"TRYING TO HELP"-- by Dennis Miller
			Archive

Posted by: Ryan2 ® 03/25/2003, 15:16:36 Author Profile Mail author

"TRYING TO HELP" By Dennis Miller All the rhetoric on whether or not we should go to war against Iraq has got my little brain spinning like a top. I enjoy reading opinions from both sides, but I've detected a hint of confusion from some of you. Maybe this can help. As I was reading the paper recently, I was reminded of the best advice anyone ever gave me. He told me about the "KISS" method ("Keep It Simple, Stupid!"). So with this as a theme, I'd like to apply this theory for those who don't quite get it. My hope is that we can simplify things and recognize a few important facts. Here are ten things to consider when voicing an opinion on this important issue: (1) Between President Bush and Saddam Hussein ... Hussein is the bad guy. (2) If you have faith in the United Nations to do the right things, keep this in mind: the UN has Libya heading the Committee on Human Rights and Iraq heading the Global Disarmament Committee. Do your own math here. (3) If you use a Google or Yahoo search and type in "French Military Victories," don't be surprised if your computer panics at its inability to respond to your inquiry. (4) If your only anti-war slogan is "No War For Oil," hire a pit bull lawyer and sue your school district for having allowed you to slip through the cracks and robbing you of the minimum education that any non-troglodyte deserves (5) You can take this one to the bank: Saddam and bin Laden will NOT seek UN approval before they try to kill us. (6) Despite common belief among some, Martin Sheen is NOT the President. He only plays one on TV. (7) If you are anti-war and even an outright "America Basher," to bin Laden you are still an "infidel" whom he wants dead. (8) Be careful: if you believe in a "vast right-wing conspiracy," but not in the danger that Hussein poses, the only job you may be able to get is as an Ivy League college professor. (9) Even multi-culturalists who try to browbeat us into believing that all cultures are equally deserving of respect have trouble explaining the past 500 years of Islam. (10) Whether you are for or against military action, our young men and women overseas are fighting to defend our right to speak out on these issues. They deserve our unreserved support. I hope this helps.

| Recommend | Alert

Previous | Next | Current page

Replies to this message

Hmm...
Re: "TRYING TO HELP"-- by Dennis Miller -- Ryan2		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: nofaith ® 03/25/2003, 16:06:25 Author Profile Mail author

> (1) Between President Bush and Saddam Hussein ... Hussein is > the bad guy. I won't argue with that. It's pretty sad that Bush has to stand next to Saddam Hussein to look good. Talk about low standards: "Our President is better than Saddam Hussein." > (2) If you have faith in the United Nations to do the right > things, keep this in mind: the UN has Libya heading the > Committee on Human Rights and Iraq heading the Global > Disarmament Committee. Do your own math here. There is no "Global Disarmamnet Committee". But Mutia Mulumba Semakula Kiwanuka (from Uganda) is the chairman of the First Committee of Disarmament and International Security. Iraq does not chair. Libya is the chair of the Human Rights Commission, unfortunately. (3) I'm not sure I see the point here. (4) Hmm, I don't use slogans to criticize war. But "No blood for Oil," seems to be more popular. (5) I like how he lumps these guys together as if they were best buddies. Not that it matters--it is a sham to seek UN approval if you are going to do what you want anyway. It's a bit like asking someone in the electric chair if you can please flip the switch. It's nice to have permission, but it doesn't change the course of events if you don't. (6) -- (7) So what? It's not like anti-war folks are seeking Osama bin Laden's approval. (8) :) (9) Hmm, sounds like intolerance to me. Every society, and nearly every religion has pretty dark points in its past and present. (10) I support our troops, but not this war. -Dan Modified by nofaith at Tue, Mar 25, 2003, 16:07:36

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Hmm...Bop
Re: Hmm... -- nofaith		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Ryan2 ® 03/25/2003, 16:58:21 Author Profile Mail author

"It's pretty sad that Bush has to stand next to Saddam Hussein to look good." What's sad is the number of people who try to make Bush look bad for standing up to Saddam, not next to him. "There is no "Global Disarmamnet Committee"." Yep. But as I'm sure you know, Iraq will chair the U.N. disarmament CONFERENCE in May. I'm sure we can all forgive Dennis Miller for confusing the words "conference" and "committee." His point still stands. Between Iraq and Libya, the U.N. really has it's act together... "(3) I'm not sure I see the point here." Neither do the French. "(4) Hmm, I don't use slogans to criticize war. But "No blood for Oil," seems to be more popular." Which only further proves the point that those protests are all about sensationalism.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: doobie do do wop
Re: Hmm...Bop -- Ryan2		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/25/2003, 18:14:16 Author Profile Mail author

I like the content in this piece. Coming from Dennis Miller gives it more weight with me, as I haven't exactly seen eye to eye with him on a few things. Good entertainment value to be sure. Unfortunately, the logic contained therein will do little good as you have jumped right into the crux of the situation. The anti-war effort is more about emotion and sensationalism than anything else. It wouldn't matter if Saddam was seen smoking a hooka arm in arm with bin Ladin as they snacked on chicken fried babies while laughing and pointing as US soldiers were tortured to death all covered live on CNN -- peaceniks just ain't gonna get it. As another unrelated analogy, I'll cite my anti-gun friends who had the gall to say that they were coming over to my house should terror attacks happen, as my humble pro-Second-Amendment collection (read arsenal) would somehow make them safe. It's not about logic, you gotta go with what feels good.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

doobie do wop bam boom
Re: Re: doobie do do wop -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Ryan2 ® 03/25/2003, 19:02:26 Author Profile Mail author

I also liked your analogy (at least, I think it was yours) about keeping the school bullies from stealing kids lunch money. But what we don't understand, Chad, is that it would be far more effective to sit on the ground and protest while the bullies beat the tar out of as many little kids as they want. That's the peaceful thing to do. You shouldn't fight fire with fire ;)

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

OK, I'm LOL
Re: doobie do wop bam boom -- Ryan2		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/25/2003, 19:41:33 Author Profile Mail author

Yes that was my material, and I loved how you took it and ran a little further with it. I got a good belly laugh out of that one. There are those who fight for good, and there are those who fight for evil. Then there are those who whine and pout about anybody that has the guts to stand and fight about anything. Course, then there are good Celtic boys like me who will fight for no good reason at all. There's a quote that I love about that: "The Celts are men that heaven made mad: their wars are all cheery and their songs are all sad." So see, hehe, I just can't help it; I was wired this way. Yes, I am actually aroused by the sound of bagpipes ...

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

meanwhile in the principal's office...
Re: OK, I'm LOL -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Ryan2 ® 03/25/2003, 21:06:22 Author Profile Mail author

Of course, the principal and faculty are well aware of the bully problem. They are busy drafting countless anti-bully resolutions. Latest developments: The English teacher has proposed that (heaven forbid) they go out onto the playground and do something. The teachers are all about to vote. Wait a minute, the French teacher is getting all upset... saying that we need to appoint some lunch-money inspectors more details as they come.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

OK, stop it!!!
Re: meanwhile in the principal's office... -- Ryan2		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/25/2003, 21:48:16 Author Profile Mail author

LMAO, I am going to wet my pants. The hall monitors are saying that locker inspections will be held on Tuesday at 8:00 AM, so anyone with stuff in their lockers that appears on the list of bad stuff will be sent to the principle's office if it's OK with the French teacher.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

watch out...
Re: OK, stop it!!! -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Ryan2 ® 03/25/2003, 22:03:40 Author Profile Mail author

if you want to make it to the lockers, you'll have to wade through a mass of sitting protesters shouting, "no blood for lunch money" In the cafeteria, the lunch ladies are debating whether to serve fries with the hamburgers.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

You guys are crazed!
Re: OK, stop it!!! -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Victoria! ® 03/25/2003, 23:16:44 Author Profile Mail author

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page

Hmm...Wackit
Re: Hmm...Bop -- Ryan2		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/25/2003, 19:49:53 Author Profile Mail author

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but there's a good deal of sensationalism on both sides of this argument.Quite frankly I have trouble believing either side on this issue. You're going to have to be a lot more convincing than liberal/anti-war bashing to get this boy off his fence, into the mine-field.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Wascally Wackit
Re: Hmm...Wackit -- Another Bob		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/25/2003, 19:56:04 Author Profile Mail author

I feel that Ryan and I have presented some pretty strong and logical arguments in support of our view. I will admit that I am a patriot to a fault, and a warrior on top of it, so if somebody says fight, I'm all over it. However, in this case I have tried to remain objective and look at it from a logical viewpoint. Which of our arguments do you disagree with and why? I'm more than happy to examine this issue on a point by point basis if you'd like.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Yet another blow for pop psychology.
Re: Wascally Wackit -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/25/2003, 22:08:29 Author Profile Mail author

In the past little while I've been doing a lot of thinking on arguments (particularly because I tend to get in them) and why, no matter how rational I get, the other side NEVER listens to me (big personal thing, let's not go any further.) Recently I started noticing that it has NOTHING to do with reason and the present situation emphasises this.People on both sides are arguing this from an EMOTIONAL standpoint. For many americans arguing for this war I almost get this feeling of trying to defend themselves from this opinion they see the world has for them, and this explains a lot of the 'them against us' mentality. I find this sad. What you need to understand, is that nobody has much of real issue against the American people, rather against the American policy makers who seem to advocate this rediculous 'World Sheriff' standpoint (not a good position to take.) I unfortunately don't know many non-american proponent of the war, so I can give no account of what I know of their arguments. On the other hand, the anti-war bunch are just the same. I've seen next to no arguing of reasons, just personal agenda's. People arguing on American unilateralism while making stupid assertions that 'Suddam has no WMD's' when that hasn't been proven yet. Neither side is making any real attempt to find common ground, or even argue ACTUAL issues. Instead both sides are arguing emotional points and we all know full well, emotional arguments are dead ends. Right, now Mr Jungian Bob would like you all to sit down and write the first thing that comes to mind with the following words: Father...

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Father....
Re: Yet another blow for pop psychology. -- Another Bob		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: rdl ® 03/25/2003, 22:27:48 Author Profile Mail author

...please forgive them, they know not what they do. Now you tell me, Jungien Bob, who I might be talking about. (I'll give you a hint...it ain't the US policy makers) rdl Modified by rdl at Tue, Mar 25, 2003, 22:30:27

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Father....
Re: Father.... -- rdl		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/25/2003, 22:37:42 Author Profile Mail author

Good good, now you accept your latent homosexuality. Let's try the next one: Mother...

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Father....
Re: Father.... -- rdl		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/25/2003, 23:48:48 Author Profile Mail author

Mr Jungian Bob feels, given appropriate moments to compose one-self, that one might be referring either to: 1.God OR 2.Him My question then, why would god not know what he was doing OR What exactly do I not see? The supposed 'reason' behind every argument? HaHa, he postulates, Reason bears no relevence to a world where everyone 'knows' the answers. Opinion is the only judge of relevence. Sipping a martini, 'stirred, not shaken' (Guess who Bob thought of first.) he wanders into a non-existent sunset, for God still blazes above him. Modified by Another Bob at Tue, Mar 25, 2003, 23:50:05

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: "they"
Re: Re: Father.... -- Another Bob		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: rdl ® 03/26/2003, 09:49:54 Author Profile Mail author

I wasn't referring to who "Father" might be....couldn't care. It was the "them" and "they" I referenced that I was asking you to interpret, oh Bob of the excessive martinis. ;-) rdl **don't feel that you need to rush an answer...I'm spending a few days on your side of the pond and won't be back until next week**

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: "they"
Re: Re: "they" -- rdl		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/26/2003, 22:43:45 Author Profile Mail author

Another Bob Inc. would like to post a retraction. His post did not adequately indicate his beliefs on the situation and hopes with his most recent post he has rectified, at the least, some ambiguities and the perceived anger. He would also like to post an official apology to rdl Corp. for rushing to conclusions, to thank said Corp. for their insight and to wish them great joys in whichever part of the aforementioned pond they have found themselves in. Another Bob Inc. does however admit he rather enjoy that martini bit...:) As an aside, Another Bob Inc. has been puzzling over that green kinda-face emote(third from the left), trying to figure out just what it is meant to represent.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page

This is great
Re: Yet another blow for pop psychology. -- Another Bob		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/26/2003, 11:40:16 Author Profile Mail author

Father, I challenge you to find an instance of one emotional argument that I have posted in my steady stream of logically and well thought out posts. :) I would further challenge you to find any such argument in what Ryan has posted. I have a "thing" about emotional arguments. I don't do them. If at any time I feel that the argument/debate is either getting emotional or heading toward a dead end, I walk away. If I feel I am winning, or garnering support from others, I will not give it up -- even if I make no headway with the opposing party. The ongoing debate between Dan and I has revealed several instances of common ground. He has offered up several good points that I happen to agree with. In fact, these aforementioned points give me hope that there is room for good discussion between the pro- and anti- war factions. Further, your assertion that we are in some way trying to make up for world opinion is ludicrous, as I have repeatedly stated that I am unworried about world opinion, and am anti-UN. Looking for a non-American proponent of war in what is largely an American conflict (don't forget the Brits, see Nigel's post!) is ridiculous anyway. Just as asking an American citizen what they think of the Nigerian tribal conflict over oil in Africa is equally irrelevant. It just doesn't matter. Nothing they say or opinion they offer is going to carry weight, because it is unrelated and removed from that arena. I feel that I have argued nothing but actual issues here, and have responded to emotional and sensationalist point by point arguments in a largely logical and intellectual manner, such as is suitable for this forum format. I see no logical argument in your post at all come to think of it, mostly it consists of emotional statements such as you are condemning. I would gladly dabate the issues with you if I could simply find something to work with in your post. I would offer as evidence for your emotionalism your use of a lot of CAPS and the use of the word "feeling" and other emotional indicators.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: This is great
Re: This is great -- Chad		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/26/2003, 22:44:20 Author Profile Mail author

The following is intended simply as an analysis of the popular opinions regarding the war and has nothing to do with the waging of the war or the politics behind the war. When it comes to the pro- vs Anti-War debates I feel I cannot discount either side in this argument as the basis for the debate is 'Does Iraq (and Suddam Hussain) pose an international threat or not.' This, in turn, depends on our belief of the existence of WMD's and Saddams williness to use them. As these have no definite proofs either for or against, they are purely arbitrary and therefore emotional. Modified by Another Bob at Wed, Mar 26, 2003, 23:04:15

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Proof for ...
Re: Re: This is great -- Another Bob		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Chad ® 03/26/2003, 23:37:21 Author Profile Mail author

Ah, but we have the proof for the existence of WMDs. It is contained in the reports of UN weaps inspectors. Also, reference the news coverage (yes, video taped evidence) of the chemical warheads (I believe those qualify as WMDs) found by Blix and Co. As for the proof of his willingness to use them I would cite yet again his using WMDs against his own people (kurds) and Iran (both well documented). I would also cite his televised promise to use them on Coalition troops if they seige Baghdad. I feel that I have satisfied your burden of proof well enough. As that would take out the arbitrary status of my arguments, would you then concede that I have not been arguing from an emotional standpoint? I reinstate my challenge to you in the original post.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page

Hmm...
Re: Hmm... -- nofaith		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/25/2003, 22:34:20 Author Profile Mail author

(2) I seem to remember one saint of a woman, Ireland's ex-president Mary Robinson, as High Commissioner for Human Rights.I do believe she stepped down due to political pressure from, amongst others, the USA, Russia and China just last year. http://www.dailystarnews.com/law/200203/04/ A woman with balls of steel, and a sad blow for the HRC.

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page