Coping with failure - No sympathy from me commie pukes! [Archive]

View Full Version : Coping with failure - No sympathy from me commie pukes!

Liberty Lover

11th April 2003, 11:56

kylie

11th April 2003, 12:04

http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?articl...0&group=webcast (http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=311060&group=webcast)

Liberty Lover

11th April 2003, 12:09

Here's one you might be interested in:

http://members.tripod.com/~RobertGillette/...Illuminati.html (http://members.tripod.com/~RobertGillette/Illuminati.html)

Invader Zim

11th April 2003, 12:11

Like any-one would believe an artical which has a picture looks like it has been edited in MS paint....

Also what of all the other pictures on the news with thousands in the crowds... waht about them?

Im sorry but youre source is bullshit.

Umoja

11th April 2003, 12:17

What country have we gone into after World War II and actually helped LL? If this is a new exception to our track record, then I'll be happy, but the people in Afghanistan were happy (well actually only those in Kabul considering no one got rid of the warlords).

kylie

11th April 2003, 12:23

Quote: from AK47 on 12:11 pm on April 11, 2003
Like any-one would believe an artical which has a picture looks like it has been edited in MS paint....

Also what of all the other pictures on the news with thousands in the crowds... waht about them?

Im sorry but youre source is bullshit.

its been highlighted, not edited.
im not sure the exact population of baghdad, but its at least 500k. there was certainly some on the streets, but it was no way in the hundreds of thousands.

Liberty Lover

11th April 2003, 12:28

Umoja,

Firstly I think the US should get rid of the warlords...and I am certain there are people in the administration who agree.

Secondly I do think this is a new exception to the US track record...people like Sec. of Def. Paul Wolfowitz seemed to be determined to spread democracy. While James Woosley as gone as far as to critisise valuble US allies like Saudi Arabia over their reluctance to accept democracy.

(Edited by Liberty Lover at 12:30 pm on April 11, 2003)

革命者

11th April 2003, 12:40

Quote: from feoric on 1:23 pm on April 11, 2003

Quote: from AK47 on 12:11 pm on April 11, 2003
Like any-one would believe an artical which has a picture looks like it has been edited in MS paint....

Also what of all the other pictures on the news with thousands in the crowds... waht about them?

Im sorry but youre source is bullshit.

its been highlighted, not edited.
im not sure the exact population of baghdad, but its at least 500k. there was certainly some on the streets, but it was no way in the hundreds of thousands.
it's 6m.

Sabocat

11th April 2003, 14:23

Now that we’ve liberated Iraq were going do all this stupid shit like install a parliamentary democracy, open hospitals, public schools and libraries. Who knows, we may even do something completely fucking insane like forcing them to stop killing each other.

LL. HAHAHAHAHA..."we've liberated" wow...all of what 1700 aussies? Who you gonna go after next FIJI?..hahaha. I don't know whats funnier the word liberation or the word we've.

Yeah...it's gonna be a great regime installed. Have you seen and read about the Iraqi that they're putting into power there? He's a convicted criminal.

US Alternative To Saddam Has Criminal Record
In 1992, a Jordanian court sentenced Chalabi in absentia to 22 years in prison with hard labour, [ 31 charges of embezzlement, theft, misuse of depositor funds etc. etc. ] after the collapse of the businessman's Jordanian bank. Chalabi's financials were questioned again in January last year when the US State Department suggested the INC had misspent $2.2 million of US funding.

[Tom says: Sounds like the kind of man we can do business with. I guess Ken Lay was unavailable for the post. See: "Chalabi was one of the most notorious crooks in the history of the Middle East."]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Austin English

Dublin, Ireland, 16 February, 2003

Washington has picked its candidate for the future leader of Iraq, should Saddam Hussein be toppled from power, amid criticism from United States senators and senior figures in the State Department.

George W Bush's choice for an interim leader of Iraq is Dr Ahmad Chalabi, head of the anti-Saddam, London-based Iraqi National Congress (INC). It is a choice that has raised a number of objections within the Bush administration that the 57-year-old former businessman is too controversial to make a success of the US-designed `regime change'.

Born in 1945 to a wealthy Iraqi family, Chalabi's grandfather was a minister in the Iraqi parliament during the 1920s. His father, a grain importer, is reported to have been an MP and senator. According to Chalabi, his father was head of the Iraqi senate in 1958 when King Faisal II was killed in a Republican coup d'état. Chalabi's family then fled to the West.

There, he learned perfect English in a Sussex boarding school before heading to the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology and gaining a PhD in mathematics from Chicago University.

But, in 1992, a Jordanian court sentenced Chalabi in absentia to 22 years in prison with hard labour, after the collapse of the businessman's Jordanian bank. Petra Bank, which he established in 1977, grew to become the second largest in Jordan. Chalabi claims the bank became too successful for Jordan's powerful business sector, and soldiers were ordered to take it over by military decree.

Chalabi's financials were questioned again in January last year when the US State Department suggested the INC had misspent $2.2 million of US funding, given to the INC as an anti-Saddam group looking to establish democracy in Iraq. Despite INC financial records proving otherwise, US funding has ceased.

Chalabi turned to politics after the Petra Bank debacle, gaining enough support from anti-Saddam Iraqis in the West to return to Iraq and attempt to overthrow the dictator. The US promised to aid the attempt and by 1995, after spending three years in the north with Iraqi Kurds, Chalabi had amassed a small army. But US support never materialised and Saddam rooted out the INC, executing 130 of its members. Chalabi still blames the US for their deaths and for Saddam's continued reign.

Senior officials in the US State Department reckon the Iraqi people would reject Chalabi as an outsider. If they did welcome him, critics suggest Chalabi's vision of Iraq -- as a haven of democracy with a federal structure representing all ethnic groups -- would alienate the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt. The neighbouring countries are fearful that their own peoples would rise up and demand the same.

Saudi Arabia especially would not welcome Chalabi's imposition after Saddam's departure. Saudi Arabia is the self-proclaimed protector of the Sunni, or `orthodox', branch of Islam, of which Saddam is also a member, whereas Chalabi is a Shi'ite.

Only 10 per cent of the world's one billion Muslims are Shi'ites, but at least 60 per cent of Iraq's 23 million people belong to the sect. Treated as an inferior minority, Iraq's Shi'ite Muslims have been excluded from Iraqi parliament and politics for over 70 years, a practice Chalabi wants to change. However, a strong Shi'ite presence in Iraq would be a cause for concern in neighbouring Saudi Arabia.

Not that it's surprising that the US will install another piece of shit puppet.

Chiak47

11th April 2003, 14:40

LL,

BRAVO....
http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/images/smilies/ylsuper.gif

It's a sad day when UFO websites start spreading the news around...

Thanks for the good read...
http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/images/smilies/coffee.gif

Dr. Rosenpenis

11th April 2003, 15:04

Chiak, you really seem to be missing the point of our opposition to the war. We don't chalenge the tyrany of Saddam, we simply see how this war is clearly not being fought for the Iraqi people as it should be. Any bringing-down of a dictator should be by the people and for the people, not for Haliburton.

Chiak47

11th April 2003, 15:09

VC,

I agree 100%.I do believe the White House stated over and over again that the oil belongs to the people of Iraq.Therefore they will get the money not sadamn and his 100 palaces.

Thanks,
Eric

Dhul Fiqar

11th April 2003, 15:17

Do Capitalists not even understand how their own economy works?

It's simple:

1. Blow something up
2. Give contracts to local companies to rebuild it
3. Have the Iraqis themselves pay for it with oil, at the same time pushing the price down and spurring the U.S. economy
4. Give the contracts to American companies, thus setting off a huge growth in the economy because of all the income produced from these massive rebuilding projects.

It's not as simple as them showing up with a pump to take all the oil and then go away, it's a four stage process that benefits the U.S. every step of the way.

--- G.

(Edited by Dhul Fiqar at 11:19 pm on April 11, 2003)

Invader Zim

11th April 2003, 17:35

Quote: from feoric on 12:23 pm on April 11, 2003

Quote: from AK47 on 12:11 pm on April 11, 2003
Like any-one would believe an artical which has a picture looks like it has been edited in MS paint....

Also what of all the other pictures on the news with thousands in the crowds... waht about them?

Im sorry but youre source is bullshit.

its been highlighted, not edited.
im not sure the exact population of baghdad, but its at least 500k. there was certainly some on the streets, but it was no way in the hundreds of thousands.

6million , and there were thousands out in the streets. All you had to do was turn on the TV to see them all celebrating.

Do you watch the news? Igf so you cant have missed it. Do you suffer from amnesia in that case? Have you been drinking heavily? Have you been fasting from TV? Were your TV and radio down? Because unless its one of these things i cant see how you can have failed to see this.

Anonymous

11th April 2003, 17:45

Sorry, from the title of the thread I thought that this was going to be about the collaspe of USSR, the free markets in China, downfall of Poland, and the starvation in North Korea.

Comrade Otaku

11th April 2003, 18:37

The war is far from over. If the liberation of Iraq is the same as the liberation of Afghanistan, I'd be surprised to see it get off its feet. The American government cares only about itself, not the free peoples of the world. I see no light at the end of the tunnel, for the Administration

Iepilei

11th April 2003, 21:32

It's been said, but if invading forces came in to oust Bush - there would be celebration as well.

Xvall

11th April 2003, 21:49

No doubt all you fucked up vermin-ridden, card-carrying, brain-dead, hog-humping, witless, commie pukes have seen the scenes of celebration in Baghdad and every other city throughout Iraq by now and are feeling like the pieces of shit you are for participating in those pathetic little protests that were as nutless and unimaginative as they were just plain fucking stupid.

You are an idiot. A very large idiot. You, like a lot of the newer capitalists on this board, have gotten so bad that many of the origional capitalists see your asinine, nuke iraq, dissenters suxx mentality as something completely uneccesary. Cheering. As I stated in previous threads; even the most right-wing of media sources have yet to produce evidence that any more than 1,000 people are celebrating right now. (That's 0.0002% of the population, for those of you who are bad at math. ) In addition; many people shown are not celebrating, but rather taking the opporunity to use this state of insanity to go looting stores, setting buldings on fire, and stealing potted plants.

This is the greatest moment in the history of democracy since the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the lifting of the iron curtain and you pus-sucking pinko’s tried to prevent it from happening!

Not one person on this site wanted to prevent this from happening. Not one of us called for the removal of Saddam Hussein from power. Everyone of us on this site believed that a popular uprising would have been much more efficient. It would have produced the same effect, it would have incured less collateral dammage, and the people, having done it all by themselves, would feel much more relieved, proud, and determined. Instead; you bombed them. Most of the population most definitely isn't cheering because a quater of the population is probably dead, and the rest are most likely still hiding in shelters out of fear of errant cruise missiles.

Well FUCK YOU, YOU FAILED.

Calm down. No one wants you hear stupid rants that say fuck every fifteen seconds. Be quiet.

You failed to condemn the Iraqi people to another 20 years of tyranny, you failed from ensuring a repeat of operation Afal, you failed to see the Kurds eradicated, you failed even more than your fucked up ideology.

Lol. When we accuse you capitalists of supporting genocide when you support capitalism; you are outraged at us for equating you with your ideology. Now you assume that anyone ciricizing the government's foreign policy demands that the Iraqi people be destroyed. No. What you have done is condemned them to a lifetime of poverty, death, and occupation.

Now that we’ve liberated Iraq were going do all this stupid shit like install a parliamentary democracy, open hospitals, public schools and libraries. Who knows, we may even do something completely fucking insane like forcing them to stop killing each other.

You make it sound so simple. I have a question; where is the parelementary democracy that you installed in Agfghanistan like you said you would? Where are the schools? Where are the Hospitals? Last time I checked; Afghanistan was pretty much abandoned, they now have a king (Nice democratic choice) and are living worse than they were under the Taliban.

Don’t start thinking it all ends here either commie pukes because this is just the beginning. We could do this world wide if we tried.

Yes! Tyrannic places like Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, Texas, El Salvad-- Ooops! Sorry; those are all your allies. Of course it's the end. The United States isn't going to do anything to North Korea even if they were worse than the Baath Regime in Iraq; even if they made a million weapons of mass destruction. They don't want any of Noth Korea's natural resources.

We could target and destroy the enemies of freedom all over the world, if only we had the balls to put our money where our mouth is.

Why don't they just start by shooting you. At this point; you're just becoming a scab on the board. God; the fascists aren't even this bad.

If you're not willing to fight every dictator and evil nemesis of freedom around the globe, then NEVER embrace hypocrisy so detestably as to utter a syllable about freedom ever again.

Good idea. Kill the president for me.

Assad, Mugabe, Hassan, Qaddafi, Kim Jong ill…all fucked up dictators, all in dire need of a good killing.[/i]

Ariel Sharon ring a bell? Saudi Arabia anyone?

I should like to see, and this will be the last and most ardent of my desires, I should like to see the last dictator strangled to death with the guts of the last terrorist.

You stole that from a nice line about killing capitalists and priests; jerk. Although I agree. George Bush should be strangled with your small intestines.

Fellow lovers of liberty: The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Don’t ever expect to maintain our supreme ideals of liberty without the determination to defend and spread them.

Shut up already.

Dictators of the world: The coalition of free nations is on the side of those who you fear most…your own people.

Lol. Coalition? Please. Two men (Not countries; they don't even have their own countries behind them!) and some Australian guys in a jeep does not constitute as a coalition.

Liberty Lover

12th April 2003, 01:44

"Everyone of us on this site believed that a popular uprising would have been much more efficient."

Er...If you'll recall that was tried in 1991, it failed and resulted in the deaths of a hundred thousand people. Any popular uprising that was not immediatley crushed by Saddam would have turned Iraq into a Somalia.

"Most of the population most definitely isn't cheering because a quater of the population is probably dead, and the rest are most likely still hiding in shelters out of fear of errant cruise missiles."

The Iraq'i infomation minister put the deaths at 1200...hardly what I would call a quarter of 5 million.

"Yes! Tyrannic places like Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, -- Ooops! Sorry; those are all your allies."

In the words of James Woolsey..."We want them nervous. We want them to know that this nation and it's allies are on the march and we're on the side of those whom you-the Mubaraks, the Saudi royal family-fear most: we're on the side of your own people"

"The United States isn't going to do anything to North Korea even if they were worse than the Baath Regime in Iraq; even if they made a million weapons of mass destruction. They don't want any of Noth Korea's natural resources. "

LOL, you will have to let me borrow that crystal ball of your's one day. Richard Perle: "You could not do a deal with Hitler, and you can't do a deal with Saddam Hussein or with North Korea"

"Ariel Sharon ring a bell? Saudi Arabia anyone?"

Last time I checked Sharon was elected by his people. As for the Saudi's...check above.

"stole that from a nice line about killing capitalists and priests; jerk. Although I agree."

It was about killing kings and priests.

"Two men (Not countries; they don't even have their own countries behind them!) and some Australian guys in a jeep does not constitute as a coalition."

This statement is indicative of your limited knowledge of world affairs. 45 nation in total support US action in Iraq. Most Americans support the war...I have not seen a poll that was below 70% in favour.

(Edited by Liberty Lover at 1:49 am on April 12, 2003)

hazard

12th April 2003, 02:00

I don't know what fake news chunk, or was it lover(sigh), has been quoting. In the news I have been watching, none of the things that lover(sigh) has mentioned occureed. Why is that lover?

First, the largely symbolic event of taking down that statue had an american pig covering the head of Saddam with an american flag. Where'd he learn that? The Superstars of Wrestling? Anyway, the Iraqi people responded by waving the iraq flag. That was a direct insult to america. Cuz if those cowards had more guts than to just wave a flag, they'd be gunnin down the americans instead of dancing like a bunch of fairies. Well, they'll soon find out that they replaced a local "dictator" with a foreign one. The only dancing that will be done will be on the graves of the americans.

Second, the american idiots didn't liberate anyone, and I don't just mean the bondage of capitalism. NO, in the news I was watching, millions of iraqis were looting and burning their cities. Talk about complete irresponsibility. The american scumbags roll through these "liberated" cities and don't bother containing or controlling them. Then, they kill 2 kids because they thought they were suicide bombers. Nice job america. Way to liberate. I give the country less than seven days to realize they were much better off with sadam than with the capitalist pig americans.

Third, I saw that spooky looking guy with the glassess who was always yapping in the news and seemed to have a hard on for killing arabs, I saw him shoot his mouth off about tyranny and dictators. I can understand his anti commie rhetoric when he mentioned Stalin. Fair enough, although I don't quite agree. But then he had the gall to slip Lenin in the same group of names. Now he mentioned Hitler as a comparison to Saddam. Thats a stretch. He mentioned Stalin, alongside Hitler, an even worse stretch. But to mention Lenin as being in the same field as Stalin is a bad mistake, but in the same field as Hitler? Gimmie a fucking break. These lunatics are like rabid dogs in their dying days. And they know it. Leave it to a capitalist pig to transform a victory over a weakened, starving, underarmed arab nation into a victory over communism. Sound familiar lover? Bet it does. And if it don't, just reread what u wrote at the original post.

u people are complete morons

Xvall

12th April 2003, 05:47

Er...If you'll recall that was tried in 1991, it failed and resulted in the deaths of a hundred thousand people.

Maybe if your government had not given him tons of helicopters, weapons, and money; maybe then the uprisings could have been sucessful. Nonetheless, your government's invasion was a reckless action that the Iraqi people didn't even have a choice in deciding.

Any popular uprising that was not immediatley crushed by Saddam would have turned Iraq into a Somalia.

Meritless speculation. It is the Iraqi people's country. If they feel like turning it into Somolia; if they all agree to do this and take the nececarry actions to do so, let them. That statement is just some wild generalization. I can easilly claim that if another republican gets elected, the country will shatter.

The Iraq'i infomation minister put the deaths at 1200...hardly what I would call a quarter of 5 million.

It was an exaggeration; just like your claim that the whole of the Iraqi people were cheering in the street; regardless of the fact that BBC even admitted that there were little more than a few dozen tearing down statues.

In the words of James Woolsey..."We want them nervous. We want them to know that this nation and it's allies are on the march and we're on the side of those whom you-the Mubaraks, the Saudi royal family-fear most: we're on the side of your own people"

That's nice, but James Woolsey doesn't share the same beliefs as the Bush Administration, who themselves decided to air propoganda commercials supporting the Saudi Arabian government.

LOL, you will have to let me borrow that crystal ball of your's one day.

My claim was of no less than your claim that Iraq would have become Somolia. In fact, it was far more accurate. I am under the impression that the Bush Administration won't do anything to Korea because unlike Iraq, in which the Bush Administration proudly stated that the regimes days were numbered, they have given nothing to North Korea but a polite request. They didn't spend time digging up information on them like they did Iraq; they didn't even do anything when North Korea kicked out the UN inspectors.

Richard Perle: "You could not do a deal with Hitler, and you can't do a deal with Saddam Hussein or with North Korea"

Once again. The Bush Administration quite obviously is not living up to these remarks.

Last time I checked Sharon was elected by his people. As for the Saudi's...check above.

Last time I checked, since Sharon has been in power; terrorist attacks have still continued, so have attacks on palestinean cities. The crisis hasn't gotten any better. In addition, last time I checked, the palestinians, who make up a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population, didn't vote for Ariel Sharon.

It was about killing kings and priests.

Ah, right. Nonetheless; good quote.

This statement is indicative of your limited knowledge of world affairs. 45 nation in total support US action in Iraq.

45 nations is not the majority of the world. In this case, with your self proclaimed devotion to democracy, you should understand that the majority rules, no?

Most Americans support the war

If this is true, why were there not nearly as many pro-bush demonstrations as there were anti-war demonstrations. How many thousand people rallied in support of Cheyney in New York.

...I have not seen a poll that was below 70% in favour.

Polls are inefficient ways to obtain a concencus. Niether I, anyone I know, or anyone on this board, for that matter, has taken part in these polls. These polls are usually started by right-wingers and they usually go around polling right-wing neigborhoods and places. Were you polled? Who took these polls? What was the name of the person who took the polls, where did they take them, and how many people were asked. I have stated this before; I can go around some liberal city, poll everyone, and claim that 90% of the nation is against the war.

Liberty Lover

12th April 2003, 06:09

"Maybe if your government had not given him tons of helicopters, weapons, and money; maybe then the uprisings could have been sucessful. Nonetheless, your government's invasion was a reckless action that the Iraqi people didn't even have a choice in deciding."

Firstly my government didn't give him helicopters. Secondly, in retrospect, the US probably should not have given them to him and further more they should have given support for the rebellion...many people in the current administration agree with me on this one.

"Meritless speculation. It is the Iraqi people's country. If they feel like turning it into Somolia; if they all agree to do this and take the nececarry actions to do so, let them. That statement is just some wild generalization. I can easilly claim that if another republican gets elected, the country will shatter."

Just look at all the different factions that would be fighting each other...the Kurdish workers party, the patriotic union for Kurdistan, the Ba'thists, Shi'ite fundamentalists, Shi'ite moderates and a plethora of other armed groups.

"they didn't even do anything when North Korea kicked out the UN inspectors."

They cut off oil supplies and shiped B2's to the region.

"That's nice, but James Woolsey doesn't share the same beliefs as the Bush Administration, who themselves decided to air propoganda commercials supporting the Saudi Arabian government."

He doesn't share the beliefs of the state department.

"45 nations is not the majority of the world."

Nor did I ever claim it to be.

Xvall

12th April 2003, 18:20

Firstly my government didn't give him helicopters.

I have no clue where you live. I will rephrase it them. The United States government, which you seem to be surrporting.

Secondly, in retrospect, the US probably should not have given them to him and further more they should have given support for the rebellion...many people in the current administration agree with me on this one.

Yes. I agree. If the United States was the help Iraq, back then, they should have not given him weapons, and instead supported the people.

Just look at all the different factions that would be fighting each other...the Kurdish workers party, the patriotic union for Kurdistan, the Ba'thists, Shi'ite fundamentalists, Shi'ite moderates and a plethora of other armed groups.

Nonetheless, if they did this, it was their choice. Like I said, this is just a theory. It isn't nececarilly true. I believe that the Iraqi people would have been able to work things out if they has formed some sort of uprising against Saddam.

They cut off oil supplies and shiped B2's to the region.

That's nothing compared to the overtley excessive actions that they took against Iraq, who actually allowed weapons inspectors in. The United States basially simply told North Korea that it was being naughty, and not to do that again.

He doesn't share the beliefs of the state department.

I know. I'm just saying, the Bush Administration may have it's own plans, not neccesarilly the ones of most Conservatives.

Nor did I ever claim it to be.

Kay. Just making sure.