Justice

Yes, they've given him numerous amounts of equipment in which to produce such weapons, far more than us. I mention this because you act as we are the only, and the worst, offender here. We aren't, we made mistakes. But we didn't continue them like some of the European Countries did. Secondly, Saddam specifically stated that the nuclear reactor was for the purpose of starting a nuclear arms program. The only reason it never got used for that was because the Israelis took it out. Just because we haven't found anything doesn't mean he wasn't pursuing it (Since the good-old "Lookin' for Uranium" story actually turned out to be more reality than fiction). First off, there was no chance either way. You don't seem to understand that what you are dreaming about was pure fiction; they couldn't rise up, and this was proven quite ably when Saddam tore them apart when he was at his weakest politically and militarially. The sanctions themselves were also coupled with a "Food-For-Oil" program that was supposed to provide for the people of Iraq. We find out that it didn't work not because it was inadequate, but because of corrupt politicans and Saddam utterly fucking looting it. If anyone is to blame for the hardships of sanctions on the people, it is Saddam for stealing the food and money that was rightly supposed to go to his fucking people. You act as though we simply put on sanctions without any consideration for the people of Iraq, which is again completely false. WE DIDN'T FUCKING LARGELY CONSTITUTE IT. OVER 75% OF THE SHIT WE FOUND IN THE FIRST GULF WAR WASN'T ANYTHING WE HAD EVER GIVEN HIM, YOU IDIOT. Okay, with that out of the way... You ignored the entire argument I made. It's not hypocritical. We realized the mistake we made, and now we've corrected it. I don't understand how correcting one's past wrongs makes one somehow hypocritical. When you make a spelling mistake, do you always spell the word the wrong way for fear of being called a hypocrit. I love that 'he mellowed out'. I find that hilarious considering he's murdered more people in the 90s then he ever did before and basically starved his population of food. What a great way to 'mellow out'... You, good sir, are a liar. More. And more. And even MORE. Amnesty Int and other organizations have also said similar statements. The Sandinistas were a brutal fucking government, and it's really sad how much of an appologist you are for them. I don't defend anything the Contras did, why do you defend the Sandinistas so much? Wow, you do a piss poor job of defending them.

That's what I intended. We still have your board from so long ago up and running, so we can use that as an archives. Bah. It'll never work.

The saddest part about that article. Ye Gods, that is horrid.

Yeah, and then we can make a thread so people can suggest their own matches, and then maybe one other than their own so they don't look like complete egotistical dicks. Uh... well, I wasn't gonna suggest any of mine. I was thinking maybe "Essential Collections" like Stubby, HVT, Edwin, King, Mark, Comet, and even you. Get the hall of famers out of the way, get in a few notable angles (M7 vs. MC, Flesher/Frost, and others that I really can't remember out of hand), then things like a Hardcore Hell one, maybe a two-part tag one with some Fallen, DVD, J&R (Okay, me once), W&D, Double Jeparody, Stables Titles, etc, to round it out. I think it'd be an awesome archiving project.

A few ideas to help polish us up: 1) Commercials. Something that CC should do, though if actives feel compelled they can help out, too. Write some commercials to break up the montony of "Match match match match MUSHROO- I mean, Promo, promo!". Hell, it opens up a bunch of angle opportunities: Guys fighting for endorsements to placate their egos and such, guys trying to be the most advertised guy on the show. Another idea is that we could do it almost as pseudo-ranking. The more motion you are causing in the ocean, the more advertisements you are in. Even if you don't like the ancilliary stuff, it's still good for breaking up shows. 2) "DVDs". We've done it before, but we should make up "DVDs" (Comment threads with a certain series of matches) to advertise and promote our federation. Each DVD could have something like a match history before it so you can understand what it's all about. Make 'em about certain feuds, certain people, certain match types, all sorts. It'd be great to not only have this history coming back, but bragging it and advertising it to others. 3) News show? Sorta like the old news articles I used to do at Empire Feds, but show format. SWF Walkoff or SWF Joker's Wild or something that. Guys submit some weird or funny rumor/newsbit and I'll run with the best ones and make up a story out of it. Post it on their forum sorta as something fun and funny, and make us more active. Any other ideas that could help us out?

Tiny Toons was pretty good for what it's worth. On topic: I've been laughing maniacially the entire time I've spent reading this thread. I don't think I've seen something so abstractly stupid that it's just comes out funny. I get the joke. I really, really get the joke here. Wouldn't it be hilarious if this all turned out to be an early buzz for a massive April Fools joke? Edit: I just watched the preview movie, and this HAS to be a fucking April Fools Joke.

GOD DAMN IT CHANGE YOUR FUCKING NAME!!! AHHHHHHHHHHH!

Saw this when the thread was bumped and couldn't allow this crap to fester on the top of the pile... Where did Saddam Hussein get chemical weapons from? If your answer is "The United States of America, while the first George Bush was president and several key members of the current Bush administration were in important positions" you win the grand prize. Otherwise you should refer to a dictionary and look up "hypocrisy". Since this thread was raised from the dead, I noticed the stuff C-Bacon posted, which needs some serious revision. Bullshit argument. Many European Countries provided them millons of dollars worth of equipment for producing such things, including cultures. We hardly built their WMDs program nearly as much as most other countries. Their nuclear program was a product of France giving them a nuclear reactor. Secondly, this isn't hypocrasy. If one makes a mistake in the past, he isn't allowed to correct it? What the hell! Perhaps we should put slavery back into practice, otherwise we'd be hypocrits! Hey, no more women's rights because we'd be hypocritical looking back at our past history. It's not hypocritical to correct ones mistakes. Obviously the solution was to let Saddam stay in power as long as he could because any action against him would be 'hypocritical'. Ahahahahahahaha... This is absolute bullshit. We saw how a popular revolt went when Saddam was at his weakest after the Gulf War and it was crushed utterly and ruthlessly. This dream that the Iraqis could somehow be empowered enough to throw him out with his iron grip is the greatest pipe dream you ever thought up. And on Sanctions: Had they been lifted or lowered, Saddam was fully prepared to restart his WMD programs (As stated in the last WI Report). The only reason the UN IMPOSED SANCTIONS failed was because of the corruption within the UN, not the stiffness of the sanctions themselves. I don't remember us ever admitting to 'keeping Saddam in power'. We gave him help to fight Iran via "Enemy of my enemy = friend". Was it a moral mistake? Yes, definitely. Did we single-handedly set him up and keep him in power? Good God no. Again, his suppliers were primarly Western Europe and Russia more than us. People who were funding him and selling him equipment right up until hours before the invasion. People that were fighting for the sanctions to be lifted and delaying action against him in the UN. Who kept him in power? Outside our support in the 80s against Iran, we've done very little in supporting Saddam, especially when one looks at countries like Russia, France, and Germany. Or does that fuck up your argument against 'nobility' too much to recognize it? We aren't in control of Oil: it's all in control of the Iraqi government. Of course they are going to give us 'benefits': We fucking liberated them. Do you expect them to just spit in our eye or something? Or are you the guy who likes to punch the guy who beats up the bully who picks on you? I see a great reason for cautious optimism. Both with NATOs new involvment and an actual Iraqi-run Constitutional Congress going are two excellent developments. Both of these will be great helps. Your consistent defeatism and pessimism through stretching of the facts and arguments that have proven to be just plain wrong. Still ignoring the massive attrocities committed by the Sandinistas? I've recognized that the Contras were a horrible bunch, but you have yet to fess up and admit that the Sandinistas did stuff just as bad (And even worse when you consider the damn near slaughter of the Pacific Coast indians). If anyone is guilty of convientent igorance, I'd say it'd be you.

Hey, I did news updates. Of course, they involved Janus getting sodomized with coral alongside Mel Gibson, but hey, news is news. Anyways... I was wondering, aren't we more of a board fed, or are we trying to avoid that stigma?

That billboard, without the markings, is fucking hilarious.

God damn it, I thought it would be Reverend Lovejoy. This truly does suck.

And agreement on the Batman photo. I couldn't tell until I noticed Catwoman was actually black...

Damn, and I was going to make a joke of me as being the Penguin. I got off light. But seriously, doesn't the Penguin look like Dick Cheney? Must be during his pre-Halliburton days... There's a reason for that...

We're not a bunch of commies, commie! Indeed. We shall not be denied! Domo-Kunservatives shall destroy you all!

Fuck it, dude. Let's go bowling.

You're just angry because your circle jerk with CronoT in the Bush Documentary got broken up.

Jefferson wrote the letter, but the 1st Amendment was not written by him. Sorry, mental block. *smacks self*

Posted per request from a friend.

Okay, how about THIS example: Divine Right of Kings, the belief that monarchs were put into power by supernatural forces/gods/God, is a principle which predates Western Civilization. We didn't have a term for it until much later, though. Eh... Again, the problem is that the concept is so damn open. "Seperation of Church and State" is something that can be taken with a dozen different ways. Jefferson's own interpretation is taken with so much credence because, well, he wrote the damn thing. It's arguable, though, how far we take that. It's essentially a better comparison, but a better one is saying "The Concept of Communism as Marx put is has always been there, Marx just defined it and put it into words". Essentially, I agree with you. I just don't believe the comparison is quite correct. No Exitus Acta Probata for me.

Popular Mechanics has experts on engines. Airplanes have engines. Airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center on 9/11. Hell, not just that, but aerodynamics and other such things as well. It's all fairly common ground. Physics don't change because it's plane, not a car.

The only real argument that can be made is that technically the concept is there, but the writing isn't. The non-establishment of a national religion is seperation of church and state, but how far you go with it is up to you. I like to think that while church and state are seperate, this isn't an abolition of any sort of involvment between religion and state (As long as it can be argued that the seperation is maintained). And Rob E: Your original comparison is very flawed: DNA isn't a concept or a philosophical idea. It's a physical entity, which obviously be there even if you don't know it. An idea isn't something that can be proven to be there until it is expressed. That's like people saying "Well, I thought of that first!": There is no proof that they actually did, nor can there be proof. It's a faulty comparison.

Okay, I'll concede that. But it doesn't help the credibility of the article or author much in my eyes.

This from a page with perhaps the most innaccurate picture of Dresden EVER (Strafing runs?! WTF MATE~!) and a section called "Iraq'nam" with an article entitled "American Defeat in Iraq".