does U2 still have a political stand? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-10-2005, 05:31 PM   #46
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark


Substitute Afghanistan for Iraq and the Taliban for Saddam.

Or perhaps you'd like to retract this statement?
Hello the Taliban attacked the US and killed 3,000 citizens. Saddam did not attack us, I love how people try and equate the two.
__________________

__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:39 PM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:29 PM
You should have noticed that drhack was referring to the Iraqi and Afghani peoples hatred for the despotic governance of both the Baathists and Taliban ~ now it seems that even Arabs prefer democracy over fascism.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:42 PM   #48
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Bullshit. Plain bullshit. The Bush Administration has blocked all and every attempt at giving gays EQUAL RIGHTS. So fine...they don't want gays to marry. Why haven't they pushed non-discrimination legislation? And I'm in love with a Canadian. Did you know that there's absolutely no mechanism for him to legally immigrate to the U.S.? If I want to stay with him for the rest of my life, I will have to move to Canada. Period. I shouldn't have to choose between love and country....things that fucking heteros take for granted every single goddamn day of their lives.

Don't ever ever ever ever tell me that the Bush Administration is not "anti-gay." Next time, ASK a gay person sometime whether or not the GOP and the Bush Administration is meeting their needs, rather than quoting from some supply-side conservative agitprop.

Every single day, I'm reminded why I will never vote Republican. And every single day, I'm reminded why I hate Bush with every fiber of my being. He could end terrorism or balance the fucking budget for all I care, but every day I cannot be with the one I love, I blame Bush and the GOP. And, yes, they are squarely and 100% to blame, because Democrats have introduced an immigration bill every year since 2001, and every year since 2001, the GOP has refused to even consider it.

Fuck Bush. Fuck the Republican Party. I hope they both rot in hell for eternity.

Melon
Wow. Does this count as "hate speech?" You and Howard Dean both. You might as well come out and say you hate Christians, but then the hate police would come arrest you. Oops, hate speech laws protect everybody BUT Christians so you're OK.

I'm assuming you believe in God, to condemn one to hell. But then to wish hell on someone wouldn't be something God would condone.

Hey, I'm bummed I can't be with my Canadian girlfriend but if it was really torturing me I'd do what thousands of Mexican citizens do every month. Hey, where there's a will, there's a way. We don't need to be sending anyone to hell over this.

I'm just curious, have you checked into immigration policies of other nations, such as Europe? I'm not sure if they're as lax as us, I could be wrong.

In any case, what's wrong with Canada? Why doesn't your lover mind leaving his liberal paradise of a country for love? You wouldn't do the same for him?

I think you're angry and will always be angry if you depend on a political party or presidential administration to "meet your needs".

Peace and Love, Buddy
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:43 PM   #49
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:29 PM
Quote:
I don't think anyone here is against the elections per se. It's just that the elections in Iraq were more symbolic than they were a real democratic election. One can appreciate the fact that Iraq is moving towards a democracy and still not approve of the means to which it got there. It's hard for me to understand why some can't see that.
How exactly were they more of a symbolic move than "real democratic elections". Most Iraqi's went out and voted, they braved the threats of the terrorists and ignored the naysayers. The turnout was greater than most countries ~ how the bloody hell was this mostly a symbolic election.

Being for democracy in Iraq while at the same time opposing the means to that end at every turn is as they say having your cake and eating it too.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:46 PM   #50
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
You should have noticed that drhack was referring to the Iraqi and Afghani peoples hatred for the despotic governance of both the Baathists and Taliban ~ now it seems that even Arabs prefer democracy over fascism.
Then he referenced verte76's quote incorrectly.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:49 PM   #51
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Hello the Taliban attacked the US and killed 3,000 citizens. Saddam did not attack us, I love how people try and equate the two.

verte76 didn't mention the Taliban attacking us (which they didn't)


he (or she) gave his reason for support of the Afghan invasion: "because it was so clear that the people in Afghanistan wanted to be rid of the Taliban, who were just about the most despicable people I have ever seen anywhere"

If that's his criteria for going to war, why is he (or she) opposed to Iraq?
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:52 PM   #52
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
How exactly were they more of a symbolic move than "real democratic elections". Most Iraqi's went out and voted, they braved the threats of the terrorists and ignored the naysayers. The turnout was greater than most countries ~ how the bloody hell was this mostly a symbolic election.

Being for democracy in Iraq while at the same time opposing the means to that end at every turn is as they say having your cake and eating it too.
Real elections the citizens at least have access to the issues and the canidates running for them. Please show me evidence of how this happened in Iraq.

To enjoy eating the cake would in fact require you having the cake in the first place.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:53 PM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:29 PM
I don't think so, Verte is clearly opposed to the brutality of the Taliban ~ the Baathists of Iraq were no less brutal ergo an argument for removing the regime on the basis of that brutality could also be made.

Of course the stock standart retort is that there are plenty of bad governments out there why only go after this one or that one ~ perhaps the only answer is because you can, the political will and strategic benefits exist to justify that course of action. Deposing Saddam was not a purely altruistic use of American force ~ the US has a lot to gain; both in terms of long term Middle East stability and pushing reforms in the Arab Muslim world - both of which are big factors in the GWOT. Iraq is important to the War on Terror not just because Saddam sponsered terrorism but because democratisation and liberalisation of the region (especially Iran) requires for a competing ideology to take hold.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:56 PM   #54
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Then he referenced verte76's quote incorrectly.
no I didn't.

verte76 can change his statement if he wishes

for reference (with punctuation added):

"I supported the action in Afghanistan because:

it was so clear that the people in Afghanistan wanted to be rid of the Taliban, who were just about the most despicable people I have ever seen anywhere. This was supported by people everywhere."

in other words:

I supported the action in Afghanistan because:

they were bad people.
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:56 PM   #55
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark



verte76 didn't mention the Taliban attacking us (which they didn't)


he (or she) gave his reason for support of the Afghan invasion: "because it was so clear that the people in Afghanistan wanted to be rid of the Taliban, who were just about the most despicable people I have ever seen anywhere"

If that's his criteria for going to war, why is he (or she) opposed to Iraq?
Ok then who technically attacked us?

Oh but how you conviently left out this part;

Quote:
This was supported by people everywhere. There weren't even any controversies over this.
Global community vs. non global community.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 05:57 PM   #56
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark


no I didn't.

verte76 can change his statement if he wishes

for reference (with punctuation added):

"I supported the action in Afghanistan because:

it was so clear that the people in Afghanistan wanted to be rid of the Taliban, who were just about the most despicable people I have ever seen anywhere. This was supported by people everywhere."

in other words:

I supported the action in Afghanistan because:

they were bad people.
Please read my other post.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 06:05 PM   #57
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


~ perhaps the only answer is because you can, the political will and strategic benefits exist to justify that course of action.
One of the scariest statements I've seen posted in here, but at least your honest and not trying to cover it up like this administration and their blind supporters.


Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

Deposing Saddam was not a purely altruistic use of American force ~ the US has a lot to gain;
At least your honest.


Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

both in terms of long term Middle East stability and pushing reforms in the Arab Muslim world
I have my serious doubts, but now the actions been taken let's just cross our fingers.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 06:08 PM   #58
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Don't kid yourself into thinking Bono supported going into Iraq. I know you'd like to believe it, but there has been plenty of evidence to prove otherwise.



I don't think anyone here is against the elections per se. It's just that the elections in Iraq were more symbolic than they were a real democratic election. One can appreciate the fact that Iraq is moving towards a democracy and still not approve of the means to which it got there. It's hard for me to understand why some can't see that.
I NEVER said Bono supported going into Iraq, in fact I stated that he and the Edge did not support the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003.

I did say that Bono supported the invasion of Afghanistan based on what he has said in HOT PRESS and elsewhere.

I don't pretend BONO supports anything, but many in the liberal crowd like to pretend he MUST support every liberal cause they love and the fact is , he doesn't.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 06:14 PM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Real elections the citizens at least have access to the issues and the canidates running for them. Please show me evidence of how this happened in Iraq.

To enjoy eating the cake would in fact require you having the cake in the first place.
Listen, I dare you to tell any of the 8 million people that voted, that what they did last week was not real! My best friend in the US Marine Corp just got home from Iraq last week. His hard work over the past tour of duty, his second, has payed the way for these elections. The issue in this election was Iraqi Democracy and the voters voted for those they thought were most likely to support democracy and combat the terrorist.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 02-10-2005, 06:28 PM   #60
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 04:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark
Wow. Does this count as "hate speech?" You and Howard Dean both. You might as well come out and say you hate Christians, but then the hate police would come arrest you. Oops, hate speech laws protect everybody BUT Christians so you're OK.
If they can dish the hate out, they had better be able to take it.

And get your facts straight. There are no "hate speech" laws in the U.S. Period. This is why groups like the KKK are free to trash on racial minorities, and Focus on the Family are free to trash on sexual minorities without risk of punishment.

Quote:
I'm assuming you believe in God, to condemn one to hell. But then to wish hell on someone wouldn't be something God would condone.
Homosexuals, on a regular basis, are told they are going to hell. Does God condone that?

Quote:
Hey, I'm bummed I can't be with my Canadian girlfriend but if it was really torturing me I'd do what thousands of Mexican citizens do every month. Hey, where there's a will, there's a way. We don't need to be sending anyone to hell over this.
I won't even dignify such a ridiculous statement. If you want your Canadian girlfriend to live with you, marry her and she'll be eligible for permanent residency. Newsflash: I don't have that option. If that's all it took, I'd marry him in an instant.

Quote:
I'm just curious, have you checked into immigration policies of other nations, such as Europe? I'm not sure if they're as lax as us, I could be wrong.
The European Union is notoriously anti-immigrant. Unless you're an asylum seeker, then you have about zero chance.

Quote:
In any case, what's wrong with Canada? Why doesn't your lover mind leaving his liberal paradise of a country for love? You wouldn't do the same for him?
Not that it is any of your business, but I have studied film/television, and want to work in that industry. With the exception of the American industry, all other nations are mostly government subsidized and have strict rules on who they can hire. And, yes, that includes Canada, which usually means "100% Canadian" productions. I wouldn't be able to become a citizen for at least 3 years.

But even at that, the Canadian media industry is horrendously limited. Canadians usually end up moving to Los Angeles to get jobs in media. The irony, of course, is that Canadians can take all the American jobs, but Americans? We don't have the same options.

Quote:
I think you're angry and will always be angry if you depend on a political party or presidential administration to "meet your needs".
You know what? Coming from your position, that's easy to say. I presume that you're a straight white Christian male? Then you've never understood discrimination or prejudice one day in your life. Sure, the "angry white male" can make a mockery of what minorities face every day, but unless you live it, you don't understand. No, your interests are represented 24/7, 365 days a year. And if an inconvenience is found? Congress will put it on a legislative "fast track."

Religions will never condemn your behavior, within reason. Sure, you might be told not to be a whore, but despite all the direct condemnations of divorce in the New Testament, divorce is perfectly legal and accepted in most religions. Exceptions will always be made, so as to not inconvenience the straight white Christian male.

So go ahead: take your life and love for granted, and make a joke out of mine. Bush and the GOP can still go to hell.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com