USA strikes start! go switch on your tv

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Dusty
I love the way Bush (or I should say he speech writers, he isn't ad-libbing on the TV) speaks in vague, emotional abstractions, it makes war propaganda so much easier to swallow.

Four jet airliners were hijacked, all crashed with everyone aboard. In the end a few large office buildings and a portion of the Pentagon were destroyed with a large but, let's face it, not that catastrophic of a death count (we've had worse, not due to terrorism, but a death is a death no matter the means). That's what has happened.

Bush is simple and right to the point. Clinton was the BSer and he spoke in words that I don't even understand.

You are right. Let me speak in simple sentences for the pacficists here:

6,000 People dead. Possibly more. 4 Airliner jets destroyed. Pentagon damaged. WTC destroyed. Possibly $150 Billion in damage. More in insurance damages. Action will be taken. Military action.

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Dusty
I love the way Bush (or I should say he speech writers, he isn't ad-libbing on the TV) speaks in vague, emotional abstractions, it makes war propaganda so much easier to swallow.

Four jet airliners were hijacked, all crashed with everyone aboard. In the end a few large office buildings and a portion of the Pentagon were destroyed with a large but, let's face it, not that catastrophic of a death count (we've had worse, not due to terrorism, but a death is a death no matter the means). That's what has happened.

Not that catastrophic of a death count? Are you serious? Around 6,000 people died that day. That is one of the largest one day non-battle totals, and the thing that makes it really worse is the fact that these were innocent people, who had nothing to do with the policies of the US that Bin Laden came to hate, except voting the leaders in initially. That demands some action, and since all other resasonable options are exhausted, war is what is needed, IMO.

And you should not be accusing Bush of propaganda. You just made propaganda there saying the death count was not that catastrophic. Propaganda really is simply presenting facts and opinions to get someone to join your side. No where did Bush lie, so why should he be bashed for supporting war, when his ideal is more than likely saftey, or should I said living, so as to avoid further debate that peace is a must to be safe.

 

[Dusty]

Not that catastrophic of a death count? Are you serious? Around 6,000 people died that day.

20,000 recently died in an Indian earthquake. Of the two, 20,000 to 6,000, which is worse? Because American lives were lost doesn't make it special.

Propaganda is made up of half-truths. While true, the facts are presented in a way that supports your side, even if they wouldn't if presented in a non-biased manner.

Reaching out to the listener's emotions rather than their minds is a very effective way of gaining their support. This is what the government has done. This recent outburst of "patriotism" and support for war is entirely due do the emotional leadings they're hearing and seeing on TV. "Today, freedom itself has been attacked" means nothing in a physical sense, but to someone in an emotional tizzy, still dazed by what's happened, it's all they needed to hear.

While I admit myself to be biased, I do try my hardest to present my arguments without trying to sway your feelings towards them, example, my description of the events above. I spoke in no abstractions, I used no persuading metaphors, I was not vague in description, I said flat out what happened.

 

[Giancarlo]

Do any of you care about the 800,000 people killed in 1994 in Uganda?

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Dusty
20,000 recently died in an Indian earthquake. Of the two, 20,000 to 6,000, which is worse? Because American lives were lost doesn't make it special.

Propaganda is made up of half-truths. While true, the facts are presented in a way that supports your side, even if they wouldn't if presented in a non-biased manner.

Reaching out to the listener's emotions rather than their minds is a very effective way of gaining their support. This is what the government has done. This recent outburst of "patriotism" and support for war is entirely due do the emotional leadings they're hearing and seeing on TV. "Today, freedom itself has been attacked" means nothing in a physical sense, but to someone in an emotional tizzy, still dazed by what's happened, it's all they needed to hear.

While I admit myself to be biased, I do try my hardest to present my arguments without trying to sway your feelings towards them, example, my description of the events above. I spoke in no abstractions, I used no persuading metaphors, I was not vague in description, I said flat out what happened.

A) I realized I forgot to put US death count... Not world wide. B) That was not an attack on someone.

But you were being vague to the extent that you presented your opinons. You said it wasn't a catastrophic death count for 6,000 people to die. If your present your opinion in an argument, your argument is biased. Only when all of the facts are the only thing presented is it unbiased.

As for half-truths. Tell me where Bush has given half-truths. He presented opinions and facts. MAybe it was stuff you didn't like to hear, but opinions are not half-truths.

 

[Todd]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Do any of you care about the 800,000 people killed in 1994 in Uganda?

I'm sure we all care to a certain extent but it's also from 1994 and a bit off topic so it's not going to get the same attention the WTC is receiving. If another terrorist attack happens in 7 years we may look back at the WTC towers but again at that time it would be old news and probably wouldn't be a hot topic. Now back to the topic...

 

[Dusty]

A) I realized I forgot to put US death count... Not world wide.

It's a world community. My opinion, yes, but to me the life of an Afghan is as valuable as the life of an American.

B) That was not an attack on someone.

"a death is a death no matter the means"

You said it wasn't a catastrophic death count for 6,000 people to die.

When compared to others, even those recent, it's not that great. I'm not saying it's insignificant, but it hasn't "changed the world" as some have said.

As for half-truths. Tell me where Bush has given half-truths

Already did, "freedom itself has been attacked". We have been attacked, truth. Freedom is an abstract notion existent only in the minds of those that hold it, it is not vulnerable to attack. A slave can be free (we're talking metaphysics now, but still). False, or at least deceiving. The line's intention was not to present facts, but to prep your mindset so you'll be more apt to agree with what follows.

 

[Owen]

"It's a world community. My opinion, yes, but to me the life of an Afghan is as valuable as the life of an American."

NEver did I say one life is more important to other. I was simpyl correcting a statement I made.

""a death is a death no matter the means""

Agreed. However, if someone causes the death, action must be taken to punish the guilty(not war in all cases however). The only action that can be taken after an earthquake is to rebuild and try to improve our technology.

"When compared to others, even those recent, it's not that great. I'm not saying it's insignificant, but it hasn't "changed the world" as some have said."

I beg to differ. IT has changed our world, at least America's, because this is an attack on American soil, and that affects the US.

"Already did, "freedom itself has been attacked". We have been attacked, truth. Freedom is an abstract notion existent only in the minds of those that hold it, it is not vulnerable to attack. A slave can be free (we're talking metaphysics now, but still). False, or at least deceiving. The line's intention was not to present facts, but to prep your mindset so you'll be more apt to agree with what follows."

A) You read to much into a statment. Don't take it so literally. He meant to say by that statement that we are attacked becasue of our freedom. While I don't agree that is why we are attacked, it is mere speculation until all of the evidence is put together, if ever. However, if you can tell me the exact reason we are attacked and back it up with facts, then you have the right to correct a saying, but until you prove he said it, knowingly saying it is wrong, don't bash him.

B) And I am sure all pacifists only present facts, and never obscure one word period. Pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Ted S]

Duty... ever seen the movie "The Terminator"? if not, rent it.... 'nuff said

 

[garibaldi]

:devious2:Isn't it a amazing but not surprising that all these people that condemn and have protest marches against the U.S for bombing,not once did they do the same against the people and supported goverments of these terrorist activities, so it is obvious to me that they don't deserve the freedom that that the freeworld offers them.
The pakistanis have set fire to the buildings of the people that help them feed,so now don't help them,lets see how long they last.Perhaps these anti war people will now protest against the pakistani people i doubt it

 

[Giancarlo]

Photos of the damage from the first strikes were released to the press today on CNN. 1 Terrorist Training base, All but one Airfields (MiGs and SU-22 Fitter Aircraft destroyed) and 1 SAM Site were destroyed or heavily damaged. They also mentioned that the ships have large amounts of unused ammo mainly because there aren't any more targets to hit.

I will give the Taliban less than two weeks before collapse. My estimation (or an educated guess based on what has been presentated by the media) of strikes on Saturday, was pretty damn close to the time it actually took place so maybe I will be close again.

I don't mean the following as critism of the Afghan Refuggees but some of them are clearly brainwashed and are put into protesting against the Pakistani Government. I support the current amount of force used, more is probably needed to silence the vocal terrorist traitors to freedom. This is not an attack against Islam, because Islam condemns terror itself.