Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Movies / TV / Entertainment - Where's the Fahrenheit 9/11 topic?
| User | Post |
Kahunah
Posts: 72/155 |
in a case like that i don't think that the United States would risk such a war. it is for that reason that i made the comment in the first place. |
Legion
Posts: 1259/5657 |
"yeah should the UN do something like that and vote to remove it the United States would be powerless to stop it if all nations were in agreement...somebody's gotta stand up to the giant. beside the worst possible thing that could happen is that the United States would go to war, but they'd rethink it cause the United States can't fight all the countries in the UN at once."
AAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 
Holy shit, did you even think about what you said before you typed it? If that were to happen, we'd probably all be dead. For starters, we wouldn't back down. And a war between us and every country in the U.N. would be the bloodiest fucking war of all time. Do you even realize how much would be destroyed? How many lives would be lost? Holy shit, you just KNOW nukes would come into play.
Yeah, let's start World War III early and kill everything. Smart thinking.
Hell, let's forget about the U.N. and just think of a war between America and Europe. Oh, the carnage, the carnage. It wouldn't be a pretty sight and there would be NO winners on either side, just losers. I know that's said about every war but it's damn literal in this sense.
I swear, if I ever become president (which I have absolutely no desire to) I'm not lifting a damn finger to help anyone. We can trade back and forth and what have you, but if your country gets invaded by some larger country, or you have a ruthless dictator ruling over you with an iron fist making life a miserable hell, don't expect me to do anything.
Last thing I want to be known as is a "war mongeror" and get spit in the face.
We'll see how long it takes for people to change their tunes.
|
Kahunah
Posts: 54/155 |
maybe its a matter of voting for the lesser of two evils. that's what we did up here in Canada. every party leader was bascially fucking us in the ass so we voted for the lesser of the evils and kept the Liberals in power.
now that power has been given back to the iraqis (thought i think its a puppet government) are the US forces staying there to legitimize the government and to keep things from further destabilizing or are they going to slowly start pulling out until occupation is minimal? |
Emptyeye
Posts: 540/2273 |
Arguably the funniest thing about this is that Moore is obvious very anti-occupation of Iraq.
He is also anti-Bush.
He obviously hasn't studied John Kerry's position on this issue. Even if Kerry ends up in the White House (With or without Moore's movie's influence), it will NOT magically get us out of Iraq, because Kerry feels the same way about the occupation as Bush does. Additionally, Kerry was one of many people from both parties (President Bill Clinton was another) who said that Saddam had WMDs (Which was our pretense for being there in the first place).
So what happens next year if Kerry ends up in office and Moore finds out his movie had no effect at all on our Iraqi policy? |
Kahunah
Posts: 48/155 |
Originally posted by Cymoro
Unfortunately, politics is a little bit more complicated than our legal system. If the US has veto power, they sure as damn well can use it.
yeah should the UN do something like that and vote to remove it the United States would be powerless to stop it if all nations were in agreement...somebody's gotta stand up to the giant. beside the worst possible thing that could happen is that the United States would go to war, but they'd rethink it cause the United States can't fight all the countries in the UN at once.
Cymoro
Posts: 861/2216 |
Originally posted by Wheelies
I will say two words: good movie
Please, go into detail as to why it was good. Are you young and impressionable? Do you hate GWB? Why?
Or do you find Michael Moore erotic like most of his fans do? |
NSNick
Posts: 631/3875 |
Originally posted by Kahunah
yeah but the people in Guantanamo Bay are terrorists supporting terrorist activities towards many nations.
If you can show that positively, then why the need to hold them without charging them or giving them access to legal help? The problem is, they could just arrest anyone, claim they were terrorists, and hold them indefinitely. |
Wheelies
Posts: 16/17 |
I will say two words: good movie |
Cymoro
Posts: 849/2216 |
Originally posted by Kahunah
yeah but the people in Guantanamo Bay are terrorists supporting terrorist activities towards many nations. the United States does have veto power but in this case the United States representative shouldn't be given a chance to vote. its similar to someone who is on trial. they do not have a say whether they are guilty or not its up to a bunch of other people to determine their fate.
Unfortunately, politics is a little bit more complicated than our legal system. If the US has veto power, they sure as damn well can use it. |
Kahunah
Posts: 29/155 |
yeah but the people in Guantanamo Bay are terrorists supporting terrorist activities towards many nations. the United States does have veto power but in this case the United States representative shouldn't be given a chance to vote. its similar to someone who is on trial. they do not have a say whether they are guilty or not its up to a bunch of other people to determine their fate. |
NSNick
Posts: 622/3875 |
Originally posted by Kahunah
yeah i suppose that you're right but what i meant is that if the United States wanted to maintain their relationships with other countries in the world, they wouldn't go and break every rule in the Jeniva(i dunno how its spelt)'s Human Rights Act right?
Kind of like how we're holding people indefinitely without charge or access to lawyers at Guantanamo Bay?
Originally posted by Kahunah
i bet the UN would pass some law demoting the Unitied States from its current position within the UN (i know that its position is a permanant one, but i mean the UN would rewrite the base laws of the UN and replace the United States with another nation).
A vote like that would never pass unless the US representative was somehow prevented from voting (much like we did to Russia), since the United States has veto power, which we've apparantly taken to mean "do anything you fucking want" power. |
Kahunah
Posts: 20/155 |
Originally posted by psilocybin
"if the United States could play by the same rules as the terrorists play by..."
Don't kid yourself, the USA has been deemed a terrorist state by the world court and has been responsible for some of the worst atrocities of the 20th century. The USA plays by very similar rules as these guys, we may not cut off the heads of innocents on television... but we'll broadcast the showering of billions of dollars worth of missiles on to their cities. I guess as long as we film it from a distance it's not the same, right?
yeah i suppose that you're right but what i meant is that if the United States wanted to maintain their relationships with other countries in the world, they wouldn't go and break every rule in the Jeniva(i dunno how its spelt)'s Human Rights Act right? i know the United States has done their fare share in the atrocities that we are faced with day and and day out but there's a threashold that they can't surpass without being shunned by like every country in the world and not only that i bet the UN would pass some law demoting the Unitied States from its current position within the UN (i know that its position is a permanant one, but i mean the UN would rewrite the base laws of the UN and replace the United States with another nation). |
NightHawk
Posts: 293/621 |
I've know about that film for a few months now.
I read about it here.
Warning though: they get their fair share of trolls on that site, and there's a lot of cursing now and then, so expect some of that if you visit the site. (I'm a lurker at the site myself... I've made a grand total of 3 posts  ). |
Legion
Posts: 1255/5657 |
Originally posted by Cymoro
Woo woo, here copmes the pain train.
All they really need now is a conversation with Moore himself, and they'll be done. Watch the trailer and see how good it is.
YES! YES DAMN IT YES! *humps leg*
Oh my god, I've been waiting forever for someone to make this movie. FINALLY! 
I'm bloggin' this. |
Cymoro
Posts: 830/2216 |
Woo woo, here comes the pain train.
All they really need now is a conversation with Moore himself, and they'll be done. Watch the trailer and see how good it is. |
psilocybin
Posts: 10/25 |
The documentary was mild... Moore could have done so much more when it comes to smearing the folks currently in office. There wasn't much in there that I hadn't already known since the start of this mess. I did really enjoy a lot of Moore's humor in the film, he's a pretty clever guy.
"if the United States could play by the same rules as the terrorists play by..."
Don't kid yourself, the USA has been deemed a terrorist state by the world court and has been responsible for some of the worst atrocities of the 20th century. The USA plays by very similar rules as these guys, we may not cut off the heads of innocents on television... but we'll broadcast the showering of billions of dollars worth of missiles on to their cities. I guess as long as we film it from a distance it's not the same, right? |
Kahunah
Posts: 16/155 |
i live in Canada and canadians who have seen it couldn't agree with it more. apart from the leader of our conservative party who think's Bush is a god the rest of us up here hate him, though we do sympathize with your fight against terror.
might i add those bastards in Afghanistan and Iraq who have been decapitating americans and other residents of nations allied with freedom need to get what they deserve. if the United States could play by the same rules as the terrorists play by (in some cases that would be good but in others it would be bad because there's no reason for giving the country with the biggest war machine and a leader who has a bloodlust certain political advantages and humaine disregards to even the playing field) sending in seal and assasinating a few members of those murders immidiate families would help them realize real quick that killing innocent people is wrong, its ashame that the innocent family members would be killed but the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many (thank you star trek) and i see no other way in getting the messege across to people who just don't care or give a shit about anything but their own personal gains. By sending soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan yes you keep the peace (relatively i guess :s) but at what cost. Not only that but no nation no matter how great they are or how powerful can win a war against a people who are not afraid to die (lessons of Viet Nam) unless they wipe EVERY single last individual (in this case islamic radicalists) who support the given cause against the nation off the face of the earth. and i'm not pro-american or anything because the United States military and certain political leaders throughout their history have/has killed and have/has endorsed the killing of many innocent people as well. 1998 the Clinton administration, bombed the plant of Al |
Colin
Posts: 2373/11302 |
Arwon: I'm sure the documentary itself - regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the message Moore's projecting - is very well made. No argument on that.
#1 at the box office... Who didn't call that? |
RavenX
Posts: 18/57 |
It's an anti Bush movie, I'm anti Bush, i'm THE Anti Bush. Which means i like how that movie thinks. But the idea of the movie itself is a bit depressing.... |
Arwon
Posts: 80/506 |
I'd go see it if he called it "Preaching to the Converted". For someone like me seeing the movie would be utterly pointless. Friends have told me it's better than Bowling for Columbine though, so maybe it's a worthwhile documentary this time. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
|
