You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Town's Crier
Moderated by Major Helper

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.30 replies
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Town's Crier » Baghdad Falls
Bottom
Topic Subject:Baghdad Falls
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
l2aGeFul2i0uS
Banned
posted 04-09-03 03:45 PM CT (US)         
Anyone else hear this news? I'm so happy now. Theres no more killing, no more blood. No more Violence.
AuthorReplies:
Danthered
Squire
posted 04-09-03 03:51 PM CT (US)     1 / 30       
YAY!!!

"Blasted Paradoxes!, They get absoloutely everywhere!" - Danthered
Current Project:None
Proud Member of DGDN
Faded Glory LARP
Completed Projects: Dark Happenings
Mobely
Squire
posted 04-09-03 04:24 PM CT (US)     2 / 30       
Hmm.. I havent heard anything like this yet.. Going to cnn and such..

This is all, that is it.

Tanneur99
HG Alumnus
posted 04-09-03 04:25 PM CT (US)     3 / 30       
There will be more killing, more blood and more violence. It is the time of the mob, now the street will rule unless the coalition forces take over the duties of the police. You are right though, it will be a better world when this is all over.
Enraged Orange
Squire
(id: RoboPaul88)
posted 04-09-03 04:52 PM CT (US)     4 / 30       
Over? This war will prolonged it by years. The Middle East will never simply Westernize. We've just got them madder at us.

[This message has been edited by Enraged Orange (edited 04-09-2003 @ 04:52 PM).]

Deathmatch
Squire
(id: Darkmaster)
posted 04-09-03 05:12 PM CT (US)     5 / 30       
"Westernization" is not ideal for the Islamic religion.

The Middle East isn't angry, I believe, since the Arabs didn't like the secular rule of Saddam. They will be angry if the United States starts running Iraq and keeps that government after six months.

I believe that the Iraqi people should be able to decide what form the new Iraqi government should take.

And, technically, Baghdad hasn't fallen. Saddam's control has crumbled.

I'm glad, though, since Saddam is out of the picture, but I don't think that the United States will leave Iraq within six months, as the Iraqi people want.


-1
Tanneur99
HG Alumnus
posted 04-09-03 05:14 PM CT (US)     6 / 30       
@ RoboPaul88

I do not agree! President George W. Bush might not be the most intelligent the US had as President, but he is a man with visions. His vision is a state for the Palestine; he said this as first President ever, shortly after taking the Oval Office and he repeated lately that the fall of the Iraque Government will be a step to a Palestinian state, latest in 2005.

This will bring peace to the region.

Remember other Presidents with a vision, like Richard Nixon, who stopped John F. Kennedy's Vietnam war to open to China? Ronald Reagan, who stood in front of the Berlin wall in 1986/87? asking to tear it down, being laughed at and the wall fell in 1989? Abraham Lincoln who freed the American slaves, wanting to give them equal rights? I know they are all Republican, as a Swiss I am not involved in American politics, but I can not recall a Democrat with visions.

[This message has been edited by Tanneur99 (edited 04-09-2003 @ 05:17 PM).]

Mobely
Squire
posted 04-09-03 05:44 PM CT (US)     7 / 30       
Go republicans On topic- The City of Baghdad has not fallen, just the city is in disarry and statues of Saddam are getting torn down by Coalition troops and in some cases Iraqi citizens...

This is all, that is it.

RushMyAlly
Squire
(id: ThaBallistix)
posted 04-09-03 06:14 PM CT (US)     8 / 30       
HAHA, the interupted 3rd hour today with something along the lines of...

Quote:

Sorry for the brief interupption teachers, but there is very important news regarding the War in Iraq...


At this point everyone is thinking "omg the war is over, yes!"...

Quote:

...coalition forces that invaded Baghdad have accomplished their mission


By now you can see the excitement in everyone's eyes...

Quote:

A statue of Saddam Hussein has been toppled!!!


The class claps, then stops rather abruptly and realises; who gives a ****?

In my mind I'ma blind man doin time:.
Look to my future cause my past, is all behind me:.
Is it a crime, to fight, for what is mine?:.
Everybody's dyin tell me what's the use of tryin:.
-Tupac Shakur, "Only God Can Judge Me"
Enraged Orange
Squire
(id: RoboPaul88)
posted 04-09-03 07:14 PM CT (US)     9 / 30       

Quote:

I do not agree! President George W. Bush might not be the most intelligent the US had as President, but he is a man with visions. His vision is a state for the Palestine; he said this as first President ever, shortly after taking the Oval Office and he repeated lately that the fall of the Iraque Government will be a step to a Palestinian state, latest in 2005.

A year after the next election, how convienent.

Bush has no vision, except maybe a vision of increased oil supply. Control of Iraq will not go to the Palestinians, it will go to a US-friendly regime, causing a second Israel in the Mideast and more hostility. There will never be peace in the region, unless Israel just packs up and leaves. The Palestinians don't just want a nation, Israel proposed a split, but they rejected it. They want Jerusalem and their holy cities in the area.

I'm not saying I'm anti-Israel, btw

Tanneur99
HG Alumnus
posted 04-09-03 08:05 PM CT (US)     10 / 30       

Quote:

A year after the next election, how convienent.

I referred to Abraham Lincoln, after how many elections did his vision come true?

Quote:

Bush has no vision, except maybe a vision of increased oil supply.

Peace in the near east is a vision! Regarding the oil supply, the idea is not to increase the oil supply, the idea is to replace Saudi Arabia.

Quote:

Control of Iraq will not go to the Palestinians...

Didn't say that.

Quote:

The Palestinians don't just want a nation, Israel proposed a split, but they rejected it. They want Jerusalem and their holy cities in the area.

Israel proposed a split claiming the whole of Jerusalem for themselves, it is obvious that the Palestinians did not accept. Either the town will be divided between the two or it will be under UN administration. Fortunately the third party, the Christians don't claim Jerusalem anymore.

Enraged Orange
Squire
(id: RoboPaul88)
posted 04-09-03 09:22 PM CT (US)     11 / 30       

Quote:


I referred to Abraham Lincoln, after how many elections did his vision come true?

Not immediately after the one that got him reelected...

Quote:

Peace in the near east is a vision! Regarding the oil supply, the idea is not to increase the oil supply, the idea is to replace Saudi Arabia.

Exactly, with a US-backed puppet government that'll get the whole Middle East pissed off again.

Quote:

Israel proposed a split claiming the whole of Jerusalem for themselves, it is obvious that the Palestinians did not accept. Either the town will be divided between the two or it will be under UN administration. Fortunately the third party, the Christians don't claim Jerusalem anymore.

The chances of Israel giving up any of Jerusalem are about the same as the chances of Bush scoring over 100 on an IQ test

[This message has been edited by Enraged Orange (edited 04-09-2003 @ 09:23 PM).]

nav
Squire
(id: nav_2004)
posted 04-09-03 10:17 PM CT (US)     12 / 30       

Quote:

Remember other Presidents with a vision, like Richard Nixon, who stopped John F. Kennedy's Vietnam war to open to China?

Kennedy did not start the war in Vietnam. If I recall correctly, the very first aid to the country was sent under President Truman. Eisenhower soon sent more aid. Kennedy sent more troops. Johnson kept up Kennedy's policies. Nixon ran on the campaign that he would get "Peace with Honor." This was an obvious retreat. Ford finally pulled the US completely out of Vietnam during his presidency.

It is easy to give Nixon credit for halting the war until you look deaper into the issue. However, during President Johnson's final term, he actually opened peace negotiations with North Vietnam. The negotiations stalled largely because of an influencial Vietnamese woman who had been told by Nixon to sabatoge the talks to prevent Johnson from getting anything accomplished. Nixon, basically, sent many more troops to their deaths because he wanted to negotiate the peace in Vietnam.

I also think it is worth pointing out that Nixon actually escalated the war. More bombs were dropped during his presidency than any other one's. He also launched the invasion of Cambodia.

Quote:

I know they are all Republican, as a Swiss I am not involved in American politics, but I can not recall a Democrat with visions.

Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat with a vision. He wanted to make World War I the "War to End war." He wanted an international peace-keeping organization, called hte League of Nations. Basically, he wanted to make world peace forever. His plan was rejected by the isolationistic Senate, which arguably cause World War II. His vision didn't get done, but he was a Democrat with a vision.


I'm not a Democrat nor am I a Republican. I'm middle-of-the road. I like some things about each party, and I disagree with many things about both. I'm still at the nonvoting age, so I don't have to make clear choices yet.




(This space intentionally left blank.)
Antz
Squire
posted 04-10-03 02:03 PM CT (US)     13 / 30       
The war in Israel/Palestine is not a religous war, it is war war between to different peoples. But both of the parts there are using religion to get support from religous fundamentalists and get more morale and support from their people.

Religion is ground for many bad things:

The crusades to the holy country: Both sides did brutal torture and massacres.

Make hatreds between many peoples: The Kurdians (as Saddam was very evil against) are self evil and brutal against the cristian Assyrian minority.

It still cause many wars today.

But religion has also did many good things:

It have streghten morale in people.

Islam created a brotherhood between Arabs and people from West Africa.

It is a big part of a culture and have created many cultures.


The best clan ever is TOAO Clan!
l2aGeFul2i0uS
Banned
posted 04-10-03 03:28 PM CT (US)     14 / 30       
When I said Baghdad falls, I meant that it affected the war. Not like the city blew up.
Deathmatch
Squire
(id: Darkmaster)
posted 04-10-03 03:52 PM CT (US)     15 / 30       
That implies conquest, but the Americans deny that it was the conquest of Baghdad, but rather it was the liberation.

-1

[This message has been edited by DM (edited 04-10-2003 @ 03:52 PM).]

Temur
HG Alumnus
(id: Gaiseric)
posted 04-11-03 07:06 AM CT (US)     16 / 30       
Yes, I just love it how when the Americans invade someone, it is "a war of liberation", and when anyone else invades someone, it is "naked aggression".

"War does not decide who is right... only who is left." -Bertrand Russell
Sopwith Camel
Squire
posted 04-11-03 03:28 PM CT (US)     17 / 30       
http://www.ironmaiden.com/ironmaiden/audio/fotd/strangers.asf


Which country wil be next? North Korea? I think it would be nice if you americans got beaten by their "mini"-red army..

(No offense, everyone)


"Må våra fienders skägg växa inåt!"
Enraged Orange
Squire
(id: RoboPaul88)
posted 04-11-03 04:53 PM CT (US)     18 / 30       

Quoted from Cherub Gaiseric:

Yes, I just love it how when the Americans invade someone, it is "a war of liberation", and when anyone else invades someone, it is "naked aggression".

It's because we're the world police, so everything we do is right.

Mobely
Squire
posted 04-11-03 05:28 PM CT (US)     19 / 30       

Quote:

He wanted an international peace-keeping organization, called hte League of Nations. Basically, he wanted to make world peace forever. His plan was rejected by the isolationistic Senate, which arguably cause World War II

How did the senate cause wwII? The United States ended world war two. As far as the league of nations, it was a pretty dumb idea to begin with if the country that stopped the war would not join it.


This is all, that is it.

Deathmatch
Squire
(id: Darkmaster)
posted 04-11-03 05:44 PM CT (US)     20 / 30       

Quote:

As far as the league of nations, it was a pretty dumb idea to begin with if the country that stopped the war would not join it.

The United States did not end World War I. The League of Nation was disbanded when it didn't do anything about the Nazi conquests of Austria, then Sudetenland, then Czechoslovakia, nor did it do anything about the Italian invastion of Abyssinia (Ethiopia).

The Treaty of Versailles was violated by Germany, yet the League took no action. The League of Nations did not include the United States, since the U.S. government wanted isolationism.

Only three of the fourteen points of President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points' Plan were accepted by the Senate. This was also a cause for World War II.


-1
GoC
Squire
(id: Ghost of Caesar)
posted 04-11-03 05:51 PM CT (US)     21 / 30       
President Woodrow Wilson was in favor of joining the League of Nations - it was his brainchild, after all. The US Senate, however, refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles; subsequently, the United States did not join the League. Coupled with the absence of the USSR, the League was relatively ineffective, since it simply didn't have the strength to back up it's condemnations. In fact, neither did the United States; in 1939, Germany had a much stronger, more modern, and better trained military than the US, which employed mostly volunteers operating WWI equipment prior to their rearmament 1940-1942.
Enraged Orange
Squire
(id: RoboPaul88)
posted 04-12-03 00:39 AM CT (US)     22 / 30       

Quote:

How did the senate cause wwII? The United States ended world war two. As far as the league of nations, it was a pretty dumb idea to begin with if the country that stopped the war would not join it.

I wish I wasn't American so I could make fun of Americans

Deathmatch
Squire
(id: Darkmaster)
posted 04-12-03 00:43 AM CT (US)     23 / 30       
[OT Rant]I really should get a spell check program, since I just noticed a stupid spelling mistake in my last post in this thread. [/OT Rant]

-1
Tonto_Simfish
Squire
posted 04-12-03 02:43 AM CT (US)     24 / 30       

Quote:

Abraham Lincoln who freed the American slaves, wanting to give them equal rights?

Conditions were much different back then; and the Republican and the Democratic Party were dramatically different parties back then. In fact; I would have preferred the Republican presidents to the Democratic presidents in the 1800s and the early 1900s; even though I do not support the policies of the Republicans at all now. The Republicans back then were viewed as more liberal, and were geared more strongly towards Civil Rights back then; while the Democratic Party is usually viewed as the party that supports the side of minorities these days.. In addition, Theodore Roosevolt was viewed as the first president with a concern for the environment, and was a Republican president himself. However, the Republican presidents today do not seem to have any concern whatsoever about the environment, and only pass environmental legislation to actually gain support among those whom place the environment in high regards.

Franklin D. Roosevolt was a president wiht visions as well; with visions of endging the Great Depression. While he is far from the greatest president (there were few events of a US president as atrocious as the removal of Japanese Americans to remote locations), he was still a Democrat with strong visions.


"Einstein is a fool." - Schrodinger
"The way to chastity is not to struggle with incontinent thoughts but to avert the thoughts by some employment, or by reading, or by meditating on other things, or by conversation. " - Sir Isaac Newton
CC | AoPS | M-W | PF | SSP | OCW | IBS | KCLS | CB
"We must believe that we are gifted for something, and that this something, at whatever cost, must be attained" - Marie Curie
"I was taught that the way of progress is neither swift nor easy" - Marie Curie
Natalinasmpf
Banned
posted 04-12-03 03:26 AM CT (US)     25 / 30       
Westernisation != Modernisation
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames