Moore or Pig?

[Maengelito]

Just saw F911 last night. I highly recommend it. It is indeed a personal attack on bush and the administration, but Moore backs up all his claims. My advice is to go see it. the end.

i'd like to see f911, but i really dont want to spend a penny to support moore. guess i'll wait til its on dvd and wait for someone else to rent it. or download it, whatever.

[JackoliciousLegs]

Here is an article written by Christopher Hitchens, one of the most well known and well respected Liberals in the country. Considered one of the top "Liberal Hawks" and regular writer to "The Nation"
...
Its a long read, but a must for anyone who has seen the movie, especially anyone calling others "uninformed" about topics related.

ahem... let me tell you something about Mr. Hitchens. He is not a "liberal hawk" nor a regular writer to "the nation." He is a neo-fascist turned conservative who supports the war in Iraq. In an interview (link ) with frontpage magazine he said:

After 9/11, you publicly broke with the Left...

Watching the towers fall in New York, with civilians incinerated on the planes and in the buildings, I felt something that I couldnÔÇÖt analyze at first and didnÔÇÖt fully grasp.... As to the ÔÇ£LeftÔÇØ IÔÇÖll say briefly why this was the finish for me

Anyways, read the article still if you want. Read the interview if you want to be really bored. Either way, know that this guy is not unbiased as Evan suggested.

[Sijray21]

The State Department acknowledged Thursday it was wrong in reporting terrorism declined worldwide last year, a finding used to boost one of President Bush's chief foreign policy claims -- success in countering terror.

W + Foreign Policy = t3h sUX

Maybe i'm late on this, but the reason why it appeared this happened was the State Department's on-going redefinitions of what a terrorist attack is. The policy is difficult to define due to its subjective characteristics.

EDIT: I work in the DoS and i recieve these bulletins daily. Once of which stated how the definitions of terror and its nature are increasing, incorporating more aspects, therefore adding to more 'official' terrorist attacks.

[Sijray21]

Just saw F911 last night. I highly recommend it. It is indeed a personal attack on bush and the administration, but Moore backs up all his claims. My advice is to go see it. the end.

I enjoyed it, but i still remain skeptical. Just as Moore says, can't trust the bias of the media...to which he belongs. I know of one fact released by the FBI regarding the release of Bin Laden's family members under executive order was the missing fact in the movie of the FBI thoroughly interviewing and investigating key members before they left the country. Also how the sympathy for certain soldiers and their families were displayed in the movie, other aspects like those i've seen in the news of soldiers that were HAPPY to server their country in IRAQ were not shown. Moore produced a well planned movie expressing his opinion very well.

[JackoliciousLegs]

I enjoyed it, but i still remain skeptical. Just as Moore says, can't trust the bias of the media...to which he belongs. ... Moore produced a well planned movie expressing his opinion very well.

that's all there is to it. of course there's bias.

[.RJ]

that's all there is too it. of course there's bias.

I would rather see a movie of this nature that presents both sides of the issue with verifiable facts, rather than slanted/edited bias.

If I want to see fiction, there's plenty of crap already out there.

[Sijray21]

I enjoyed it, but i still remain skeptical. Just as Moore says, can't trust the bias of the media...to which he belongs. ... Moore produced a well planned movie expressing his opinion very well.

that's all there is too it. of course there's bias.

the main issue with this movie is the timing of its release. I guarantee that this movie will effect the polls in November; hurting the re-election possibility for Bush and helping whoever will run for the Democratic Party, i believe it's Kerry, not sure. And whether voting for Bush is a better or worse decision, this has the type of view of voting for the 'other guy', whether he's better or not than Bush, which could turn out to be very bad. It may only be entertainment, but i believe this will have serious implications on the upcoming elections.

This movie hasn't swayed my voting stance, since i haven't researched much yet i don't know who to vote for, but this documentary might have people's decisions already made. With that in mind it is a type of ignorance that is being promoted since they are not aware of both sides. I'm only speaking with respect to what i saw in the movie.

[JackoliciousLegs]

but i believe this will have serious implications on the upcoming elections.

That's what the point of this movie is. It's to encourage voters not to reelect bush. Whether you agree or not, that's the point. It's an attack on the bush administration start to finish and that's all.

PS... I can't believe the movie started calling the election a fraud. i thought that was a funny start. I agree, but hey. Damn florida, damn political ties, and damn the electoral college.
edit: don't damn florida... just the leadership.

[Feersty]

Bush will get reelected.

Terrorists want Kerry to be elected so our troops will pull out of the Middle East and continue killing. So I guess he has international support.

WE WERE ATTACKED ON 11 SEPTEMBER 2001. Have we been attacked since?

I didn't think so.

[Maengelito]

PS... I can't believe the movie started calling the election a fraud. i thought that was a funny start. I agree, but hey. Damn florida, damn political ties, and damn the electoral college.
edit: don't damn florida... just the leadership.

didnt they do several recounts even after the fact and each one of them had bush winning by thousands of votes each time? it was awhile ago though, so its not like it matters now.

[Mike]

WE WERE ATTACKED ON 11 SEPTEMBER 2001. Have we been attacked since?

I didn't think so.

I guess you don't count the hundreds of military men and women who have lost their lives so that we can live the way we like to? :?

I truly wish Americans realized that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction...

[Maengelito]

I truly wish Americans realized that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction...

only since my boy Gdubs has had the balls to react unlike big willie.

[Mike]

"Gudubs" makes me hungry for chicken wings. Please do not say it again.

[Maengelito]

"Gudubs" makes me hungry for chicken wings. Please do not say it again.

haha, i never said "Gudubs"... besides, once you have Wild Wings, you'll never go back to the BW3 crap again.

[.RJ]

I guess you don't count the hundreds of military men and women who have lost their lives so that we can live the way we like to? :?

Compared to the thousands that died during WWII?

[Evan]

How about the thousands of Kurds Saddam butchered?
How about the missle systems Saddam was in the middle of purchasing when we invaded his ass?
How about the many known terrorists Iraq was harboring?

I guess Iraq really was just a land of peaches and kittens. Damn those republicans and their propaganda! Im going to go watch Al-Jazeera

[Maengelito]

Im going to go watch Al-Jazeera

speaking of which, have you ever watched it? its weird... i'm not used to things scrolling the opposite direction

[G.Irish]

How about the thousands of Kurds Saddam butchered?
How about the missle systems Saddam was in the middle of purchasing when we invaded his ass?
How about the many known terrorists Iraq was harboring?

I guess Iraq really was just a land of peaches and kittens. Damn those republicans and their propaganda! Im going to go watch Al-Jazeera

Quite frankly dead Kurds have little to do with this war. If ethnic cleansing were such a high cause for the United States we would've intervened several times in the last 2 decades on the African continent.

But yeah lets put American personnel deaths in perspective. We've been in Iraq for over a year and we've had about 600 American deaths. As I said earlier we've had over 600 deaths in 2 American cities from homicides. It may not be a picnic out there but as military endeavors go we've suffered minimal losses. If people are so concerned about these casualties maybe they should take up the cause of battling inner city crime.

Now I'm not supporting Bush's reasons for going to war or his handling of foreign policy issues but realistically things on the ground cannot be that bad if we have over 100,000 troops in theater and we've had only 600 deaths. By comparison we had almost 50,000 deaths in Vietnam.

[Evan]

Gerald I was responding more to Mike's post than an overall justification for the war.

My personal views on the war are a mixed bag. Ive never been a big supporter of it, even though there are many "smaller" reasons (like what I listed) that make an excellent point to take Saddam out of power. However someone I was talking to about it the other day made the point, that we as a country were not directly threatened by Iraq, and therefore war was unjustified. This point was simple but definately struck a chord. However under more thought I believe the point to be a bit shallow and oversimplified.
The US certailny wasnt under direct danger when Japan blew the fuck out of hawaii, and Europe was not under direct threat from Hitler until it was too late. (and ironically then, Germany was under weapons sanctions after WWI, which hitler repeatedly broke and dodged, but the europeans refused to enforce them, fearing more war- how ironic. This gives curious insight into the european thought of placing actual importance on due-diligence and process over actual enforcement - but thats another subject entirely, and damn this was a long parentheses!)

[G.Irish]

Longest parenthesis on the forum award!

The parallel between Pearl Harbor and Sept 11 is a good one because essentially we responded in the same fashion (going to war with Japan, going to war with the Taliban).

I too believe that most of the cases for going to war and not going to war are pretty shallow. When I think about the war in terms of the long term implications I have to wonder what would have happened had we not gone to war. Maybe the Iraqi people would have overthrown Saddam anyway (although they tried that once and were violently put down).

However, had Saddam stayed in power I can't help but to think that he or one of his successors (most likely one of his famously brutal sons) would have become a problem sooner or later. And chances are the Iraqi regime would have resorted to some form of asymetrical warfare. After all it was made painfully clear to them that there is no way they could ever win in a traditional tactical conflict with the United States. They had the 4th largest Army in the world and they got decimated by the US and coalition forces. So the only way they could ever hope to hurt us would be through terrorism or strategic weapons. My guess is they probably would have tried to use terrorism and possibly a combination of strategic weapons.

"We would have had to do something about him anyway" is not really a rationale for going to war but that's just the way I think things would have panned out. In the end I think its critical that this new Iraqi government succeeds. If it does it will improve our relations with the Middle East and hopefully curtail the birth of more anti-West hatred.