|
Author
|
Topic: Spain to crocodile: "Please eat me last."
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 03:42 AM
Old news item
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 12:42 PM
Bull fucking shit. The Spanish had a lot of reasons to vote the PP out besides the terrorist bombings.
- - - - -
WHAT.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 01:12 PM
Remember, if you don't vote the way America wants you to, you're voting FOR TERRA.
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anthrax
Ultimate Authoritative Power in the Universe
Member # 335
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 04:18 PM
no crocodiles in article white cat is banned
- - - - -
She told The Associated Press she first realized her son was mentally ill in 1996 when he killed her oldest child, a 25-year-old woman who suffered from cerebral palsy, by beating her with a dumbbell.
From: Somebody put shit in my pants! | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jman
Farting Nudist
Member # 618
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 06:10 PM
Its the socialist revolution.
From: da burgh | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-23-2004 11:43 PM
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Slade_64
chipmunk pr0n author
Member # 804
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-24-2004 02:15 AM
- - - - -
Bucket.
From: Funky Town Texas | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-25-2004 07:16 AM
Mindless conservative bait too boring to take...
Next!
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-27-2004 08:20 PM
Well, the al Qaeda guy on the tape demanded that Spain withdraw their troops from Iraq, and the Socialists have said they will do exactly that.
If that's not "appeasement", then what is?
also crocodile made out of Optimus Prime beats fruity winged croc any day
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rysto
Farting Nudist
Member # 24
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-27-2004 09:40 PM
If terrorists demanded that blacks be given civil rights, would giving blacks civil rights be appeasement?
- - - - -
So "a" can be any value?
-a guy in my Calculus class, on the nature of variables
From: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-27-2004 11:22 PM
1938 just called; they want their argument back.
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
NintendoLover
I'm much dumber in actuality than I pretend to be.
Member # 3138
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 12:56 AM
white cowned
- - - - -
I love Nintendo!
Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 01:55 AM
Logic expires?
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Slade_64
chipmunk pr0n author
Member # 804
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 03:24 AM
Just as much as tradition does.
- - - - -
Bucket.
From: Funky Town Texas | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 04:26 AM
There are some very stupid people in this world.
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Slade_64
chipmunk pr0n author
Member # 804
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 06:05 PM
Yes, yes there are.
- - - - -
Bucket.
From: Funky Town Texas | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 06:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by White Cat:
If that's not "appeasement", then what is?
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's foreign policy which sought to both quell Hitler's German expansionism by making concessions to him that were considered reasonable, and give Britain time to rearm in case of an outbreak of military conflict.
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bulbasaur3000
Donkeylips
Member # 1801
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 07:45 PM
Hitler later said that his incursion into the Rhineland was only a test of the League of Nation's reaction. Had the League, or even France or Britain, condemned it and threatened to use force, he would have withdrawn immediately and probably waited longer to launch his quest for world conquest.
- - - - -
This signature sucks. Why is it here?
From: Plano, TX =( | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-28-2004 11:49 PM
Hitler also said he never wanted war. Repeatedly.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-29-2004 06:36 AM
So, if you're not sucking on the Fox News teat, it's possible to see a population who chose a new leader because the old one got them involved in an unpopular war and lied to them about terrorism.
Using mindless zombie horde logic, if Bush isn't re-elected for the same reasons, then the terrorists have won. As long as terrorists exist, you must vote Republican or you are an appeaser.
If this is a picture of Chewbacca, then you must vote for Bush.
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-29-2004 02:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by White Cat:
Well, the al Qaeda guy on the tape demanded that Spain withdraw their troops from Iraq, and the Socialists have said they will do exactly that.
If that's not "appeasement", then what is?
Nevermind that people were sick of the Popular Party's authoritatian bullshit, strict control of the state media, inefficiency when handling the 2000 oil spill, brainless support of a crusade in the Middle East, and attempt to repackage their new guy as Aznar with a different face - nevermind, also, that polls have what's called a "margin of error" and a 5% lead is not that notable - if anyone votes Socialist, they're appeasing the terrorists!
(People still don't know for sure that Al-Qaeda was behind it. The ETA could have been responsible, and unless I'm mistaken the PP is bigger friends with the ETA.)
Moron.
- - - - -
WHAT.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-31-2004 05:04 AM
M&M&Ms:Nevermind that people were sick of the Popular Party's authoritatian bullshit, strict control of the state media, inefficiency when handling the 2000 oil spill, brainless support of a crusade in the Middle East, and attempt to repackage their new guy as Aznar with a different face
All of these factors applied before the bombings. We are discussing whether the bombings caused a change in the voters. Pay attention.
nevermind, also, that polls have what's called a "margin of error" and a 5% lead is not that notable
Is that how much the PP was leading by in the pre-bombing polls? Even if it was that low, that's still a 9-15% shift in voter opinion within a few days.
Moron.
However, in the end it really doesn't matter what the motives of the Spanish people were, or even which terrorist group did the bombing. What matters is how the terrorists perceive it. Which of these two scenarios do you think is more likely?
(1)
al Qaeda Guy #1: "Hey, Spain just voted out the Popular Party in favour of the Socialists. What do you think about this?"
al Qaeda Guy #2: "They did that because they felt the PP wasn't honest and had handled domestic issues poorly. It had little to do with the bombing, and future bombings won't have any effect on Western voting patterns."
(2)
al Qaeda Guy #1: "Hey, Spain just voted out the Popular Party in favour of the Socialists. What do you think about this?"
al Qaeda Guy #2: "They seem to believe that we were responsible, and voted for a party that has promised, whether by way of appeasement or for other unrelated reasons, to do something that we want them to do. It looks like more bombings will get Westerners to vote the way we want them to."
Also editorial by a guy who doesn't appear to be a right-wing facist oppressor Nazi Fox News poopie-head.
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-31-2004 08:43 AM
White Cat: What matters is how the terrorists perceive it.
So is there any situation in which an incumbent who supports an unpopular "war on terrorism" can be defeated that does not mean "omfg teh teristz haf won!!11!" in your mind?
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-31-2004 11:21 AM
Wait, so the way to defeat terrorism is to abolish democracy?
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 03-31-2004 10:04 PM
WC: All of these factors applied before the bombings. We are discussing whether the bombings caused a change in the voters. Pay attention.
You're directly saying Spain voting for the Socialists was appeasement. I'm saying more factors went into it, and given major shifts in voter turnout and the fact that Aznar sucked dick as a leader, there's no reason to suppose the attacks alone played the decisive role.
People always cite "pre-bombing polls" that placed the Popular Party ahead. What's interesting is that they never post any kind of citation or information regarding these polls - whether they came from reliable organizations, how many were polled, what the margin of error was, etc.
Other than that, there isn't much to say other than DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN. Pre-election polls frequently turn out to be full of shit.
However, in the end it really doesn't matter what the motives of the Spanish people were, or even which terrorist group did the bombing. What matters is how the terrorists perceive it.
Fucking what?!?
[ 03-31-2004, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: Mentar the Malady Monkey ]
- - - - -
WHAT.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
ceoalex316
Time for the flaming leprosy party
Member # 338
|
posted 03-31-2004 11:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by White Cat:
However, in the end it really doesn't matter what the motives of the Spanish people were, or even which terrorist group did the bombing. What matters is how the terrorists perceive it.
Someone is trying to end up like cfalcon.
If terrorist can brain wash people into killing themselves, then they will perceive any scenario in their favor.
From: NYC | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-01-2004 01:28 AM
K: So is there any situation in which an incumbent who supports an unpopular "war on terrorism" can be defeated that does not mean "omfg teh teristz haf won!!11!" in your mind?
Well, since I've never claimed that "the terrorists have won", the answer is: All of them.
If you mean "which situations don't amount to appeasement", then it's the ones where the goverment (new or incumbent) and the populace don't respond to a terrorist attack by taking the exact same action that the terrorists demanded they take.
Mentar: People always cite "pre-bombing polls" that placed the Popular Party ahead. What's interesting is that they never post any kind of citation or information regarding these polls - whether they came from reliable organizations
You're right, I have been guilty of using unreliable information. For example, in my last post I went with the data that you posted...
Me: However, in the end it really doesn't matter what the motives of the Spanish people were, or even which terrorist group did the bombing. What matters is how the terrorists perceive it.
Malady: Fucking what?!?
Y'know, I first read your "parody" of my post in the "finish what Daddy started" thread, and despite the complete lack of context it still made only slightly less sense than the rest of your posts. However, since I realize I didn't spell out my point in cfalcon-level detail, I should explain it to you now:
When people vote for a government that has promised to do what the terrorists want them to do, regardless of their motives for doing so, the terrorists will perceive this as weakness and bowing to their will, which will encourage them to commit further terrorists acts to influence the outcome of other elections in their favour.
I am at a loss as to how someone in our post-1938 world could disagree with the above statement.
[ 04-01-2004, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: White Cat ]
- - - - -
"Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?"
-- Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
JolteonStorm
Farting Nudist
Member # 1774
|
posted 04-01-2004 01:31 AM
So there is no way to ever back out of an unpopular war because it would be seen as a sign of weakness to "the enemy?"
- - - - -
hi
From: lol | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-01-2004 04:37 PM
However, since I realize I didn't spell out my point in cfalcon-level detail, I should explain it to you now:
When people vote for a government that has promised to do what the terrorists want them to do, regardless of their motives for doing so, the terrorists will perceive this as weakness and bowing to their will, which will encourage them to commit further terrorists acts to influence the outcome of other elections in their favour.
I am at a loss as to how someone in our post-1938 world could disagree with the above statement.
While agree to an extent, I don't see what it has to do with whether Spain's elections were directly and solely determined by the attacks. Seriously, what the hell is Spain supposed to do? Vote the Popular party back in just to spite the terrorists? Give me a break.
- - - - -
WHAT.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Atma
Farting Nudist
Member # 689
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-01-2004 05:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. K (and mocking WC):
Using mindless zombie horde logic, if Bush isn't re-elected for the same reasons, then the terrorists have won.
Don't forget that many people think Bush and/or Sharon are terrorists...
(and I'd be much happier if they both lose)
- - - - -
"My name is Atma...
I am pure energy... and as ancient as the cosmos.
Forgotten in the river of time...
I've had an eternity to ponder the meaning of things...
And now I have an answer..."
From: Cinnabar Isle, Long Island, NY | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-01-2004 07:43 PM
White Cat: If you mean "which situations don't amount to appeasement", then it's the ones where the goverment (new or incumbent) and the populace don't respond to a terrorist attack by taking the exact same action that the terrorists demanded they take.
So you are in favor of a world wherein the terrorists can almost effortlessly determine who the leaders of the free world are?
JS: So there is no way to ever back out of an unpopular war because it would be seen as a sign of weakness to "the enemy?"
I guess if White Cat had his way, future Bush descendants would still be looking for ways to avoid fighting in Viet Nam when they turned 18.
[ 04-01-2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: Mr. K ]
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
starCaliber
is evil and also MewtwoSama
Member # 268
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-03-2004 06:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. K:
Mindless conservative bait too boring to take...
Next!
man you tried so hard, but you still got fucked over
From: San Francisco, CA | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charmeleon42
Date Rapist
Member # 1066
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-03-2004 06:31 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Psybro:
Well, it certainly looks like those terrorists were happy with the election results!
Yes, it makes me wonder just how much the left is shaking in their boots at being wrong. At least those who have been advocating for the US to pull out of Iraq, stop supporting Israel, etc. Those who say "If we stop pissing off the terrorists, maybe they wont attack us!!1!"
Bad-Guys: 2, Appeasement: 0
EDIT: I unwaveringly call it appeasement because seemingly the day after the attacks, the government said "Oh we should pull out of Iraq." In direct response. Because by george before this, Spain hasn't been in the newspapers since the 1890's, so it's not like it's in response to anything else.
[ 04-03-2004, 06:35 PM: Message edited by: Charmeleon42 ]
From: Mountain Dew Land | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-03-2004 07:24 PM
Winston fucking Churchill: Yes, it makes me wonder just how much the left is shaking in their boots at being wrong. At least those who have been advocating for the US to pull out of Iraq, stop supporting Israel, etc. Those who say "If we stop pissing off the terrorists, maybe they wont attack us!!1!"
Bad-Guys: 2, Appeasement: 0
Hold on, I thought the terrorists wanted the troops to be pulled out of Iraq. That's happening now, so why would they attack again? ![[Confused]](confused.gif) Those are some pretty whacky terrorists you've constructed. Do they care about who's in power in Spain or not? It's one or the other.
I unwaveringly call it appeasement because seemingly the day after the attacks, the government said "Oh we should pull out of Iraq." In direct response.
Actually I think you'll find that the Socialist Party had withdrawal of troops from Iraq as an electoral promise. I don't know how your Spanish is, but their electoral manifesto repeatedly refers to the war as illegal.
[ 04-03-2004, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Psybro ]
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Donald
Bob the Builder
Member # 1551
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-03-2004 10:54 PM
I hate this planet sometimes.
From: In your girl's panties | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-04-2004 04:33 AM
Well, it sure is nice of the terrorists to eliminate the middleman and blow themselves up...
Slowduck: Hold on, I thought the terrorists wanted the troops to be pulled out of Iraq. That's happening now, so why would they attack again? Those are some pretty whacky terrorists you've constructed. Do they care about who's in power in Spain or not? It's one or the other.
quote:
Several newspapers reported on Saturday that the Spanish embassy in Egypt had recently received a letter signed by the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades threatening to attack Spanish embassies and Spanish interests in north Africa and the southern and eastern Mediterranean region.
The letter warned that the attacks would go ahead unless Spain withdrew its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan within four weeks, El Mundo reported.
Just making sure the Socialists keep their promises, I guess.
Also notice how the demands have increased. First Iraq, now Afghanistan too.
- - - - -
"Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?"
-- Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charmeleon42
Date Rapist
Member # 1066
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-04-2004 02:59 PM
First the Sudetenla- erm Iraq, then the world!
From: Mountain Dew Land | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wizzymoto
Farting Nudist
Member # 60
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-04-2004 04:35 PM
Is that Bush's new campain slogan?
From: Irvine, CA, USA | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charmeleon42
Date Rapist
Member # 1066
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-04-2004 05:12 PM
god dammit, i meant the terrorists : ( : (
From: Mountain Dew Land | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-04-2004 06:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by White Cat:
Just making sure the Socialists keep their promises, I guess.
I thought they threatened to blow up embassies? And I thought they were all best mates with the Socialists?
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-06-2004 02:15 AM
Psy-yi-yi: I thought they threatened to blow up embassies?
Uh, yeah. They threatened to blow up Spanish embassies and other "Spanish interests". What's your point?
And I thought they were all best mates with the Socialists?
I believe the term you're looking for is "useful idiots".
- - - - -
"Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?"
-- Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-06-2004 11:38 AM
To change tack because this is going nowhere fast, if the Spanish people elected the Populist Party back in as a result of this attack tomorrow, would that be appeasement as well?
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-07-2004 12:44 AM
Well, the PP's platform on Iraq is pretty much the exact opposite of what the terrorists want, so no, it wouldn't be appeasing the terrorists.
It would probably qualify as "appeasing" the Bush administration, though.
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mentar the Malady Monkey
worst username ever
Member # 1182
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-07-2004 12:54 AM
Amazing. If you do anything anyone likes, that's appeasement.
From: Pandemonium, HL, Hades | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-07-2004 02:51 AM
cal: man you tried so hard, but you still got fucked over
Yeah, with cfalcon choosing to cower in fear rather than treat everyone respectfully, I thought there might have been a chance, but suddenly White Cat has leaped in to fill the idiot vacuum.
Oh well, whatever, at least WC makes his points clearly and concisely.
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-07-2004 08:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by White Cat:
Well, the PP's platform on Iraq is pretty much the exact opposite of what the terrorists want, so no, it wouldn't be appeasing the terrorists.
So essentially appeasement has nothing to do with actively fighting terrorism and everything to do with following the US?
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
White Cat
Nobody knows why I'm an admin.
Member # 42
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-08-2004 01:25 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Psybro:
So essentially appeasement has nothing to do with actively fighting terrorism and everything to do with following the US?
So essentially you're saying that the inverse of the hydrogenated polarity is responsible for the downturn in mortgaged hypothermia transudation?
The Azure Heights homework assignment for tonight is to read the following and write a post about it that is actually relevant.
quote:
appease
1. To bring peace, quiet, or calm to; soothe.
2. To satisfy or relieve: appease one's thirst.
3. To pacify or attempt to pacify (an enemy) by granting concessions, often at the expense of principle.
appeasement
The policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.
Edit: Hey Psybro, are you one of the 9% of Britons who believe that Winston Churchill was a fictional character?
[ 04-08-2004, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: White Cat ]
- - - - -
"Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?"
-- Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa
From: Calgary | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psybro
Half Psyduck. Half Slowbro. All cop.
Member # 290
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-08-2004 10:40 AM
Can you find me a definition of an 'election promise'?
From: Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic