Author Topic: Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick  (Read 24831 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Sigur Rós

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
  • The H.W. of Xixax...
  • Respect: +7
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #60 on: March 04, 2003, 04:00:44 AM »
0
By the way I think Saddam is 73 years.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 12170
  • Lynchian identity mystery
  • Respect: +769
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #61 on: March 04, 2003, 06:43:30 AM »
0
endless 'nothing is what it seems'-isms

budgie

  • The Magic Flight
  • ****
  • Posts: 614
  • Respect: 0
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #62 on: March 04, 2003, 10:01:26 AM »
0
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman

You return once again only to make me question myself... I think it's a sign... more of that, please...



Much as I like to 'make' you question yourself, that isn't only why I return.

However, the question is whether you ever answer when I make you question?

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #63 on: March 04, 2003, 10:22:30 AM »
0
Quote from: budgie
the question is whether you ever answer when I make you question


I don't know how to answer that.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
They gave a report saying they had no weapons and now are in the process of "destroying" some.


I don't think any country that admits it has a military will say it has no weapons... The issue is weapons of mass destruction, and the missiles they're destroying right now are not nuclear, they just exceed the UN's range (Iraq argued that the missiles will not go as far with a second guiding system attached). Of course Iraq has weapons of mass destruction... we sold them to Iraq in the 80s, that's how we know. And of course they're not in Baghdad.. they're underground, in the middle of the desert. Iraq is using them as collateral, and I don't think Saddam would ever use them unless he wants his nation and his leadership to be destroyed, or if he knows that's inevitable.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
The second argument is just trying to find justification for the dictatorship of Iraq. A dictatorship is wrong either way.


Yes, I'm trying to justify a dictatorship.  :roll:  ... Of course it's a bad thing, but the end does not always justify the means. There are many similar bad situations in the world... does that mean we can solve the world's problems simply by dropping bombs?

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
"No justice, no peace."


It feels good to oversimplify things, doesn't it?
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Duck Sauce

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1986
  • Respect: +4
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #64 on: March 04, 2003, 10:55:47 AM »
0
Quote from: Sigur Rós
You guys are seriously being manipulated by your goverment, and your CNN, BBC....etc. This is just like the Iraqien people you don't get the truth....so don't think you do! Very few realises how the americans makes up storys about Iraq. Like back in 1991 when they entered Kuwait because they claimed that Iraq had attacked Kuwait.


What a breakthrough, do you know anything about the United States other than what you have seen in PTA movies?

Quote from: Sigur Rós

This was later proved to be untrue! America claimed that Iraq has attacked with no less then 200.000 men but sattelite-photos showed only a few thousand......hmm credibility....I dont believe any "facts" from America!

Prove it

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #65 on: March 04, 2003, 10:57:49 AM »
0
Quote from: Duck Sauce
do you know anything about the United States other than what you have seen in PTA movies?


Do you know anything about the United States other than what you have seen on CNN?
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Duck Sauce

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1986
  • Respect: +4
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2003, 11:00:32 AM »
0
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: Duck Sauce
do you know anything about the United States other than what you have seen in PTA movies?


Do you know anything about the United States other than what you have seen on CNN?


I don’t watch CNN. You are quick to take offense from anybody who doesn’t believe everything is one big conspiracy.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #67 on: March 04, 2003, 11:14:26 AM »
0
Not just simply dropping bombs, but removing a government. Sorry to say that has to come in order to remove this government, but it does. Its funny though how you took that and basically put it in a context that all is being done is dropping bombs when the situation involves dealing with an oppressive government who has a leader who violated the mandate that kept him in power after the Gulf War. Instead of dealing with the unquestionable things of what he can do in the future, why not get rid of him now? You put the removal of Hussein as just dropping bombs on a country to solve problems, now how does it feel yourself to simplify things yourself? My whole purpose in this argument is the arguing that the government of Iraq needs to be removed. You really are not arguing that the Iraqi government shouldn't be removed. If there is a way to remove it without mass civilian casualities, then tell me. If not, your dancing around this subject will prove entertaining only for some time.

~rougerum

phil marlowe

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Respect: +1
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #68 on: March 04, 2003, 12:13:50 PM »
0
You oughta stop this discussion right now. You make poor GT make such nastyass long posts that he doesn't have the time post in other threads.

Duck Sauce

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1986
  • Respect: +4
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #69 on: March 04, 2003, 01:25:24 PM »
0
Quote from: Phil Marlowe
You oughta stop this discussion right now. You make poor GT make such nastyass long posts that he doesn't have the time post in other threads.


I know, we all know we arent going to get anywhere on this topic.

phil marlowe

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Respect: +1
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #70 on: March 04, 2003, 01:36:09 PM »
0
Typing training.

Sigur Rós

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
  • The H.W. of Xixax...
  • Respect: +7
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #71 on: March 04, 2003, 02:15:54 PM »
0
All you need to know about USA are in Boogie Nights :-D No, let's stop this discussion. Just didn't think all you film-guys had enough space in your hearts for bombs.



Turned on yet???[/img]

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #72 on: March 04, 2003, 02:41:48 PM »
0
Quote from: Duck Sauce
I don’t watch CNN. You are quick to take offense from anybody who doesn’t believe everything is one big conspiracy.


I was using CNN as a synecdoche for the mainstream media as a whole, and I think you are too quick to believe your government's own propaganda.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Not just simply dropping bombs, but removing a government.


You can remove a government and break down its power by means other than physically blowing it up.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Its funny though how you took that and basically put it in a context that all is being done is dropping bombs


Well, it seems to be preferential to just about everything else, doesn't it? What do you think Bush would prefer... a drawn out, BORING diplomatic and inspections process, or a simple flattening of the landscape?

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Instead of dealing with the unquestionable things of what he can do in the future, why not get rid of him now?


You could use the "why not?" argument for a lot of things (why not annex Canada, why not send all the Palestinians to a remote island, why not install puppet governments across the middle east) but I think I already gave you my reasons.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
You put the removal of Hussein as just dropping bombs on a country to solve problems, now how does it feel yourself to simplify things yourself?


I don't think I simplified anything... the situation is complicated and our government's solution (bombs) is unsuitably simple for such a complicated situation. I don't think it would be possible for me to simplify Bush's solution beyond it's present state.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
You really are not arguing that the Iraqi government shouldn't be removed.


That's more of an ideology than a process or an action. The action that you are arguing for is bombing. The action that I'm arguing for is pressure and inspections. There's no way that you can say that inspections aren't working. You could argue that they aren't working fast enough, but that would only reflect your impatience and your gullability to the manufactured atmosphere of desperation.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #73 on: March 04, 2003, 04:21:54 PM »
0
I would be completely for an inspections process, if I believed it could actually work. First off, Iraq saying they have no weapons at all is completely bogus and everyone knows it. Further more, nuclear war heads were discovered by inspectors with Iraq saying a big "oops". Reports are all coming back of Iraq being very uncooperative with the inspectors, who say it themselves, about revealing information. Even the scientists within Iraq are said to not be really disclosing everything they know. Speculation likely suggests the scientists are under the gun on what to say and how to say it. They could be even soldiers posing as them. But c'mon, this has been a ten year long process of multiple times of inspectors coming to inspect for weapons and most times before, they being thrown out and now most signs saying there is very little cooperation and now they are wrapped in a mess of a political debate of whether or not to destroy the missiles that have been discovered. The problem with the weapons inspections is that one must give trust over to Iraq in fully revealing the weapon capabilities they have. Any means of taking the government out to fully investigate without use of military force is nonexistent. Iraq's history suggests no trust can be given at all. And this isn't talking about allowing 6 more months to a process that has only had time of a few months for investigation. The process of trying to inspect Iraq has been a ten year one with little success. Sorry if I feel 10 years is time enough. And even if I were to say more time is needed, nothing suggests Iraq is suddenly going to roll over and be completely cooperative at all.

~rougerum

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
Full Metal Jacket and the limitations of Kubrick
« Reply #74 on: March 04, 2003, 05:38:38 PM »
0
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Further more, nuclear war heads were discovered by inspectors with Iraq saying a big "oops"


Hmm. Tell me more about these nuclear warheads. They found empty cartridges that can be filled with chemicals, but when did they find nukes?

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Even the scientists within Iraq are said to not be really disclosing everything they know


What, did they say, "okay, I'm going to tell you almost everything I know, but I'm going to keep one thing secret" ? ... The UN has been able to pressure scientists into giving untaped, unmonitored, private interviews.


Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Speculation likely suggests the scientists are under the gun on what to say and how to say it.


I would say that's a fact... What do you think would happen if a scientist said "psst.. we have weapons of mass destruction"? We would use that as a reason to go to war. I think the scientist interviews were doomed from the beginning, anyway. The more pressure, the more time, the more we'll find and the weaker they will become. The more we find, the more Saddam will be forced by the world to admit his other possessions. If we start finding bigger stuff, he's not going to say, "okay, fair enough, you found that... but there's nothing else! I swear!" The entire world would be skeptical. More pressure.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
But c'mon, this has been a ten year long process


And we have never been able to anything even close to what we're doing now, and Iraq has never been more cooperative (that's the result of pressure, not Iraq's free will). Pressure works.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
they are wrapped in a mess of a political debate of whether or not to destroy the missiles that have been discovered.


Actually, that's completely incorrect... they have already destroyed many of them, and are destroying more as we speak, with strict UN supervision. They have agreed on a timetable/schedule with the UN.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy