painispretty In reply to digikym [2003-12-31 17:49:20 +0000 UTC]

*pokey*

I know you too. *g*

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ninebreaker In reply to ninebreaker [2003-11-28 21:43:57 +0000 UTC]

good for you, I am glad you wallow in ignorance....because I havent been proven wrong.

Most likely, you err'ed and meant to type

"oh god, I love it when people like you are proven SO RIGHT!"

I can understand such a mistake...and I forgive you for it.

And dear lord Man, arent WE a little behind, eh?? When did I say that? Like...almost a year ago. I had to go back and re-read what I said just cause I thought I might actually have been wrong! Try to keep up.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

ninebreaker In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-21 00:15:01 +0000 UTC]

Thanks again for the prompt response, you'd make the US Postal Service proud.

When did I ever call them "unpatriotic" or "unamerican"? You types always scream this but no one is making those allegations...are we feeling guilty about something?

Secondly, no matter what you ppl think, the US (and British) gov't hasnt murdered anyone. The definition of murder is to kill in cold blood. Our troops arent going out of their way to shoot innocents, they are fighting a war. In fact, thanks to ppl like you whining at our government, we take extra special care to keep the collateral damage to a minimum. So when you say that no one should wage war against innocents because their government has santioned evil behavior, you are right, and we havent. Our war is truely against the former government of Iraq, it is through terrorists activity that the civilian population has become involved: which is what they do best, and people like you play right into their hand. They count on the ignorant bystanders to sway public opinion in their favor. Every time you scream "The US murders innocents! It is all their fault!" you sway that much influence the way of terrorists and evil people.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-20 14:57:20 +0000 UTC]

I think what Nasasie was trying to say was that no evidence of WMD have been found yet, and since your original post thousands of civilians have been murdered by American (and British, I am ashamed to say) government-sanctioned action.

As I am sure you are aware, having experienced horror and disgust at the actions of unsupported terrorists on the 11th of September 2001, it is an act of gross inhumanity to avenge the actions of one group on another, perfectly innocent group of people whose only connection to the originals is their nationality.

Oh, and that you do not speak for an entire nation, and never will, and just because people do not agree with your politics does not make them "unpatriotic" or "unamerican", it simply makes them " unninebreaker"

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-21 05:36:00 +0000 UTC]

Oh and BTW, the terrorists from 9-11 were totally supported by several different Arab nations including Iraq and their organization is named Al Queda.

And non of the 9-11 terrorists were Iraqi, so they werent even related by nationality. The war in Iraq was related to 9-11 but not directly caused by it. Saddam had been causing trouble for over a decade by the time America decided to go to war with Iraq, it really was just the completion of what was started in 1990.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-21 14:43:30 +0000 UTC]

Miraculously "finding" videotapes that connected Al Queda and Hussein? I have no sympathy for the nation's leader, you understand, but I'm still cross that people see nothing wrong with executing over a thousand civilians at an airport for the heinous crime of RUNNING AWAY FROM ARMED SOLDIERS, which I'd always thought was the rational response.

And yes, I know how Al Queda are and I am perfectly aware of who trained their leader.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-21 23:04:36 +0000 UTC]

Well you said that an "unsupported group" commetted the crimes during 9-11, I was simply refuting that claim.

Secondly, there was nothing miraculous about finding ties between Al Queda and Saddam, it actually makes total sense and everyone really expected to find such evidence in the aftermath of the conflict.

And finally, our troops dont shoot on ppl running away from them, they fire upon people who come at them and wont stop when asked to. Again, it is the type of world that is created by terrorists and another big reason why we should continue to fight them wherever they rear their heads.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-22 13:01:44 +0000 UTC]

everyone really expected to find such evidence in the aftermath of the conflict.

Yes, they did, and it would have been awful if they hadn't found any, because then there would have been no excuse to start a war on one of the greatest oil-producing countries in the world, one that wasn't cooperating and giving up cheap supplies. Also, did the public actually sit down and ask just how easy it is for a) governments to lie and b) people to doctor videotape?

wont stop when asked to.
I should imagine that, given that it is their country, they should be free to go where they please.

our troops dont shoot on ppl running away from them
And they don't bomb hospitals either, right?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-22 15:51:41 +0000 UTC]

You are right, when they can help it they dont bomb hospitals. Sometimes there are mistakes during war, as it is innately a dangerous thing. Even with the best intentions, man isnt perfect.

Secondly, even IF Saddam hadn't been connected to terrorism, there would STILL be PLENTY of cause to go to war. How bout the fact that he had used weapons of mass destruction in the past, even on his own people? Ever hear of the Kurds? How about the fact that he was in direct violation of every one of the 14 UN resolutions passed since 1990? How about the fact that he was selling oil illegally to other countries, in contempt of the oil-for-food program? Or maybe you'll remember how Saddam was bribing other countries such as France to turn the blind eye to his illegal activies? Or was it the child torture chambers? Or the sadistic habits of Saddams sons? Or his support of other rouge nations? Or his invasion of Kuwait in 1990?

The man has been nothing but a thorn in the worlds side since he came to power and we have been at war with him since 1990. There are literally hundreds of reasons why we should have taken him out, not the least of which he supports Al Queda. And furthermore, it's not as if we havent found evidence that he had WMD's. We have found bio-trucks and canisters with mustard gas residue, among other things. Isn't it the least bit conceivable that Saddam could have barried his WMD's in the vast sands of Iraq or sold them to other rouge nations like Syria? Afterall, he did bury his airforce of over 30 planes in the sand and the only way we found that is because the wind started uncovering things. It is far too early to say there aren't and WMD's and to think Saddam didnt actually have any is absurd. Also, you may want to know where the weapons are if Saddam doesnt have them. That is a much more frightening possibility.

And lastly, I find this whole topic funny. The world is turned on it's head. The good guys are being chastized and scrutinized and mocked and yelled at and the bad guys are being defended. Your view is a minority no matter how you may feel and you really do come across as defending evil dictators and terrorists.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-22 19:07:39 +0000 UTC]

had used weapons of mass destruction in the past
Which he was sold by the American government. If they're that dedicated to saving the world from terrorism, how about making arms sales to foreign countries illegal?

It is far too early to say there aren't and WMD's and to think Saddam didnt actually have any is absurd.
And if none are ever found? My own government are already changing their hypocritical tune and singing "it was a practise, just in case". There is no practise that justifies war. I don't think the people who order attacks on other countries (be they terrorists or governments) have any conception of what they're doing.

To be honest I feel sorry for you, living in a country where you are constantly told you have freedoms and then cheering as they are taken away from you in the name of safety from enemies that your own government armed. The "good guys" in this equation cannot reasonably be said to be ANYONE who celebrates the deaths of innocent people on either side. I feel sorry for me, too, because my stupid, ass-licking " leader" is trying to turn an independent nation into the 51st state of America, and we don't need that.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-23 06:37:15 +0000 UTC]

Well First off, with the most recent example of France, ones allies can quickly become ones enemies in the world of international affairs. Secondly, we never sold him weapons of mass destruction, we sold him arms and supported his army against the Iranians, who were at the time a mutual enemy. You ever hear the phrase "the enemy of your enemy is your friend"? And lastly on this point, not everyone is perfect and being friends with Saddam back in the 70's was a mistake in hindsite...luckily being the most powerful country the world has ever known lets you rectify mistakes like that.

About the WMD's...I thought we have already been over this. In fact I think I listed a whole assortment of other reasons why a war against Saddam was justified other than WMD's. WMD's was really only one of very many reasons President Bush laid out.

And lastly, I dont want or need your pity. In fact I think it should be the other way around, but you already covered that. I realize that my rights as a citizen are being hindered every single day by the Democratic party of my country. I dont cheer, I fight, which is why I love George Bush so much. He doesnt bend when some groups come whining at him, he does what is right even when it is not popular which is the makings of a leader. Your Prime Minister Blair is the same type of man. He isnt trying to make Britain into America, he is simply recognizing what is right and standing up for it along side of us. If your country had more men like Blair populating it, then I would gladly welcome them as the 51'st state. And as for reveling in killing innocents...this is a great example of why you are in fact the one deserving pity. If you actually believe that we rejoice when innocents die, you are even more mislead than I even dared to think. In fact the opposite is exactly the case. Your brave fighting men, along with our countries' warriors do their best to save innocent lives...I have already mentioned this and the numbers back me up. You seem bent on regurgitating the party line... I might as well flip on MTV or CNN because I will hear the same things coming from them as I have read from you.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-23 11:05:18 +0000 UTC]

we sold him arms and supported his army against the Iranians, who were at the time a mutual enemy.
Given the amount of confusion involved at the moment regarding who is friends with who, why not become a violently introverted country who trusts no one?

being the most powerful country the world has ever known lets you rectify mistakes like that.
*coughBritishEmpirecough*, and uh, the Spanish Empire, also. And the Romans. Technologically and militarily the most powerful, but financially as fucked as the rest of us and FIFTEENTH on the world scale of education? I think it would be more important to see about the welfare of your own people before you start blowing up/arming/"helping" /whatever the rest of us.

In fact I think I listed a whole assortment of other reasons why a war against Saddam was justified other than WMD's.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-26 00:12:45 +0000 UTC]

Your first point: What you say makes no sense. It seems to me most things are confusing and the problem is exactly as you outline it. Things dont get fixed if you become violently introverted. You weed out the trash and refine what is good, that is what the US and Britain is doing in its war on terror.

Your second point: The US is generations ahead of any other country in military technology, we have the strong economy in the world and our average citizen make more money than any other country in the world. Basically, we are economically, technologically and militarily superior to anyone in the world, thus making us the lone world Super Power and therefore making us the most powerful nation on the face of the planet. And since we are at a point in the world where we are more advanced than we ever have been, that means we are the most powerful country the world has ever known. The Romans and Spanish and English Empries were the greats of their times but pale compared to the US. And as for education, that relates to how the Democrats have been systematically destroying this nation. And, as far as sticking our noses into other ppls business: As the worlds single super power and most advanced nation, a lot of other countries like trading with us which means we have interests all over the world. If Israel is doing crappy then parts of the US may suffer so it is to our best interest to help them out...ect, ect.

Your third point:
None of those pitiful reasons you listed are reasons why we went to Iraq nor were they on the list that I gave you so I dont know why you put them up.

Your fourth point:
Fair nuf

Your fifth point:
Since you are British and I realize that you may not know how our country's political system works, I will explain.
True enough, the Republicans have the majority in the Congress and own the White house but that only happened a year and a half ago. Up until this point, the Democrats have been running the show since the 40's. They have had over 50 years of destroying this country and there is no way that the Republicans can undo all of that trash in one short term. Also, renegade liberal democratic judges have been illegally legistating from their bench, which just adds to the problem. So you see, even tho we have the majority now, it hasnt been that way long and it takes a while to move a whole country in one direction or the other...it maybe another 50 years before we unscrew everything the democrats falked up.

Your sixth point:
I must admit, I have no idea of Blairs domestic policies, only his internation ones. He may be trying to Americanize Britian, but I can tell you it is the better route to go if you had to choose between Americanization or the European Union. As far as his internation policies go, he isnt trying to Americanize Britian, simply do what is right.

Your seventh point:
Didn't say you do, but I was saying that if ever your country had the inkling, it would be a mistake to turn fine folks like Blair away.

Your eight point:
There is a difference between terrorists and innocents. I am sure many of the people you see are simply expressing rage over the bastards who attacked us. But you are right, there are a lot of idiots and ignorants these days...you'll undoubtedly have a lot of loud morons shouting stupid things.

And finally: Yes I watch Fox News often and I have never heard them call people at BBC anti-America simply for presenting news in a different fashion. Fox News may claim that the BBC is presenting news in an anti-US way, but not that they are anti-American for having different views. There is a great difference.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

painispretty In reply to ninebreaker [2004-02-27 14:42:26 +0000 UTC]

I don't really want to drag this discussion out any further but there is one point that confuses me - Up until this point, the Democrats have been running the show since the 40's.

Again, I don't know much about American politics but I was under the impression that Reagan and Bush Sr. were both Republicans?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ninebreaker In reply to painispretty [2004-02-28 02:48:21 +0000 UTC]

The President doesnt make laws, he signs laws that the Congress passes. So you see, while the President can influence things, it cant change the laws. The Congress makes laws and the Judicial branch enforces laws.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

nasasie In reply to ninebreaker [2003-11-28 17:12:28 +0000 UTC]

oh god I love it when people like you are proven so wrong..

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

nasasie In reply to nasasie [2003-11-29 19:02:02 +0000 UTC]

no, dear, what I meant to say, was that I *love* it when people like you (that is, self-centred asses, who really do think that our world orbits around them and their opinions) are proven wrong in their ignorance.

while I do believe that one is entitled to ones own opinion, (and should not be prosecuted for it)
I do NOT think you are therefor entitled to push your opinion onto random people (ie painispretty, me, other people) in a maner that, comes of rather 'totalitarian' flavoured.

what strikes me, is, that you, unlike all those other extremist brainwashed right-winged neocons, seem to have an intelligence..
this leads me to wonder if you are using your opinion as a way to 'stir up controversion'

while you might still think that, Bush, the Bush Administration, and the public American News agents are telling you the truth, and what they want is to 'prevent Saddam from using these BIG weapons of Mass Destruction'
I, (and a whole lot of other people, many Americans, who risk a very real risk of being stamped as 'unpatriotic, terrorist-sympathisers' just because their opinion, their God-given, constitutional right of free speech, opinion, might differ from the people in charge)
we, think differently, we random few, whom are rapidly growing larger in number.

how you where proven wrong? ahh.. where should I start? hmm
" Saddam has these BIG weapons and he wants to KILL A LOT OF PEOPLE! TONS AND TONS!"

ok, I'll forgive you for the overuse of the Caps-Lock button,
so.. why didn't he use them? the weapons I mean, those weapons of mass destruction, that weapons inspectors, journalists and politicians alike COULD NOT FIND?
his country was attacked, bombed, thousands of his people slaughtered, even his own sons.. why didn't he use those 'big' weapons? maybe he'd hid them so well (to prevent prying eyes of said inspectors) that I couldn't find them again?
why would he want to kill alot of people? what purpose would that fulfil?

" America makes a huge effort to lower the amount of civilian casualties but Saddam is going to use his people as meat shields."

how did they do that exactly?
they killed many, many many civilians, often in situations where they could have acted differently, while you might not care much for 'Saddams people'
it might be interesting for you to know that the soldiers suffered (and still suffer) from large amounts of friendly fire
the soldiers are STILL being sent home in body-bags, mounts after the so called 'end' of the war
the reason? - suecide, there are large amounts of suicide death by the American soldiers.. a bit suspicious, no?

"If any civilian dies, it will most likely be Saddam's fault, not americas."

America attacks Iraq, American soldiers bomb Iraq, American soldiers storm Iraqian homes and redcross buildings
how is this Saddams fault?


have you seen the news lately? wait, I don't mean the Fox network,
I mean places like [link] or [link] or even Yahoo news
ah yes, I realise you probably will assort to calling these sites are 'extremist-left propaganda sites', but I assure you, they are not

I personally don't believe in the death penalty, I think it's crude and barbaric, but hey, whatever floats your boat


I think you are entitled to your opinion, what you are NOT entitled to, is patronisation and ridiculisation of people whose opinions differ from yours.
*I* think you are and idiot, but I have no right to say that MY views are in any way 'better' or 'more right' than yours, but it works the other way around to.

ah yes, I am late with my reply, the reason for this is that
a) being able to reply to the message directly is a new implementation at DA
b) I have been away from deviantart for a while
c) I had, to tell you the truth, forgotten about this here, but as painispretty started to upload things here again, I went and looked and thus saw your 'speech' again.

I'm sure you where amused for a whole 30 minutes by my retardism.


one last thing.. what kind of person did you think I was 'portraying myself as' ?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ninebreaker In reply to nasasie [2003-11-29 01:19:20 +0000 UTC]

If indeed you are the person you portray yourself as then I am happy to know that you are content to be steeped in your own ignorance...because I havent been dis-proven yet.

However, it is very possible, that, in your excitement to congratulate me on my right-ness, you mis-typed and your message might have read: "oh god, I love it when people like you are proven SO RIGHT!"

This is a mistake that is easily understandable and just as simply forgiven.

Next time, though, I would prefer a more prompt realization of my correctness. It would have been more appropriate to praise my insight months ago, seeing as I posted this particular comment way back in February. Again, this is something I am willing to overlook.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0