Saddam Hussein

[i k a r i]

And what about the new toy some US toy factory is making, is selling way too good.
Is a 30 cm recreation of Saddam Husseins's death, you've to be fucked up to buy that.

[MrColossal]

I am not entering this thread but I just want to say, Ikari, it would help SO much if you started providing sources for what you post...

What Saddam toy that is selling way too good?

[i k a r i]

OK sorry, here you go:

The headline says "the toy that is already a sales success"
http://www.clarin.com/diario/2007/01/04/elmundo/i-02602.htm

http://www.herobuilders.com/

[DGMacphee]

Whoa, Saddam action figure is pretty buff! You sure someone didn't just get a Six Million Dollar Man action figure and draw a beard on him?

[Nacho]

Ok... I had enough.

Making fun of an important fact, no matter how serious it is, is the most normal thing on Earth. If you say that the Us citizens are "fucked up" for that,then, YOU are seriosly fucked up.

Excuse me, but you are the typical sponge that swallows every information smelling "anti-yankee" for using it as a weapon in your next manifestos, but your sectarian and biased mind simply ignore simillar (but non-related to the USA) examples.

Start to be coherent. Everybody makes poo. Every shit smell bad. Do you want to discuss if the American shit smells worse? Ok, I' ll gladly discuss that... I' ll probably agree.

Do you want to make me believe that only the American shit smells bad? Sorry... I won't discuss that.

Example about naughty jokes: We had a terrorist strike here 15 years ago. One of the victims was a girl who lost their legs. She became an important activist against of the victims of terrorism here, and she is generally admired. But we have a joke... "Which are the resemblances between E.T. and Irene Villa (this girl)? Both fit in the bike basket" Ok, the joke is terrible, and its totally politically uncorrect if said in "official" forums, but its a joke that is in the street and generally provoques fun. People like black humour and  "secretelly" enjoys that.

"What does Tower A of the WTC says to Tower B? I wait for you downstreet!" Again, a terrible joke, but the joke it's  there, in the streets, and made people laugh... and if you believe that any country where this jokes has been told is "fucked up", then, you have a real problem with your sociologist axiomas.

Allow me to make clear that those jokes are spanish, and, well, while you can consider us a "fucked up" country as well, we are not (nowadays, at least) this capitalist-colonialist-belicistic entity you say the US is... ergo, "black jokes" are not linked with "being an evil-capitalistic entity", ergo, you are wrong, ergo, shut up.

Also... There are no "fucked up" jokes in your country? Reply yes and your previous statement (USA has black jokes=USA is fucked up) would reveal as hypocrital, so, shut up.

Reply "no", and you' ll reveal to be a liar, so, shut up.

I don' t see any problem with someone painting a beard to a GIJOE, attack a rope, and make money bout it... Specially I don' t see it as something so BIG for declaring a country as "Fucked up"

I don' t know if you realise that you are revealing to be as short-sighted and radical as the most short-sighted and radical north american jerk.... just that your color is the opposite.

People here has been constantly saying you "Yes... there are jerks in the USA. Yes... our president is one of those... but we are not a country of jerks" and you go on, and on, with posts which spirit basically is "You are all jerks". You should apology, my friend.

Which country has managed better than the US when they were in the simillar mighty world ruling position? Caesar's Rome? Alexander' s Mecedonia? Lionheart's  England? Napoleon' s France?

Bocanegra's Spain?

I can' t really put any examples about Argentina, because you never rules the world, but well... If you go on constantly tying the personality of the citizens with the personality of the rulers, you are not in a good position either. Anyone which access to wikipedia will see that your presidents are not samplers of intelligence and good management. Equivalently yours are even more militaristic.

For the God's shake... your national heroes are a terrorist, a drug addict and a prostitute.

Well... you know the joke, no? The best deal in the world is buying an Argentinian for the price he costs, and selling it for the price HE SAYS he costs.

[ildu]

I saw that doll before, but looking at that site, especially their collection, is really sickening me. They've got gay-bashing, liberal-bashing, bush-loving and most disturbingly representations of death. But surprise surprise, no joke dolls about Bush. They have a 'Crackhead Saddam', which makes absolutely no sense, so where's the 'Bush on Cocaine' doll?

Here are some highlights:


Ahmadinejad


Bush in Iraq? When did this happen?


A democrat with the Confederate flag? Really?


What can I say?


Hmpf.


Dead Uday.


Yeah, hate him just because Bill O'Reilly says so.

[ManicMatt]

Wow, I can Nacho is pissed off, his english took a sharp decline!

And God likes a strawberry milkshake.

But for ther record I agree with Nacho and Darth, and disagree with Ikari, and definetly Shitar.

Look at that site selling the "GiJoe witha beard drawn on"! It's so obviously small time! I think it's just weird to sell that! Does it come with a neck snapping sound effect too when you tighten the noose?

Maybe it is selling well if you say so, but how well? and does that make the whole country sick? James Blunt sells shedloads of his album, does that mean I must like his album too? That the UK likes his album? Does this question sound stupid to you? EH?

[Nacho]

Idlu, Maniac:

Indeed it' s weird, and sickening, probably... But an idiot making that toys, and millions of idiots buying a toy (which in a big country as the USA might still be less than 1% of the total population) does not make a country "to be fucked up".

It would if it was an unique caracteristic of the US citizens, it the US was the only country in the world with such items and such humour... But I' ve seen something simillar in Spain and some other countries of Europe.

I just don' t write that down in my notebook as a "point to say when an anti-(put the name of a country here)" debate starts. Ikari does... He, who has been the spokesman of the "Americans think EVERYBODY in the rest of the world is inferior" is the one who is now treating all the americans as if they were so dumb is its stupid president. I refuse.

[DGMacphee]

Wow, I can Nacho is pissed off, his english took a sharp decline!

[Darth Mandarb]

edit DG - that's hilarious!!  Of course you know ... ALL spaniards have violent tempers so you better keep your doors locked for the next couple of weeks!!


Yakmed Ahmadinejad??

I think you're mistaken.  That's Steve Carel with a beard!!  Seriously ... use your thumb and cover up from the nose down.  That looks just like him!!  I wonder if he's a virgin?

I cannot believe that this thread has now gone to using a toy as proof of evil Americans!!  I seriously laughed out loud when I read that!

This is a little known fact; but the U.S. toymaking consortium patented violent/grusome toys so no other nation in the world can make them.  In Japan for example, the most deadly weapon their action figures can wield is a spatula and any and all blood must be hot-pink.

Come on guys ... a toy?!?!!

[ildu]

I didn't say anything. I just said the site was sickening - no generalization there. So really, it's just one 'guy' .

[Nacho]

Error!!! My English are allways bad, no matter if I are angered or no. The problem is that when me are angered not, people does not pey atenttion to what I write.

EDIT: Idlu, I don't think you generalised... I was focused in Ikari' s posts.

Actually, I think that those dolls are being sold pretty well, so, even throwing stones to my own speech... I must recognise that, no... That dolls are not just the idea of a sick guy.

That shows that in the USA there are a lot of idiots.

But even if there is a million of sold dolls... There would be only 0.3% of idiots in the US... So, saying "In America, there is a toy for idiots who is being sold pretty well, ergo, all the Americans are fucked up" is silly. You never said that... but someone said.

[i k a r i]

WTF? xD
Nacho calm down, I've just said you've to be fucked up to buy that, I didnt say US is fucked up, lol.
The toy may be selling good, but you dont need 1% of the population for that, as you said. I was just sharing funny info 

People here has been constantly saying you "Yes... there are jerks in the USA. Yes... our president is one of those... but we are not a country of jerks" and you go on, and on, with posts which spirit basically is "You are all jerks". You should apology, my friend.

I never said this, but the contrary since my first post, I said I have nothing against USA people, only his president, and those who follow him (wich I think there are many).
Let's cut this crap, bottom line: I've entered this discussion to say "I hate Bush", then I ended up saying "I think many americans follow him", and that would be it. I think is normal that many Americans are fucked up, so are many Argentinians (many xd), you took it personally because you think Im an anti-yankee, well, Im not at all.

For the God's shake... your national heroes are a terrorist, a drug addict and a prostitute.

I dont know who are you talking about, my national heroes are nobel prices and/or inventors noone talks about 
And who are you talking about when you say terrorist?

Well... you know the joke, no? The best deal in the world is buying an Argentinian for the price he costs, and selling it for the price HE SAYS he costs.

That was our national industry, then we ended up buying US people. You guys are the most egocentric kind there is xD, and you know it. Im generalizing again.

EDIT: Well, I didnt noticed the bad english cause me speaks español, but Nacho you must be a really fun person to annoy. 

[Nacho]

I don' t go picking word by word to reply to posts.... I just take the spirit of the posts, and reply to them consequently.

And the spirit of your post is definitelly anti-american in the most negative way. I was quite sure that you were going to reply in a politically correct way saying "I looooove America, and all the americans, but I hate Bush" but, well... You' ll have to work harder to convince me that you areÃ,  this "relaxed" IKARI version 2.0 and not the one I "noticed" firstly. I am open to it, though.

Don't worry, anyway, hating the powerfull country has historically been the rest of the world' s sport. You are just one more.

I dont know who are you talking about, my national heroes are nobel prices and/or inventors noone talks aboutÃ, 
And who are you talking about when you say terrorist?

I was talking to Ché Guevara, Maradona and Eva Perón. And I was not talking about "your" national heroes, but simply of "National heroes". Deny that the national heroes of Argentina are those 3 idiots, one more lie won't matter.

That was our national industry, then we ended up buying US people. You guys are the most egocentric kind there is xD, and you know it. Im generalizing again.

Who do you talk when you say "You guys"? of Spain? Curious, I have heard many adjectives refering to us, must of them approppiate, but "egocentric" is new. Explain your reply and tell when we have been historically egocentric. I preciselly think that one of the big problems of my nation have been the complexes. You use egocentrism as an isult, but IMO it' s not something to be totally cursed. The lack of it can be so hamful as the excess. Argentina is a clear example of country that wants to pee higher than it can, actually...

And, to end... I am glad to amuse people with my EnglishÃ,  I don' t do it on purpose, and I hope everything can be understandable (sometimes I go back and read older posts by me, and I can't understand what they said...Ã,  ) but you can understand them, mistakes and typos don't really concern me.

But sorry... I can't shut up and swallow if I see something I don' t like. I preffer to sound ridiculous and say my opinion than look smart and don' t tell it. Hope everybody understands me.

I' ll try to improve, though.Ã, 

[i k a r i]

And the spirit of your post is definitelly anti-american in the most negative way. I was quite sure that you were going to reply in a politically correct way saying "I looooove America, and all the americans, but I hate Bush" but, well... You' ll have to work harder to convince me that you are  this "relaxed" IKARI version 2.0 and not the one I "noticed" firstly. I am open to it, though.

I didnt say that I love America, you're a hot headed extremist. The only country I love is the one I live, Im just saying America has excpecional things noone can deny, and "hating the powerful country" only happens when they abuse this power, just like Bush is doing, I think that is normal.

I was talking to Ché Guevara, Maradona and Eva Perón. And I was not talking about "your" national heroes, but simply of "National heroes". Deny that the national heroes of Argentina are those 3 idiots, one more lie won't matter.

Well that's the kind of ignorance I showed earlier, if you think that by saying "one more lie won't matter" I'll shut up and say you're right, you're WRONG. There are people here wich heroes are those shitheads xD, but there are A LOT less than you think, in fact I know there are more who hate them.

Who do you talk when you say "You guys"? of Spain? Curious, I have heard many adjectives refering to us, must of them approppiate, but "egocentric" is new. Explain your reply and tell when we have been historically egocentric. I preciselly think that one of the big problems of my nation have been the complexes. You use egocentrism as an isult, but IMO it' s not something to be totally cursed. The lack of it can be so hamful as the excess. Argentina is a clear example of country that wants to pee higher than it can, actually...

Whatever, I think you just want to pick a fight, I wont pick it. Cry and shout all you want xD, you think you'll get to me by talking shit about Argentina because that's what you feel I did (Probably I did, but I didnt mean to), and you're again talking from the ignorance, maybe you're trying to teach me a lesson by doing to me just what I did, cause is obvious you dont know nothing about Argentina. 

[DGMacphee]

I think you're mistaken.  That's Steve Carel with a beard!!  Seriously ... use your thumb and cover up from the nose down.  That looks just like him!!  I wonder if he's a virgin?

Yeah, now you mention it I look at the doll and see Carrell from Little Miss Sunshine where he had the beard. Very uncanny!

[EagerMind]

America has excpecional things noone can deny, and "hating the powerful country" only happens when they abuse this power, just like Bush is doing, I think that is normal.

If you're going to call America the "evil imperialists" (and I'm not saying you are here Ikari, I'm talking in general), then I would hope you're doing so based off of facts and not just regurgitating all the anti-American propaganda floating around out there. Of course, if you start bringing facts into it, this cozy little picture of the "terrible angry aggressor" will start to fall apart. Our foreign policy objectives are no different from that of any other country on the planet: to protect our national interests, our national security, and our economic prosperity. The one thing that does separate us (at least for now) is that the resources we have available to pursue these objectives are much greater than anybody elses.

It may seem cute to compare us unfavorably to the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, ancient Rome, and other "super powers," but anyone taking a few minutes to scratch beneath the surface of this fantasy will realize it's total bull. I don't deny that our country has tended to meddle in other countries affairs and has acted heavy-handed at times, but that's a far cry from the "imperialism" that people are accusing us of. Anyone taking the time to learn about 20th century history will discover that there are very good reasons for our country acting the way it has. I'm not saying that necessarily justifies our behavior (that's a personal decision), but at least it will give you an understanding of it and allow for more constructive conversations on the topic. I don't expect most people will take this time, which is fine, and you're certainly free to continue disagreeing with how our country acts. But at least be open to facts and re-evaluating your position instead of thumping on your chest and passing moral judgments on us.

Bush may be a terrible president who has abused his powers in office, but don't extrapolate this one case to all of American history or to all its people. Our system is no more "broken" than any other country's, and the system that allowed him to be elected into office is now the same system that's curtailing his powers, holding him in check, and will soon remove him from office. We're certainly not the first country to have brought an unpopular leader to power, and I doubt we'll be the last, so I'm not sure how that makes us worse than anyone else.

Frankly, most Americans could care less what goes on outside our borders, and with the exception of our soldiers that are dying there, this even goes for Iraq. Most people just care about making a decent living, paying less taxes, and doing so in relative safety. I suspect this pretty much holds whether we're talking about Argentina, Europe, North Korea, or anywhere else in the world. When it comes to choosing a leader, the candidate that can put up the most compelling argument in these three areas will generally win, whether it's Bush or someone else. Again, I don't really see how this makes us any better or worse than anyone else.

Cry and shout all you want xD, you think you'll get to me by talking shit about Argentina because that's what you feel I did (Probably I did, but I didnt mean to), and you're again talking from the ignorance, maybe you're trying to teach me a lesson by doing to me just what I did, cause is obvious you dont know nothing about Argentina. 

Wow. The juxtaposition of this statement with the one being made my Darth is just too good to pass up. Another point for Darth.

Ikari, whether Nacho is intentionally trying to teach you a lesson here or not, there's certainly a lesson to be learned. You could benefit greatly by learning it.

I hope everything can be understandable (sometimes I go back and read older posts by me, and I can't understand what they said...  ) but you can understand them, mistakes and typos don't really concern me.

It's OK Nacho. I usually understand what you mean, not what you say.


EDIT: I know I've rambled on long enough, but I feel this is an important point to address:

EagerMind, at first in USA, re-election did not exist, a president altered it to be re-elected, what makes you think Bush cant altere that again,

This is exactly what I'm talking about. There's not one iota of truth in this statement, and yet you throw it out there like this is some sort of fact, and then use it as evidence that we're all war-mongering supporters of Bush.

Our Constitution originally had no term limits, so a person could be elected an unlimited number of times. This was changed in 1951 with the passage of the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidents to two terms. This means that the most any one person can be elected as the president is twice. If you're curious, this amendment was passed as a result of Franklin Roosevelt (the president that brought us out of the Great Depression, led us through World War II, and helped established the UN) winning 4 consecutive terms in office, the only man ever to serve as president more than twice. So if Bush wanted to run again, he'd have to amend the Constitution to remove the 22nd Amendment.

Why do I think Bush can't do this? Because he can't. Our president doesn't have the power to amend the Consitution. Proposals to amend the Constitution require a 2/3 majority vote from either the Congress or the states. For a proposal to become an actual amendment, it requires the approval of 3/4 (75%) of the states. I'm not going to say it's impossible for one man to gain this much power and influence to lawfully change our government to his own needs, but it's very very very difficult, and Bush certainly doesn't (and never did) have that much power.

This is why we don't need to take to the streets to throw out leaders we don't like. Our government is structured so it happens automatically with safeguards in place to prevent one man from taking it over. We may not have the satisfaction of instant gratification, but it also means I won't wake up one morning to find that someone has taken over the country because he didn't like the previous ruler, which is a trade-off I'm willing to make. Rule by mob (peaceful or not) only establishes that laws and government can be discarded when they're inconvenient. If you want to see how well that works, look at Thailand, where the popularly-elected prime minister was deposed by military coup in the middle of the night because a powerful minority didn't like him. If that's your idea of freedom and democracy, I'll take a pass.

[i k a r i]

Wow. The juxtaposition of this statement with the one being made my Darth is just too good to pass up. Another point for Darth.

Ikari, whether Nacho is intentionally trying to teach you a lesson here or not, there's certainly a lesson to be learned. You could benefit greatly by learning

The thing is, I dont compete in discussions unless I want to annoy the other, in order to have a productive discussion you have to accept you said stupid things, Im still holding some points though, and if you have to scream like a cheerleader "another point for Darth" so be it. (irony)

I can understand what you're saying, if you dont care too much about those iraqi people, then it's ok, me neither.
Is another different thing to support Bush war actions which I think is what's happening with many US people. Bush has won many enemies, let's hope for our safety that in these 2 years left he keeps his mouth shut and that he doesnt mess with North Korea or Iran, it could mean WW3  , no really.

[DGMacphee]

Bush may be a terrible president who has abused his powers in office, but don't extrapolate this one case throughout all of American history or to all its people.

Yeah, just extrapolate that to the 22 per cent of the total population who voted for him and the 58 per cent of the total population who sat around apathetically not voting. Altogether that's 80 per cent. It's a good thing we still have that other 20 per cent who didn't vote for him. Yeah, they can deny responsibility over this.

I guess you can criticize us (or at least those that voted for him) for electing him as the president, but the last time I checked, sovereign nations don't require the approval of the rest of world about which leader they choose. We're certainly not the first country to have brought an unpopular leader to power, and I doubt we'll be the last, so I'm not sure how that makes us worse than anyone else.

How hypocritical! You say no other country should judge you for electing an unpopular leader when your country's government goes ahead and removes an unpopular leader (Saddam) from a country you have no sovereignty over. (Until you invaded it of course) And the majority of US citizens approved of the war at the time!

I mean, Christ, let's not white wash the hypocrisy here. It's imperialism any way you look at it.

Likewise, you say other countries shouldn't chest-thump when that's exactly what most Americans did in the lead-up and during the Iraq War. All that flag waving and "NEVA 4GET" and blah blah blah in the name of not letting the terrorists win?

Quite frankly, there's so much hypocrisy in what you say that it disappoints me you're trying to validate everything that has happened over the last few years.

Frankly, most Americans could care less what goes on outside our borders, and with the exception of our soldiers that are dying there, this even goes for Iraq. Most people just care about making a decent living, paying less taxes, and doing so in relative safety.

Okay consider the fact that Bush has done all these things: big tax cuts, low unemployment rate (4.4 per cent), high security, and a poverty rate that although has increased during his term is still lower than times when Bush Snr and Reagan were in power.

How do you explain the majority of people against Bush's policies? That's 50-60 per cent of people during the last month!

Not to mention the domestic issues like the Patriot Act, the NSA wiretap program, the Valerie Plame affair, the death of habeas corpus, the blacklisting of people like Cindy Sheehan and Jeremy Glick, the deficit, dependence of foreign oil... I mean, c'mon, people care about those things and they're all related to Iraq/War on Terror.

[EagerMind]

How hypocritical! You say no other country should judge you for electing an unpopular leader when your country's government goes ahead and removes an unpopular leader (Saddam) from a country you have no sovereignty over. (Until you invaded it of course) And the majority of US citizens approved of the war at the time!

You totally missed the point of what I was saying while also trying to twist my words into something they're not. However I acknowledge I muddled the point and I've edited that particular paragraph to remove the offending sentence.

Go ahead and criticise us, but do it based on facts, not on propaganda and hyperbole. Please, be unhappy that Bush is in power and criticize the things that our country has done as a result - lord knows a lot of Americans are, and one could only hope that all the bad press is exerting some kind of influence on his decision-making. But the fact that a bad leader can rise to power certainly isn't unique to our country. Unfortunately we're just as capable of choosing bad leadership as any other country, so I don't see how this makes us any worse when compared to the rest of the world.

There are reasons why Bush was elected to power, but those are quite aside from the fact that he's subsequently abused that power to further his own agenda. Darth already explained why people ended up supporting the invasion of Iraq, and if you're going to conclude from that that we're war-mongering imperialists, then I'm going to have to disagree with you.

Likewise, you say other countries shouldn't chest-thump when that's exactly what most Americans did in the lead-up and during the Iraq War. All that flag waving and "NEVA 4GET" and blah blah blah in the name of not letting the terrorists win?

I wouldn't begrudge any country a moment of national solidarity after an incident of unfathomable tragedy. But I do agree that things got out-of-hand, especially with France and the whole "freedom fries" thing. When did I say this was ok? No nation, including the US, should march around like they're better than everyone else, and we're certainly not the only ones guilty of this. This is what I've been saying from the beginning: we're no better or worse than anyone else.

Quite frankly, there's so much hypocrisy in what you say that it disappoints me you're trying to validate everything that has happened over the last few years.

I'm not trying to validate anything here. Where have I said that the things we've done are OK? Where have I shirked responsibility for what our country has done? I'm trying to point out that there are real reasons underlying the things that have happened, reasons which won't be found by blindly buying into all the spin. You can choose to try to understand them or not. But if you don't think similar circumstances may someday arise somewhere else in the world and that there are lessons worth learning from our particular experience, then I'm gonna have to say you're a little naive.

Okay consider the fact that Bush has done all these things: big tax cuts, low unemployment rate (4.4 per cent), high security, and a poverty rate that although has increased during his term is still lower than times when Bush Snr and Reagan were in power. How do you explain the majority of people against Bush's policies?

Big tax cuts: Yes, but when you start considering the national debt and burgeoning expenses from social security and Medicare, none of which he has fixed, then we're looking at a much higher tax burden in the near future.

Low unemployment rate: True, although many perceive that jobs are being lost to outsourcing. It's also true that while corporations are raking in record profits and the richest 1% or so of the nation are getting richer from said outsourcing, middle-class wages have remained stagnant. People may be working, but they're not happy.

High security: Possibly, although it appears that our personal liberties are being jeopardized in the process. And a study showing that the Iraq war has actually made us less safe suggests that Bush's "war on terror" isn't working after all. (If that link doesn't work, try this one.)

Poverty rate: As you mentioned, going up. Nobody cares what it was 5, 10, or 100 years ago. During Bush's term it's gone up.

I mean, c'mon, people care about those things and they're all related to Iraq/War on Terror.

Yes, people care about the war because it impacts their life. They care because of the reasons I've mentioned and also because people they know are dying or coming home maimed. Not for some vague notion of empire or "spreading democracy" to foreign lands.