:ghey:

go post on another topic. There's a reason the title says "For those of you against the war...."

 

Not :ghey: its a very valid point. You cannot argue with someone your own interpetation of WMD against the common and well recognized defenition of WMD. That is like trying to argue with us that the sky is red because that is what your defenition of the color blue is.

 

poor analogy, but whatever. I don't feel I need to prove my veiws to you, which is why I didn't title the thread for people FOR the war.

 

This is about the propaganda I talk so much about. It's taken out of Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda 2nd Edition (by Noam Chomsky, published 2002)

"Mohawk Valley formula" or "Scientific methods of strike-breaking" worked very effectivaley by mobilizing community opinion in favor of vapid, empty concepts like Americanism. Who can be agaisnt that? Or Harmony. Who can be against that? Or, as in the persian Gulf War, "support our troops." Who can be against that? Or Yellow Ribbons. Who can be against that? Anything that's totally vacuous. In fact, what does it mean if somebody asks you, Do you support the people in Iowa? Can you say, Yes, I support them, or No, I don't support them? It's not even a question. It doesn't mean anything. That's the point. The point of public relations slogans like "Support our troops" is that they don't mean anything. They mean as much as whether you support the people in Iowa. Of course, there was an issue. The issue was, Do you support our policy? But you don't want people to think about that issue. Thats the whole point of good propaganda. You want to create a slogan that nobody's going to be agaisnt, and everybody is going to be for. Nobody knows what it means, because it doesn't mean anything. Its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question
that does mean something: Do you support our policy?"

"Just in the two years that George Bush has been in office three million more children crossed the poverty line, the debt is zooming, educational standards are declinging, real wages are now back to the level of about the late 1950's for much of the population, and nobody's doing anything about it. In such circumstances you've got to divert the public, because if they start noticing this they may not like it, since they're the ones suffering from it. Just having them watch the Superbowl and the sitcoms may not be enough. You have to whip them up into fear of enemies. In the 1930's Hitler whipped them into fear of the Jews and Gypsies. You had to crush them to defend yourselves. We have our ways, too. Over the last ten years, every year or two, some major monster is constructed that we have to defend ourselves against."

This is just a small sample. Definatly a book worth looking into.

 

It's pretty much a moot point to be against the war at this stage. We have bulldozed our way through the country, are pissing in Saddams own gold plated toilets in his palaces, and have watched the "mighty" Republican Guards surrender in their underwear (yes, there was actually an R.G. surrendering in his jammies). I can't understand for Pete's sake why anyone would protest or be against it at this point. The only thing that scares me now is that since 8 years of Pres. Bush is not enough to root out all the nutcases, what kind of President will we have when his second term is up (if you don't think he'll get re-elected you are a complete fool) -- Clinton, whose military and intelligence cutbacks didn't make 9/11 any easier, or will we have another G.W., who holds his word, stands hard and tough, and puts the money where it belongs: to protect and defend our country from lunatics. I could honestly care less about the economy, because I'd rather have a rough economy in a free country than any economy in a county being blasted into the next century. You have to put it into perspective -- we are talking about the future of man kind. The terrorist and dictators and regime leaders cannot have an easy go at it. If they do, we are all in trouble. That's what its about. Fighting the war on all fronts all over the world untill there's pretty much no one left to fight. Then we fight even harder to keep it that way. Use common sense.

 

Different topic but I bet we see Rudy in '08!

 

whatever, you guys beleive what you want.

and post your off-topic bullshit elsewhere.

 

That'll be a landslide. No need to worry about chads! He'd win on emontional attachment alone. I don't think there is a single American who doesn't hold him in very high reguard.

 

its called ON-TOPIC for a reason, jackass.

 

It's not what I believe, it is the truth. Of course, I don't believe liars or far left opinions (one in the same), so yeah I will believe what I want.