Stupid war babble (was Re: cctalk digest, Vol 1 #473 - 49 msgs)

From: Vintage Computer Festival <>
Date: Sun Feb 23 00:16:00 2003

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Al Hartman wrote:

> > Based on the off-list exchanges we had, your "proof"
> > was most likely merely jingoistic non-sequiturs
> > that Sridhar would have probably found as stupid as
> > I did.
> Being that you haven't read said reply, you can't possibly make a
> comment on them. I notice, as usual you stoop to personal attacks rather
> than discuss the issue.

How can I not call you an idiot? Look, I believe firmly that everyone has
a right to believe what they want. But when what you believe puts others'
(in this case tens, probably even hundreds of thousands of others') lives
in jeopardy, I am going to call it like it is. You think a few thousand
dead Iraqi's is fine as long as it, in your twisted logic, somehow saves
American lives. Not only are you wrong, your premise is wrong, the
so-called "facts" that you are basing your opinions on are wrong, the
people you are putting your trust into are wrong, and they are lying to
you, and you are completely, totally, unequivocally blind to this. I call
that idiocy.

> > Look, every time you open your mouth you contradict
> > yourself. When will you realize that everything
> > you ascribe as the reasons for which we want
> > to go to Iraq, the US has committed the same? Are
> > you seriously this dense?
> And what contradiction.
> When has the U.S. attacked it's neighbor?

Do you know how to read?? Open up a fucking history book for once! I'm
not your god damn history teacher, and anything I tell you you're going to
deny anyway, so what's the fucking point!? WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT!!?

> Last I heard Canada and Mexico are unmolested. And before you bring up
> stuff that's 100's of years old, you can't address stuff that old with
> todays mores.

Panama, 1989
Grenada, 1983

Need any more examples?

How about just about every central American country mired in deadly
conflict throughout the 1960-1980 timeframe, with collectively millions of
civilians totured or killed through puppet regimes of the US or third
party elements acting on behalf of the US.

Will you wave this off also? I can't wait for your reply!

> Iraq attacked it's neighbors in modern times, with modern weapons.

Blahdaddyfuckingblah! WHO CARES!? We didn't even give a shit about the
Kuwaiti's until they begged us to come save their stupid asses! And we
certainly didn't and still do not give a shit about the Iranians, and our
wonderful ally Turkey doesn't give a shit about the Kurds, and so you can
bet the US doesn't either!! Israel attacked Iraq. Israel also attacks
what was supposed to be sovereign Palestinian territory on a daily, almost
HOURLY basis. Israel is one of, if not THE, most blatant and unrepentive
human rights violators on the planet Earth! Yet the US (i.e. your tax
dollars, i.e. YOU) supports them through it all!

WHAT IS THIS IMMORAL HYPOCRISY!? What is your answer to that!???

> When Iraq AGREED to disarm, to not own or develop weapons of mass
> destruction, and then broke those agreements. That's where the problem
> lies.

Control freak.


> It's not about "control" or being a "control freak".

Yes, it is!

> Adults make agreements and keep them.

Maybe in your elemntary school yard world, but last I checked, the United
States has broken NUMEROUS agreements, including international treaties
on the environment and certain weapons bans. What have you got to say

> That's the only way world affairs can work. Treaties and agreements have
> to be kept, and there must be trust that they will be.


> When they are broken, they must be enforced. Otherwise the entire house
> of cards based on agreements and "word" collapses.


> That leads to chaos.

My head is going to explode.

> > > Nobody wants war, but in case such as this... This
> > > war will prevent the deaths of millions. Not only
> > > by Iraq and Hussein, but by others in the future
> > > who will take this example to embolden themselves
> > > to do evil without fear of retribution.
> >
> > Contradiction.
> None that I can see.

Of course not, because you're an idiot. This is not a personal attack.
This is my sincere, educated assessment of your level of critical thinking
ability. I honestly classify you as an idiot.

> It's a common tactic of people who are unable to have intelligent
> discussions of issues.

That's funny. That's really funny. You know, there was a study about a
year ago that found that incompetent people are not capable of realizing
their own incompetence. In their minds, they perceive themselves to be
more competent than they actually are.

> Instead of discussing the issue or facts, and keeping the discussion on
> that level. You attack the person directly.

YOU GIVE ME NOTHING ELSE TO ATTACK! Everything you say I heard on
yesterday's news, and even then it was bullshit! Give me an original
argument that actually makes sense and I might just respond cordially!

> I could be the world's worst idiot.


> But, if I was speaking a truth... What difference does that make?
> I could be a drooling idiot and point up and burble
> "Sky.. Blue..."
> The fact that I could be an idiot, doesn't change the
> fact that sky is indeed blue.

> So keep the discussion on the facts, rather than making personal
> attacks. When you do this, you rob yourself of any power, and ability to
> have your opinions considered and respected, and convince people that
> they must be indeed, invalid since you needed to make a personal attack.

Ok, you're right. Throughout the past 10 or so grueling messages I have
written to you, I have not once provided any facts whatsoever. I have,
unlike you, just been spewing babble and recycled rhetoric that I borrowed
straight from the lips of some talking head on TV. I'm sorry.

I'm going to go shoot myself now.

Sellam Ismail                                        Vintage Computer Festival
International Man of Intrigue and Danger      
 * Old computing resources for business and academia at *
Received on Sun Feb 23 2003 - 00:16:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:35:56 BST