were great at that, so we went among others to
the
> US to kill the Indians and made the land ours, we went to Australia,
killed
> most of the aborigionals and made the land ours. Same story for Africa and
> South-East Asia... everything that was worth something we "stole" with our
> Armys... We should have known the black mud in the ground would become
> usefull some centuries later, cause then we would have occupied those
> countries at that point aswell. but we thought its was just dessert, so we
> left them. But I hafta say: we have been kind too... we invited some of
> these 3rd world ppl to our 1st world ... we called them slaves.

Every region in the world has these things, as you say. In Africa people
sold their enemies to slavers. In Europe you had Hitler. In China there
was the human corruption in the communist government. In Malaysia and
Vietnam there was the massive slaughter of millions of innocent people after
US troops pulled out of Vietnam.

> Now in our times things changed a bit... some parts of the world that was
no
> real use to us we gave back to the ppl that lived there, and since we
robbed
> their countries empty we left them with nothing. These r the ppl that
knock
> our doors now and tell us they r hungry. Some food is all they want. Our
> answer to them is: "Fuck of and get a job!" Maybe... maybe sometimes when
a
> few kids of them died of hunger allready and the guy that knocked our door
> is to weak to knock again, we give him one dollar so he gets well enough
> again to realize that he has been fucked by us. With a little luck he can
> live an other year. When he does have anything that might be worth
> something, like coffee, tobaco, diamonds, we still concidder it ours. We
> give the man even two dollars so he is healthy enough to be able to dig it
> out of the ground or grow it for us. Still he ends up with nothing.
> Now I told u bout the mistake we made in that desert... The place where
the
> oil is. Their society grew strong enough in history by trade between
> south-east Asia and Europe. Their dessert happened to be in the middle of
> that. Their Allah was smarter than our God, cause he left a desert: Oil.
Now
> u know we 1st world ppl r bad loosers so considdered that oil ours anyway.
> We where wrong there.


> Bush and the rest of our 1st world now allows North Korea to sell nuclear
> weapons in the open to the rest of the world.

That situation is being solved diplomatically. What, you think we should
march to war on everything? ;)

Bush allows Pakistan to
> threath India with nuclear weapons, and allows India to do the same.

Why all of the sudden is the United States an international police force?
Isn't that the UN's job? Maybe it's their fault. Perhaps they are rife
with inaction. Besides, that situation was defused months ago.

We all
> allowed the Muslim Government in Sudan to kill over 2,000,000 of the
> Christian Sudaneese population !!!! Until China said (last year) they
where
> going to dig for oil in Sudan. Bush knew to stop more or less the war in
> Sudan on condition that China would not be allowed to dig for oil
there....
> The Oil is considdered to be for the 1st world. Not for China!

I must not have heard of this, and I watch a lot of news! :) Guess I'll
have to research it.

>
> Saddam is a Basterd yes... but no prove still is there that he has the
> weapons, the US claims he has

Perhaps you should hold your tongue till tomorrow. :) Powel may change
your mind. But what we do know is that there are chemical warheads which
were not declared. Empty you say? Yes, of course. What kind of moron
would store chemicals in a warhead when you're not planning on firing it off
immediately? What about the warhead they found that Iraq said was a left
over from 1986? A plausable excuse, but it wasn't declared.

This while North Korea is selling them in the
> open... Why not attack North Korea?

In North Korea we haven't had to put up with constant breaks of
international law by a despot. Iraq has had a decade and some years to
disarm, and still hasn't presented any proof that they _have_. So if you
want to talk about proof, perhaps you should be looking to the perpetrators
as well as the police men. Iraq has had their chance and their decade.
North Korea is getting theirs as we speak.

or Pakistan? Because there is no oil...
> simple as that
> Now the 2nd and 3rd world r rather pissed off about the attitude we have
> here in the 1st world. They r mad cause we r never willing to share or
help
> them with their education or with medicine or what ever. We r not even
> giving them worth for the goods they sell, unless its sold by a 1st world
> company. This raised some, not many, but a few extremists that r comming
for
> revenge or at least to shake us awake a bit that things r not in the right
> perspective. The ways they choose r not always mine, but lets say that's
> "Collateral Damage" they couse. The rest of them is just asking for a
little
> bit of help... thats all...

US: biggest exporter of international aid. We've tried to make them happy.
It's no use. It doesn't work. They hate America because we aren't as
downtrodden as them. So kill their citizendry! Sorry, but what did we do
to them?

> Ever wondered why the US is up till now alone in the UN and the rest of
the
> 1st world to attack Iraq??

Australia, Spain, Portugal, and Britain are our allies. They are
representatives in the UN. Stop spinning.

Could it be Bush is wrong at this point??

Well we could sit on our hands and let Saddam have another decade. If you
really want. It's only America's ass.

> Allthough the extremists hardly say they r acting in the name of Allah, be
> sure Bush will not hasitate to call out Gods blessings over the comming
> bombs at Bagdad. Lets hope for us God will not fail us this time...
>
> screb
>

Peace for all, and domination of the will.

With due respect,
Chris

Feb 4, 2003, 9:28pm

Corrections:

"So kill their citizendry!" is supposed to refer to the American citizendry.

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 9:35pm

lol , dude , chill , you take everything a lil too serious here , it was a
joke , do you knwo that word ? and all the other stuff doesnt make even
sence

Feb 4, 2003, 9:38pm

It certainly makes sense. There are some things worth fighting for. Like
freedom, for one. Others see toppling Saddam's regime as worth fighting
for. And still others see the oil in the middle east is worth fighting for.
No, the two latter are not the same thing.

As for a joke, it was still racist and antisemetic, and poorly timed. You
need to apologize.

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 9:49pm

i apologize to no one , and i can make fun of jews americans , chinese ,
belgian ( my own country ) , and italian ppl as much a si like . fighting
for freedom , well , since when do you care about free dom in other countrys
, did you know no country in the middle east is democratic , not to mention
china , and all the african countrys , so lets start wars everywher eand
give them freedom huh.?

Feb 4, 2003, 9:51pm

Oh yes, that's rather selfish Joker. If you don't care about other
countries, why are you criticizing what the US does with its interests? Now
I really have no respect for you.

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 9:58pm

god chris , where are you getting those ideas ? since whne do i not care
about other countrys ? next time copy paste what i wrote allright

Feb 5, 2003, 12:44am

Stupid random fact... only 10 generations of human life have ever known
a time with complete peace. This leads us back to about 2000 BC so we've
spent about all the time up until 2000BC with at least one country at war
;P. Rome, Greece, Egypt so-on even had wars (obviously you know this if you
studied ancient cultures) 2000BC is about when humans first came around
hehe. Just felt like giving some random information :)

-Sk8man1 (346035)


<snip>

Feb 5, 2003, 12:53am

Alright. I re-read it and I misquoted you. I'm sorry for that. However,
as you can see I have taken responsibility for my comments. I apologized.
And I expect the same thing from you for your anti-semetic "joke" and the
insults you threw at bowen in the general discussion thread.

Chris


[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2003, 7:31am

lol , poor bowen , he must be hurt

Feb 5, 2003, 8:42am

bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e3fe6ce at server1.Activeworlds.com...
form.
on
the
words
>
> It is considered "peacekeeping" due to what _could_ happen if we don't act
with our
> military at the current situation.

You cannot honestly think a war is justified just because maybe Bush has an
itch in his balls? If we start to think that way, we would actually need to
kill everyone around us, because they are or could be a potential risk to
our safety
>
UN,
attack
>
> Mmm, the UN preventing the US from attacking? How much of the UN's
"peacekeeping"
> personal are actually US troops? More than half I'd bet.

What a dilemma, is it not ? I guess some soliders would need to shoot
themselves as they would be a potential risk to themselves. Just think what
COULD happen if they did not take action.
>
will
land, so
know
Korea,
>
> I don't even think the British spell Iraq with a ue at the end, I could be
wrong. As
> for pronouncing it, it's our language we can say it however we damn well
please.
> Sorry, it's our dialect. Don't want to get the British crazies on us for
"destroying
> their language."

Neither do I, but I am not on my way to bomb anyone either, but I promise as
soon as I go, I will check the dictionary
>
>
> Well compare it this way; if the US attacks, civilian deaths will tried to
be kept
> low. If Iraq attacks, I think, civilian deaths will be what they're
trying to
> achieve. It's better to be pre-emptive then to have another Hitler who
feels the
> need to cleanse the world of all those whom are different. Hey, Saddam
did it once
> already, didn't he? Sorry, I can't say the same for Bush.

I do not say it would not be logical to attack from our (western world)
point of view, if we are shortsighted. Just think of all the concequenses.
It is not even the logical problem that bothers me so much in the attack,
but the ethical. Who are we to say we are better people and therefore have
the right to decide what is best for them? (us actually but one is not
supposed to say so).
>
> --Bowen--
>
>

Drac

Feb 5, 2003, 8:52am

Not sure if you refered to me and the media of my country, but FYI I try to
get alternative views, not only CNN and BBC.

And media here has actually been quite neutral about this circus, actually
there has not been much on Tv about it. I guess we are just so tired of it
already. I have made my conclusions mostly by talking to other people and by
trying to make an opinion of my OWN, something I cannot say about you. You
seem to stick very much with the official line as your goverment and your
media has programmed you to do. I am not blaming you for this, it is not
your fault,, but maybe some day you will be able to think further than CCN
or goverment wants you to. You might become a troublemaker then in their
eyes and maybe be sent to an island near Cuba, and held there for months.
And dont worry they can just keep you there withouth evidence or withouth
charging you, because in their eyes you might be a potential security risk.

Drac

sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e403d91$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Give it up, Bowen. He's just a dope who's just repeating what his
country's
> media has been telling them about us. At least I get my information from
> multiple sources. It's happening anyways. Not like he can stop it.
>
> Vipers...
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

1  2  3  |   Order by index