WAR! What is it good for?

Chimp · Post by **Chimp** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 9:41 am

Two more words

'Friendly Fire'

you manged to whack a fair few Brits at the beginning of this war huh?

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 9:54 am

PJ wrote:
Chimp wrote:-"The US spends billions trying to get all the shit working again"

er, that would be the same shit they spent billions of dollars destroying right?
Since the Americans worked extremely hard to not target infrastructure, and since American weapons' targeting and flight control systems are designed and built (at significant expense) to be as accurate and precise as possible, no.

PJ, what are you thinking, engaging this guy? Don't you see the shield on his head? It's made of solid duracranium, utterly impervious to change.

Let's get back to something practical and constructive, like vasectomies, leather, spanking machines, sex, beer, fire and cows. Oh, and guns. Lotsa guns.

chickenfish · Post by **chickenfish** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:02 am

it's already started in our cities...

I'm with you Chimp...this whole war was a fucking joke, along with the "war on drugs" and the "war on terrorism" I am constantly amazed at the seemingly aware people that devour the bullshit with fervour, and actually defend our attacking Iraq, as we had to do it...our weapons are so precise, we weren't trying to kill civilians....or the british...yeah right....The more shit we blew up, the more damage we do to the infrastructure of the government, the more $$$ we can give to haliburtton et al to "rebuild" iraq....what an ingenious way of doing business....It's the oldest trick in the book....If you need to sell something, you first need to create the need for it, so that people will buy it....American is in the business of arming the world....Remember Nicaragua? Remeber Vietnam? Remember Iraq, the first time we bombed them? Oil, drugs and Guns, makes America #1....

Borris · Post by **Borris** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:19 am

TestesInSac wrote: solid duracranium

Testes, do you speak russian? or is it a coincidence??

Durak (can be spelled durac as well if you read the c as a K) in russian means an Idiot.

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:47 am

Borris wrote:
TestesInSac wrote: solid duracranium
Testes, do you speak russian? or is it a coincidence??

Durak (can be spelled durac as well if you read the c as a K) in russian means an Idiot.

Let's just say, I don't speak Russian, but I've had some exposure to it.

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:01 am

Not really wanting to engage the actual topic of this thread, as it's been done to death (no puns intended), but there is a pattern emerging in terms of the fervor of expression that I think is dangerous. I use 'fervor' pointedly, as there is a sort of fundamentalist attitude on both sides of the argument, and fundamentalists get people killed.

A fundamentalist, worse than an ideologue, is someone who cannot or will not accept anything as fact that supports an argument they oppose, regardless of veracity. In other words, if it supports the hated point of view, it must be wrong. There is no middle ground for these folks. If you are not the faithful, you are an infidel.

Using the exchange between PJ and Chimpy as an example, Chimpy out-of-hand rejects the notion that any attempt was made to avoid damaging Iraqi infrastructure. But, assuming, as I suspect Chimpy would certainly accept, that the neocons were after Iraqi oil, they'd need the Iraqi infrastructure intact, and would hence certainly make some effort to avoid destroying it.

So, the premise that the US attempted to spare infrastructure has clear support in the practical world, but was rejected out of hand nevertheless. That rejection is something you expect from a fundamentalist.

chickenfish · Post by **chickenfish** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:32 am

I was pointing out that fact that if there were plans to distribute jobs to "rebuild"Iraq, then there would need to be something to "rebuild" Hence you have to destroy it first. If you leave the infrastructure intact, then you have nothing to rebuild, and hence no multi billion dollar "rebuilding" contracts.Bush and Cheney are tied to haliburton, and hence stand to make money off of the "rebuilding" of Iraq. Funny that they happen to be the very people who were set to destroy Iraq as well.....hmmmmm is there some connection? You be the judge.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:35 am

A fundamentalist, worse than an ideologue, is someone who cannot or will not accept anything as fact that supports an argument they oppose, regardless of veracity. In other words, if it supports the hated point of view, it must be wrong. There is no middle ground for these folks. If you are not the faithful, you are an infidel.

Totally in agreement. The very same can be said of some of the more rabid Maoist leftist types you run into over in Berkeley (or San Francisco). Were you swap out certain words (Mao/Marx for Jesus, 'utopia' for 'heaven'
'workers' for 'believers) you'd just have another ranting Christ-o-holic Bible thumper.

Given his current tack and his seeming inability to entertain any point of view other than his own, I'll wager that sometime before the holidays Chimp's rants will be as thoroughly dismissed out of hand as Chunky's were towards the end of his eplaya days.

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:54 am

chickenfish wrote:I was pointing out that fact that if there were plans to distribute jobs to "rebuild"Iraq, then there would need to be something to "rebuild" Hence you have to destroy it first.

Quite possible, even plausible.

Of course, assuming specific intent to "create reconstruction contracts", the question then becomes one of degrees, or, how much to destroy. There was enormous damage done in GWI, more than enough for a decade of reconstruction. GWI was followed by crippling sanctions, which further degraded infrastructure. Then there'd certainly be infrastructure damage in GWII, regardless of how much effort was made to avoid it. Finally, experience from GWI demonstrated that if Saddam couldn't hold it, he'd destroy it, and he tried this time too. That includes what's being done today by Saddam loyalists, which may well prove to be an ongoing source of damage to repair.

I'd say that there was already plenty of damage to repair before GWII, that everyone knew it, and that gratuitous destruction of infrastructure would be politically and maybe financially damaging to all interests, including Haliburton's.

PJ · Post by PJ » Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:58 am

TestesInSac wrote:...assuming specific intent to "create reconstruction contracts", the question then becomes one of degrees, or, how much to destroy...

The RAF's Dresden model would rank pretty high on the scale.

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 12:03 pm

PJ wrote:
TestesInSac wrote:...assuming specific intent to "create reconstruction contracts", the question then becomes one of degrees, or, how much to destroy...
The RAF's Dresden model would rank pretty high on the scale.

<laugh><cough><laugh><cough><cough><laugh>

Frikken cold.

Kinetic · Post by **Kinetic** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 2:25 pm

The Dresden Model....I never heard of it being referred to in such a way. Time to go back and brush up on some things. I studied a little on the European Theater but the Pacific is my area of interest.

As for the thread, if he keeps going he will find a place for him among the list of other e-playa notables such as Chunking and Joseph Dunphy. It's not a list you want to be on.

PJ · Post by PJ » Mon Sep 22, 2003 4:54 pm

Kinetic wrote:...I studied a little on the European Theater but the Pacific is my area of interest..

The flying weather often sucked, however the dames were hotter in the European theater.

Kinetic · Post by **Kinetic** » Mon Sep 22, 2003 5:38 pm

I happen to like the Pacific better, maybe it's stories like the one of the DC-3 that had an engine run out of oil and the pilot landed it on an emergency airstrip, if you could call it that. Of course they had no aircraft parts or oil there, but they had tons and tons of cooking oil, due to classic military supply fuckups. The pilot filled the crankcase with cooking oil and took off...he managed to fly back to his normal base where the engine was properly repaired and put back in service.

With stories like that, the Pacific seemed a bit more interesting.

Also speaking of DC-3's, there is slightly famous "Jackass Airlift", but I won't go there. Anyway back to the thread now.

Chimp · Post by **Chimp** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 4:22 am

"The very same can be said of some of the more rabid Maoist leftist types you run into over in Berkeley...I'll wager that sometime before the holidays Chimp's rants will be as thoroughly dismissed out of hand as Chunky's were towards the end of his eplaya days." - Badger

"That rejection is something you expect from a fundamentalist." - Testes

"If he keeps going he will find a place for him among the list of other e-playa notables such as Chunking and Joseph Dunphy. It's not a list you want to be on." - Kinetic

Jeez

So I'm a fundamentalist / Maoist leftist type and I thought I just had a couple of opinions. Seems to me that you cats aren't willing to entertain any of them (precisely what I have been accused of) - fair enough, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if some people have been put off posting on this thread by these kinds of responses, nice.

Chickenfish and me have stuck our necks on the chopping block by having so called 'radical' points of view it seems, only hang on - are they really THAT radical?

Well, whatever really.

Chickenfish Oh Chicken of the sea - I meant to say this earlier dude, I love the name, the avatar and the poem - fucking awesome, Terry Gilliam would be proud of your creation man.

Personally I am gonna leave this thread alone for awhile now before I get called a member of a fucking terrorist faction.

On the subject of being accused of rejecting any counter arguments 'out of hand' - I don't, I take them on board I just have my own opinion - I don't really see why all the emphasis here is on me changing that opinion.

Ah, fuck it.

"Chimp's rants" Badger? thanks a bunch. Wonder if you have any idea what a rant is - half the stuff I posted here were news articles in an effort to generate discussion, how they constitute as rants I fail to see (Pot, Kettle and Black are three words that come to mind here). Cheers for the 'idiot' snipe Borris, I'm not sure what I have done to get such high praise.

How's this for a last post / rant - I think after all that I should at least try to live up to my so called ranting fundamentalist, maoist, terrorist tendencies etc...

I suggest you all take your precious fucking war and your billion dollar bunker busting bombs and stick them right up your collective fucking assholes for some radical physical expansion.

Kisses y'all,

Chimp, 'radical, maoist, fundamentalist' - my fucking ass

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 4:50 am

Chimp wrote:I suggest you all take your precious fucking war and your billion dollar bunker busting bombs and stick them right up your collective fucking assholes for some radical physical expansion.

Kisses y'all,

Chimp, 'radical, maoist, fundamentalist' - my fucking ass

watch out, kiddo - if your not careful, people are gonna start calling you
"chimp - that radical, maoist, fundamentalist fisting motherfucker".

or at least they will now.

oops.

Chimp · Post by **Chimp** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 5:44 am

Well, whatever...

I have admittedly thrown my teddy in the corner and kicked the shit out of him in one helluva strop.

Gonna' stop now.

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 6:31 am

i suggest you start checking out our local weekly rags - that way, you can present both sides at once:

www.sfbg.com/37/51/x_this_modern_world.html

PJ · Post by PJ » Tue Sep 23, 2003 8:28 am

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:04 am

Hmmm, with all that talk of fisting, I'd think Navy would be a better choice.

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:06 am

fuckin puddle-jumpers.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:37 am

I especially love how the general comparisons of style (and substance) got twisted into direct accusations.

chickenfish · Post by **chickenfish** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:40 am

I thought this was a thread for soul lovers and fans of the late great Edwin Starr. I am especially fond of 25 miles. When I was I young I never beat up kids in the schoolyard. What is it good for? Absolutely Nothin.

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:43 am

say it again!

i'll tell ya what war is good for - padding the butcher's bill.

chickenfish · Post by **chickenfish** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 10:39 am

Absolutely Nothin.
I think That Chimp has a lot of good points. I wouldn't pick on him so much. ya bunch of e-playa bulletin board bullies.

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 10:54 am

chickenfish wrote:Absolutely Nothin.
I think That Chimp has a lot of good points. I wouldn't pick on him so much. ya bunch of e-playa bulletin board bullies.

hear, hear. what you fuckers don't realize is that the man is perfectly capable of pulling the plug any time he wants. trust me, chimp knows when the fucking party is over, which is more than i can say about many of you.

he doesn't need to sit around and trade marginal insults re: specious attacks on his credibility ( and can i just say that there have been way too many of those ). he has a very rich life, and holds his tongue and his temper as best as he can. and he's smart enuf to just walk away if things get out of control. then we'd all suffer his absense.

nymphgonebad · Post by **nymphgonebad** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:00 am

now leave him be and let him do his homework.

you'd all do well to spend more time examining your own shortcomings.

if only a fraction of the energy put into flaming others was redirected into, say, your art project for next year, no one would show up next year and say: "shit, i never got around to making that el wire bikini because i was too busy running around clever-clever land trying to outwit someone who's smarter than i am."

chickenfish · Post by **chickenfish** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:16 am

parties over folks, everyone go home. Nothing to see here.

Kinetic · Post by **Kinetic** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:16 am

princess strych-9 wrote:now leave him be and let him do his homework.

you'd all do well to spend more time examining your own shortcomings.

if only a fraction of the energy put into flaming others was redirected into, say, your art project for next year, no one would show up next year and say: "shit, i never got around to making that el wire bikini because i was too busy running around clever-clever land trying to outwit someone who's smarter than i am."

Nice thoughts but it won't happen. For some people they get their thrills by flaming and pulling down others. And change is out of the question.

Besides if they channeled that energy into building things we'd run out of room on the playa. That's one heck of an energy source...it seems to have no limits to how negative it can get. BRC would cover 10 miles and you would need art cars just to get around to see the main works, let alone the rest of the place.

TestesInSac · Post by **TestesInSac** » Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:25 am

Sorry, Princess, but I'm inclined to disagree.

Chimpy has engaged in as much, or more, ad hominem and straw man attacks as any other poster I've ever seen. And while I've seen lots of "cut and paste" coming from him, I've seen little in the way of personal cool-headed analysis. And his penultimate post was pure defensiveness, not that any of us haven't been on occasion.

Another problem I have with his attitude and style is the control factor. He seems only to want affirmation of what he's posting, but only addresses non-conforming posts in some form of defense, never in affirmation or building on an idea. He also doesn't answer questions, to wit, the one I posed regarding (intellectual) heterogeneity, which doesn't give his posts any positve interaction.

I've had far more constructive interaction with you and Chickenfish, and you both largely agree with Chimpy, so I'm not inclined to think that political orientation is the key factor here.

WAR! What is it good for?

lets have a war, so you can die

haliburton et al

Re: haliburton et al

Re: haliburton et al

Re: haliburton et al

Edwin Starr

parties over