Good ol Mr. Colin Powell....

[VinceZeb]

When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying that, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

It became very quiet in the room.

[AChimp]

At which point the Archbishop farted loudly and announced it was time for tea.

You see, the Archbishop knows that every other Western country that has fought anywhere has done the exact same thing, so the U.S. isn't all that special afterall. Except, the U.S. usually tries to end up with as much influence as it can over liberated countries.

The Archbishop sipped his tea with a small, knowing smile; it was a good fart. "Better out than in, I always say," he thought to himself, and thanked God that Europe is full of white people.

[Protoclown]

Suddenly, the ambassador from Iraq burst into the room, with bandoleers of dynamite strapped across his chest!

"Alright, you American and European pigdogs! It is time for you to die!" He laughed evilly as he strode into the center of the room, preparing to annihilate everyone within it and send them to meet Allah, a god his secular self did not even believe in.

"Blast!" thought Powell, as he slowly tried to position himself around the room and behind the Iraqi. "If only there were some way I could distract him, I could take him down without anyone getting hurt!"

[FS]

Then, everyone in the room was distracted as a loud explosion, possibly from a humvee, sounded outside. A window shattered as a small, bronze, pudgy figure dressed in blue spandex somersaulted into the room.

"Stop, fiend!" he cried out, and the Iraqi ambassador spontaneously soiled himself. "Wh... who are you?" the ambassador asked in a feeble voice. "I... am VinceZeb!" the figure said in an obnoxiously loud voice. "I have come to... could someone turn down the heating in here?" VinceZeb went on to say, and fell to the floor with a mighty thump.

"Ha ha ha!" the ambassador laughed boldly. "Who of you can stop me now?" Meanwhile, Tony Blair pushed his way to the emergency exit, crushing the 80-year old coffee lady in the process.

[AChimp]

Cautiously, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien stood up and began to speak.

"Mr. Iraqi Man, we understands that you are angry and when you are angry you can becomes very angry and do angry things out of anger, you knows?" he started. Confused by the extremely poor English, the Iraqi ambassador took a staggered step forward.

"Hey! What the fucks do you thinks you are doing?!" said Chretien, "This are my personal spaces that you are invading!"

Using all the training that he was given as an amateur boxer and the expertise that he gained fending off unrelenting protesters, the feisty politician delivered a stunning uppercut to the Iraqi ambassador's face.

"Don't fuck wit me, eh!"

[The_Rorschach]

You think this is all a joke? Christ. What would I expect from a representative of the country that has booed the American anthem at their hokey games. No so special huh? Name three countries that have fought in wars where they had nothing to gain, and asked for little or nothing in return.

We fought in the Korean war, losing 33,651 personnell killed in action. We fought in Vietnam, losing 47,369 personnell killed in action. We gained nothing for the loss of our servicemen in either war.

Your ability to be glib on this subject sickens me Chimp.

[AChimp]

Thank you for ruining the thread, bozo.

The Canadian anthem has been booed at and disrespected far more in the U.S. by drunk fans than any amount of Quebecers can make up for.

As for naming the countries that fought in wars with little or nothing to gain, here they are in no particular order: Canada, Australia and New Zealand. They fought because all their allies were fighting, not because they had to.

[The_Rorschach]

"The Canadian anthem has been booed at and disrespected far more in the U.S. by drunk fans than any amount of Quebecers can make up for."

So this justifies things? I've attended quite a few sport events, and while I have witnessed a fight between a marine and civilian because the latter would not remove his hat during the music, I have never once seen anyone boo the anthem of any country, US or otherwise.

"As for naming the countries that fought in wars with little or nothing to gain, here they are in no particular order: Canada, Australia and New Zealand. They fought because all their allies were fighting, not because they had to."

And what wars were these, pray tell? Notice I didn't mention the World War 1 or 2, or any war which the US was bound to serve due to treaty or agreement. I can almost guarantee any wars you mention involving those three will.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by VinceZeb

When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying that, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

It became very quiet in the room.

Ladies and Gentlemen, may I present to you, the Straw Man arguement.

[El Blanco]

It is as strong as anyone's claims towards empire building.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

It is as strong as anyone's claims towards empire building.

Even assuming the other side has fundamentally flawed arguements, it doesn't justify using the straw man.

[The_Rorschach]

Do you just repeat pretty words and phrases you hear mumbled more coherently by others?

For those who don't know what she is, quite incorrectly, refering to, the strawman is a form of logical fallacy by which one attempts to pretend they are responding to the views of their opponants when in actuality they are erecting an artificial argument more easily refuted. The two most common forms of this are to respond to an exaggerated view of others, or to respond only to an extreme view which does not accurately represent the argument of ones opponant.

Now, when asked if our staged conquest in Iraq was empire building - an extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations - Colin Powell responded succinctly to the question and answered negatorily. He cited past history as an example of current operating proceedures in that, this would not be like the aquisition of Costa Rica, the Philappines or Hawaii, it would be like the liberation of Japan, So Korea or the attempt made in Vietnam. Anyone with an ounce of intellegence hearing his statement would have known this momentarily. The more confused and feeble witted, like Jen, take a bit longer to reach this conclusion - providing they have the ability to even reason that far.

[mburbank]

Woah! Jump back, Shach!

Sue, Powell's line was, depending on what angle you shoose to view it from, correct, I think it was just as glib as anything that Jeanette said.

I also am suspicious where a source isn't given, particularly concidering that "It got very quite in the room" nonsense. This is a piece of a piece, obviously written with a desired impact in mind. Structurally it reminds me of those scenes in "Dragnet" where Joe Friday would fire off a succint, tart reply to a self righteous criminial, who would then get that "Oh, my God! He's right" expression and then look down in shame and guilt.

I think, on the whole, folks here were making fun of the staged nature of the writting, it's canned quality. I also think Powell's quote itself was highly debateable.

And I take issue with your idea that we 'stood nothing to gain' in the wars you sight. Had we won the decisive victories we hoped for, it would have put points on the cold war scoreboard. All the brush wars were a fight against Communism as a whole as we saw it at the time. Land was not the objective, but hegemony and the widening of our "Sphere of Influence" surely was. We were looking for a wee bbit more than land to bury our dead on. We were looking to choose who ran the country, who they traded with, who's proxy they became in a wider, manichean conflict. I think powells line was a deliberate simplification of America's style of proxy colonialsim meant to play for a media audince and not whomever he may have been speaking to.

[AChimp]

And what wars were these, pray tell? Notice I didn't mention the World War 1 or 2, or any war which the US was bound to serve due to treaty or agreement. I can almost guarantee any wars you mention involving those three will.

Ror, you should really see a doctor about all that red, white and blue that you are seeing. The view from inside your ass should only be red.

Canada fought in Korea, too. Australia and New Zealand had troops in Vietnam.

Now, as for Powell's statements, I hardly see their relevance in today's world. There's about 30 dead American soldiers as of right now, but are you honestly going to bury them in Iraq after you've "liberated" the Iraqis? Not unless you want their graves pissed on.

Come to think of it, I can't think of a single war in the last 20 years where you haven't shipped your dead back the the U.S. in flag-draped pine boxes. My guess is that the liberated haven't been as grateful as you thought they should be.

This thread has been completely ruined now. I want story time again.

[Protoclown]

Rorshach, I don't know what Jeanette ever said or did to offend you so badly, but I have never seen any posts from her deserving the kind of venom you spew in her direction in response. She is perfectly capable of holding her own in here, quite a bit more than several others who hang around in the political forum (quite possibly myself included)...I respect that you disagree with her but I have seen you consistently attacking her intelligence over the things she has said, most of which I have found reasonable additions to the conversation whether I agreed with them or not. What the hell has gotten into your panties, man??

Oh, and can we PLEASE get back to the story that VinceZeb started???

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by Protoclown

Rorshach, I don't know what Jeanette ever said or did to offend you so badly, but I have never seen any posts from her deserving the kind of venom you spew in her direction in response. I respect that you disagree with her but I have seen you consistently attacking her intelligence over the things she has said, most of which I have found reasonable additions to the conversation whether I agreed with them or not. What the hell has gotten into your panties, man??

Thank you Proto. I couldn't have said it better myself.

[FS]

Originally Posted by Protoclown

Oh, and can we PLEASE get back to the story that VinceZeb started???

Yeah really! I want to know what happens next.

[VinceZeb]

Be weary no longer: http://www.weforum.org/site/homepubl...etary+of+State

I trust you can read away by yourself. And the address was given to the former AB of C, not the current Ultra-lib one.

[AChimp]

Originally Posted by The actual article

We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years and we’ve done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in, and otherwise we have returned home to seek our own, you know, to seek our own lives in peace, to live our own lives in peace. But there comes a time when soft power or talking with evil will not work where, unfortunately, hard power is the only thing that works.

Originally Posted by VinceZeb

Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return

And you expect us to treat you with any credibility? You took Powell's remarks completely out of context.

The Archbishop also didn't mention anything about "empire building," but instead asked about whether or not the U.S. would rely on being friendly rather than sabre-rattling in the future.

There's also no mention of the room going silent, except maybe out of the general social norm that you don't talk while someone else is talking.

[VinceZeb]

I took the quote that I posted from what was (supposedly) and eyewitness account. I knew what was said before hand. I didn't type that first comment out in the first place, just a c & p. And why would the offical transcript of what he said say *Crowd drops into eerie silence* on it? It only shows what was said, not others reactions, because their reactions are not important as per offical record keeping.

Besides, if you tell a story about something you heard someone say, do you tell them the 20 minute word for word version or the 1 minute summary of what was most important.

My statements I make have sources. That is credibility.

[Protoclown]

Originally Posted by VinceZeb

My statements I make have sources. That is credibility.

SORRY TO INFORM YOU VINCE, BUT I DO NOT THINK YOUR ASS COUNTS AS A PROPER SOURCE.

[The_Rorschach]

Zeb, you are a boob. I can't believe I actually defended a quote, totally contrived might I add, merely because I trusted you to post something vaguely remiscient on the truth.

As for Jen. . . I treat her the same way I treated Italian when he first got here. He was lit into by both Kevin and I for his initial posts. Its the way I treated Heather Michelle, KellyChaos and Zeb. I always fancied myself fairly consistant. Hazing is how you see what new people are made of, and I do believe, calling her an idiot is somewhat less insulting than my calling Zeb a whiny, well worn cunt.

[AChimp]

It only shows what was said, not others reactions, because their reactions are not important as per offical record keeping.

Vinnie, the transcript says "applause" several times, and the last time that I checked, an applause is a reaction.

Besides, if you tell a story that you heard someone say, that is called a secondary source, and isn't given very much credence in many circles. It's kinda like that game of Telephone that we all played in kindergarten where the first kid says "peanut butter" and the message turns into "penis" after 30 kids.

Sorry, but if you're going to start relating stories that you heard from Uncle Frank as you were all drunk and talking about how much sex you have, I'm just going to have to laugh in your face each time.

My statements I make have sources. That is credibility.

I showed this thread to my brother. He says that, since he is an expert in dumbassedness, that you are also a dumbass. Therefore, by going on his authority, I can credibly say that you are a dumbass that knows nothing.

[VinceZeb]

Rorschach, that is nice. You are just so consistent and important. Go lord over your Star Wars action figure collection, to find someone that cares about your consistency.

AChimp, I would completely respect you and your brother's opinon if I were talking about eating maple syrup, saying 'eh' after sentence, Mountie training or moose fucking. Until then, go back to being a poorly educated and imformed citizen of the USA's little brother.

[AChimp]

I knew you'd say that. The bit about moose fucking, I mean. You seem like the kind of guy who knows a lot about that.