the debate: part iv

Brak: well i finally get around to respond. i enclose another article which i think is great and again i agree with. http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.pref=/mccarthy/mccarthy200604170640.asp
I do feel that Bush's biggest mistake is not selling this war. People need to know better the importance of this war and he must not only respond to the critics but make them respond to him. As for the article, i think it illustrates well why we chose iraq. I konw you're going to say, where is the proof of all of these claims and I haven't checked all the sources he states, however, i respond likewise to all the claims given by the critics of the war. Where is their proof. As time goes on, the proof indeed looks stronger that Bush was right. Perfect example is that of France. Kerry and others can't get over the whole, diplomacy blah, blah. I agree with diplomacy if it is going to work, however, would france ever backed what would be necessary to deal with Saddam? NO!!! they were banking on the Oil for Food scam and we had no idea. That goes for other countries also. As for the question of Iran. Well, indeed we haven't attacked, yet. Bush has called for diplomacy and hoped the Iranians would rise up against their government. He made these choices and comments partly, I believe becuase of the current political enviroment. With so many critics who want nothing more than to see Bush fails, he knows he can't get the support necessary for another invasion. As he said today, "all options are still on the table." My perspective of Iran is this: I think that the world community will, as usual shrug away from the fight. Everyone is concerned but most lack the balls. Sanctions won't happen because what would that do? The only thing the Iranians export is oil, being the 2nd largest exporter of oil, and if you put sanctions on oil, prices would triple. This would only hurt the world. So sanctions won't happen. Let's face the fact however that Iran doesn't want nuclear power for any other reason than weapons, (I really hope you can agree to that, otherwise you are way further left than I ever imagined) If they get nuclear power, we're in trouble, not to mention Isreal. The Iranians aren't going to bargain and it may just come to military intervention. I hope it doesn't becuase I imagine that war would indeed be much worse than the current war we're in. Having said that, if the time comes to drop a bomb on Iran, I fully support it. Diplomacy isn't going to work and if we wait too long we lose the first punch advantage. We must wait as long as possible but a pre emptive strike just might come. As for the censure thing, I can't think of anything stupider and more politically motivated. It only goes to prove that all that Democrats are concerned with is playing politics. It backfired on Feingold big time, becuase it was a stupid idea. Bush has done nothing wrong!!! He hasn't lied. He hasn't trampled civil liberties. He is a president at war. He acted upon the intelligence he had and he has followed the advice to "connect the dots" by doing all he can to protect Americans, including wiretaps on certain calls. As for the stockpiles of weapons, there is indeed proof about that. http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/10/29/iraq9575.htm ( I realize that this article points out another stategic error which is true, we should have protected these stockpiles, a strategic error still doesn't justify a censureship.) http://www.nysun.com/article/26514. As for the name thing, still nothing has come to us.

A Sound of Thunder (2005): watching this you'd think that it is a low budget sci-fi movie, but i just read that they spent a lot of movie to make it. if that's the case then this movie is one of the worst special effects movies ever and should not be seen. however, i watched it thinking it was low budget. after a while, instead of seeing just crappy effects, i began to see them as a technique to stylize the movie. whether they intended to or not, the movie looks very much like anime. it’s a very good story and has very good ideas about the way time works and traveling through time. it is somewhat along the lines of my own ideas on time, which were ripped off from me by that bastard steven hawking. but that’s for another time. the movie is basically about these tourists go back in time, do something that we don't know about, which causes the future to change and catch up with itself in ripples every few hours or so. the characters build up the suspense for the last time ripple which should bring in the new species of humans that should be enough to kill them all. so the audience waits the entire movie to catch a glimpse of what these evolved humans will be like, and when they show it, i was pretty caught off guard, making it rather comical. pre-evolved humans that came through the previous ripples were basically eight foot tall primates mixed with raptors. i was expecting more along those lines. instead, well, you’ll have to see it. sorry. it is a little unbelievable the way that time actually gets altered in the first place, or, what the tourist did to change all of time. i would have liked to see them explain that a little better. there were a few other plot holes here and there like that. nothing too distracting though. probably not a lot of sci-fi fans out there and even less that go for crappy special effects, so no one will want to see it. it’s interesting though. i think it is worth seeing because it’s so different from the usual movies we all see and movies are a delight. see it.