Tropical Fish Keeping - Aquarium fish care and resources

Tropical Fish Keeping - Aquarium fish care and resources (http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/)
-   Off Topic Discussions (http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/off-topic-discussions/)
-   -   something you guys in west US should look at (http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/off-topic-discussions/something-you-guys-west-us-should-7060/)

tangy 07-14-2007 09:35 PM

something you guys in west US should look at
 
2 days after ignoring my e-mail i found this. its from my favorite author, Steve Alten. im just doing my part and passing it on.(i couldnt give you the link to my e-mail so i print screen and posted the pic)
http://fishforum.com/userpix/1939_a_1.jpg

Train Tracks 07-15-2007 08:32 AM

American government at it's finest. If the public doesn't want war, they'll manufactor a reason to go.

Gump 07-15-2007 09:04 AM

Who said we don't want war? Wars we win quickly, little bs conflicts are what we don't want.

Train Tracks 07-15-2007 12:12 PM

What do you mean by "Wars we win quickly"? WWII for us was aprox. 3 years 8 months. Look at Korea, even, BS conflict. A conflict is war and you can't describe in anyother way. Soldiers are stationed in other countries, fight, and get killed. Okay, so how is John Q Public supposed to know the difference between a war and a bs conflict from the get go? I was in the service (army) from 99 to 03. I remember when it all was going to spill into Iraq for the many (now false reasons) and the whole public bought into it. Now look at it. It sure the hell seemed legit to leave afganistan for Iraq at the time.

George Bush was smart during Desert Storm because he stopped before crossing the Tigris River. That's why that war only took a few hours and lost 70 some soldiers, most to friendly fire. We didn't dare to enter Sadam's real prized territory.

Train Tracks 07-15-2007 12:23 PM

WAR: 1. a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation; warfare, as by land, sea, or air.
2. a state or period of armed hostility or active military operations: The two nations were at war with each other.
3. a contest carried on by force of arms, as in a series of battles or campaigns: the War of 1812.
4. active hostility or contention; conflict; contest: a war of words.


Conflict: 1. to come into collision or disagreement; be contradictory, at variance, or in opposition; clash: The account of one eyewitness conflicted with that of the other. My class conflicts with my going to the concert.
2. to fight or contend; do battle.
–noun 3. a fight, battle, or struggle, esp. a prolonged struggle; strife.
4. controversy; quarrel: conflicts between parties.
5. discord of action, feeling, or effect; antagonism or opposition, as of interests or principles: a conflict of ideas.
6. a striking together; collision.
7. incompatibility or interference, as of one idea, desire, event, or activity with another: a conflict in the schedule.
8. Psychiatry. a mental struggle arising from opposing demands or impulses.


What's the big difference between these two words? FORCE OF ARMS

They (US Government) tried to start this terroist war before and it failed. Because the bomb truck wasn't placed in the right spot. Why did the FBI aid the 1993 bombing?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RA...K/wtcbomb.html

You can believe that the top Generals in Iraq on still working on PLAN B if you want, but this Surge in troops is actually Plan J or K. Operation Light Foot Print (keep the very minimal amount of soldiers over there as possible) didn't quite work well. Rice basically forced Rummy to quit because when she became secretary of state, she started this "Clear, Hold, Rebuild" thing that Rummy was totally against and the Republican party began to unwind with in themselves. That's why Bush kept changing Generals, because he hand picked the ones that believed in the same plans as he. If they didn't go with Bush, they were removed.

fish_4_all 07-15-2007 07:24 PM

Take a look at THIS website and any other you can find and do a little research on what is required by the United states right now and the other nations with troops in the conflict before making rash judgement. I will let you make your own conculsion after it has been read but will make these comments;

All the rhetoric regarding the "illegal" status of the war is just that. The legitimacy of the war has been tried in several courts around the world and in no way has the war been deemed illegal by the UN, any Security Council or reigning body. As for the United States withdrawing immediately, that in itself would be a violation of all international treaties, accords and laws of war according to the UN and Security Council. Once the United Sates went to war they were required to stay there until the ruling government can provide for and protect the citizens of the country on their own. The ruling government of Iraq has not made this statement and right now they can not "take care" of the country, its laws nor properly protect their citizens. Once they can, the United States will leave as it will be required for us to do so once the ruling government and the United Nations and Security Councils agree that Iraq can govern and protect itself.

I will be the first to say I hate the way the war has gone after the first year but those are the facts. Most people don't like it here but if we do withdraw and do not follow the governing laws of the "civilized" world then we are the weak minded and shameful country that everyone makes us out to be.

Oh and for those that think we just go looking for a reason to attack a country, take a look at North Korea and Iran, if we were really that aggressive and went to war for no reason why then haven't we bombed them both? And don't use the cop out of we don't have the troops or the money or we are afraid of the black eye. The UN and Security councils are handling Iran and North Korea; we don't have to nor need to, yet.

I also want to remind a lot of people about one thing that seems to have fallen through the cracks here. Yes the news tells "some of the truth" but only what will sell papers and make their ratings the highest. If you really want to know anything about what is going, research it. I didn't start researching the truth until abut 6 months ago and I will tell you this. There is a WHOLE lot more going on out there than you will ever hear from the 5:00 news and it is a whole lot deeper in laws, rules and policy, both domestic and international, than you might think.

Oh and one last thing I'd like to say and before anyone jumps on the band wagon I will say this first. I vote for whom I think will do the job best, I have never voted straight down political lines and I think only a fool does. Now as for the rhetoric regarding what is being thrown around by democrats and now straying Republicans, read again what I said above and then judge the legitimacy of voting democrats on the simple notion that they would immediately withdraw troops from Iraq. If they do win the Presidency in the election next year and still control both house and senate they will not have the authority to remove our troops from Iraq until the guidelines of the UN and Security Council’s treaties and accords have been fulfilled. If they do, the United gets the biggest black eye it has had in its history and we would deserve to be attacked by terrorists the day after the last troop left Iraq. The Democrats want to force the hand of Bush so they don't look like idiots if they do get the Whitehouse and can not, by International law, do exactly what they promised if you did vote for them. That's why they want the troops out now because if they do win and we stay in Iraq another 6 months after they do it will be one of the biggest black eyes the Democratic Party has even gotten. Think about that when you vote in 14 months.

Oh and for those that think I am jumping on Bush's Bandwagon, think again. He is playing the political game too because he knows the laws and the longer we stay in Iraq the better chance that the Democrats, if they do win the Presidency will have to deal with the American people crying "Liars" to ever one of them when they don't pull out our troops immediately. And even if they do pull them out they still get a black eye because of breaking international law. I for one am not ready to deal with embargoes, sanctions and Trillion dollar fines because we break international law just for a political power struggle.

Make the right decision and vote for whoever will do the right thing for the country and the world, not for their political party. We are an intelligent people and it is about time we showed it.

As for the politically incorrect rhetoric about past attempts by the Us to start wars; If you believe everything you are read and told I have a bridge and a huge waterfall for sale; really cheap! If you give me the right circumstances I can convince half the planet were are ancestors of a race of microscopic beings that now live in our brains and make us do the stupid things we sometimes do as Human Beings.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2