Nick Jones, a Biology Graduate student at East Carolina University, and another fellow (and currently unkown) pastafarian, took part in the first ever FSM Anti-War protest. Hopefully thousands more will follow. Make Noodles - Not War
You can contact Nick here: nickeatspie@earthlink.net
I thought you said you were gonna stay out of it?
hahaha, I am, I just wanted to thank the service people, and I got carried away. Don’t worry, I’m out.
Ramen
One thing that does worry me. How can we withdraw from such an unstable situation?
.
Our respective Politicos decided, rightly or wrongly, to topple the regime. Nothing can change what has been done. Do we dare leave a demoralised, defenceless nation to fend for itself with Iran smelling blood? A state that has publicly declared it’s desire to wipe Israel off the map? Who are blatantly ignoring UN resolutions? Who will soon, if not already, possess nuclear weapons.
More pertinently, what will Israel do if we don’t act? Remember what they did to the test reactor some years ago? Then what? Both the US and UK have very strong ties with Israel.
.
SALMNDR92 - Please don’t think that I hate the military or the US. Most of my family live in America. I don’t support the Government of the UK, nor that of the USA. I do support the people who have been placed in the firing line.
Oarless Marc (btw I thought you’d regained an oar?) put it very well.
I very nearly joined the Royal Air Force. I’d been accepted (I wanted to fly). I didn’t think I could handle the discipline though and thought it might interfere with my drinking schedule. So good luck to you.
Sigh…
war depresses me…
May we all one day follow His 8 “I’d really rather you didn’ts”
@ Johnny Corvette
sorry I upset you. I know the US has tried to help Darfur, but since it is mostly their governmet that is causing the genocide, action is very dificult. A little more attention to it in the UN might help. as to Isreal, you would think that we would at least HEAR about the bad things they do… but there are plenty of nice people in every country. convincing them to take a stand against injustice may be difficult, but an end to war could finally ensue.
Of course American religious extremists don’t exist either, and the President wouldn’t take any notice of them if they did.
“(btw I thought you’d regained an oar?)”
.
Holy shit! Someone stole my oars again! FSMdammit. No, wait, they seem to be back. Phew. I was worried there for a moment. I think my cleaning lady had them in the wash.
The FSM Discussion is a great forum for long, in-depth dicussions of this nature. There are a few forums there, already up and running on this subject.
http://www.venganza.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=52
@SALMNDR92
That study which I cited in my previous post investigated the mortality rate before and after the coalition invasion and showed a substantial increase in the number of deaths. What they showed was 655,000 more deaths in Iraq than could be expected based on pre invasion mortality rates. So, more people are dying in Iraq now than they were under Saddam Hussein. That includes more people dying violent deaths and more people dying of disease. You cannot use Saddam’s tyranny as a justification for the war becuase Iraqis are worse off now than they ever were during his rule.
I understand those who are against war. It is only natural: “war is hellâ€. The question you need to ask yourself is whether there is ever a reason to go to war. Whether there is a point where war is the only option.
A careful look at the facts shows a very strong case for a war to topple Sadam’s regime. Iraq was a much larger threat than poor Afghanistan ever was The Clinton administration knew this and actively pursued covert and military options against Iraq. The UN knew this and repeatedly gave Sadam ultimatum after ultimatum. The US had 100,000 troops amassed indefinitely on Iraq’s borders in an attempt to maintain the mid-east truce and maintain the no-fly zone (to keep Sadam from gassing the Kurds, etc.). His regime was a danger to his own countrymen, the region and the world. I don’t really know a clearer case for war.
Maybe if Sudan started using chemical weapon on Darfur and began to develop nuclear capabilities AND declared open hostilities against the US it would as strong of a case.
After the fiasco (more a PR fiasco then a military one) in Iraq I don’t think the US has the stomach for more intervention. So I guess if it gets bad enough in Darfur or Somalia it will be up to the mighty French military or perhaps the Dutch.
I certainly hold out and hope for UN diplomacy but their track record is not great. So perhaps “Save Darfur†will go the same way “Free Tibet†has gone - namely onto faded bumper sticker for the morally superior. Tibet is all but gone – save Darfur indeed.
@Gnocci
I am not upset but I am depressed like you. I have traveled a great deal and have lived in many parts of the US and Europe and worked in the Middle East. I hate this situation we are in and I hate how it has divided the world.
@Cleopatra
Many innocent people have died in Iraq (although I would not trust any report sanctioned by the Lancet). But it is unprecedented that Iraq has free elections, a functioning government and is hopefully moving towards a peaceful future. The newfound freedom of some 40 million Iraqis has indeed exacted a horrible price. I am not sure anyone besides the Iraq people themselves can say whether this price was worth the freedom.
@Johnny Corvette
“A careful look at the facts shows a very strong case for a war to topple Sadam’s regime.”
-
Rubbish! A careful look at the facts says that the US overstated the threat that Saddam posed to the region and his regime never posed any threat to the rest of the world. He never possesd weapons capable of striking outside the region and had no links with any terrorist organisations. The UN knew this and that is why the US started the war without UN approval. Kofi Annan, the secretary-general of the UN, was an outspoken critic of the US decision to fight the war. He believed that diplomacy was working and producing positive changes in Iraq. The decision to go to war was based on the “mammoth quantities” of weapons of mass destruction hoarded by Saddam that in fact did not exist. Not even 1. Colin Powell, the man who presented the case for war to the UN, acknowledges that the information he offered was misleading and regards the incident as a blot on his career. He said that it was a major failing of the intelligence community because it was known at some levels that the information was unreliable and nobody spoke up. Here is a link to an article about it:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Politics/story?id=1105979&page=1
-
As an aside the population of Iraq is closer to 25 million than 40.
Johnny Corvette
Jan 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Yeah - same for Eddie spaghetti. This is no place for long stupid posts of regurgitated Chomsky drivel. We are easily bored and perhaps a little dim.
So let’s stick to the topic at hand. Worship of the noodly great one and funny comments about Christian nutters. Oh and maybe a smattering of Theist vs. Non- theist philosophy and discussion. But please keep it short and sweet.
And remember kids - it doesn’t matter how many people are killed, maimed or murdered as long as the US isn’t involved in some way.
.
.
.
So we agree on somrthing. Short and sweet is good. What do you call short?
Yes I am long winded at times as well.
I don’t have the answers I am asking at what point is it necessary to use military force? After how many years of failed diplomacy? Should we allow a state like Iraq to have a full nuclear arsenal first? Considering that every world crisis is blamed on the US (and our supposed satellite Israel) and many rouge states are openly hostile to the US (and were so long before this war) I am not surprised the US is a little trigger happy.
From the disreputable and spineless Kofi Annan 2003 -
“ The determination of the Security Council to disarm Iraq of such weapons is the most urgent issue - because Iraq has actually used such weapons in the past, and because it has twice committed aggression against its neighbours. That is why the Security Council, ever since 1991, has passed successive resolutions requiring Iraq to disarm. On this critical question, there are no divisions, no grounds for doubt, dispute or delay. “
From the Heroic yet reluctant Collin Powell – (article you linked)
“I’m always a reluctant warrior. And I don’t resent the term, I admire the term, but when the president decided that it was not tolerable for this regime to remain in violation of all these U.N. resolutions, I’m right there with him with the use of force,”
I am done posting here. Subject doesn’t seem to fit the FSM concept and I am not that in love with the sound of my own voice. I will keep it short and sweet hereafter.
Johnny Corvette;
At what point?
.
When JAPAN bombed Pearl Harbor, we attacked JAPAN.
When GERMANY sunk our ships we attacked GERMANY.
When ARABIANS based in AFGHANISTAN blew up the WTC we attacked IRAQ.
.
Which one doesn’t fit.
C’mon, it’s really pretty easy.
.
Eddie
Time to revive an old tradition I think… the post length warning
IT’S A BIG POST CHAPS, REALLY ONLY AIMED AT JC. SORRY.
.
.
@Johnny Corvette
.
“Should we allow a state like Iraq to have a full nuclear arsenal first?”
.
.
Ahhh… you mean like North Korea?
.
Let’s see…
A country that has stated opposition to America? Check.
That’s only a short step away from open war with another country (S. Korea)? Check.
That has successfully tested nuclear weaponry? Check.
That has a theoretical range on a missile delivery system that reaches American (Alaska, true, but still…) and worse (as far as I am concerned), Australian, soil? Check.
.
The country is lead by a nutter worse than Saddam, yet I don’t hear the States doing anything about it.
.
You could argue that they are afraid to get into war because it’s right next door to the one nation that’s more powerful than America…
… but surely that cannot be much worse than pissing off, and thus radicalising, a large chunk of the muslim faith?
.
.
.
“But it is unprecedented that Iraq has free elections, a functioning government and is hopefully moving towards a peaceful future. The newfound freedom of some 40 million Iraqis has indeed exacted a horrible price.”
.
Newfound freedom? Their government is paralysed, torn between a block of Sunnis, a large block of radicalised Shiia, and a tiny little raft of moderates. If the admittedly imprecise mainstream media is to be believed, that large block of Shiia follows Moktadr Al-Sadr… he is a very fundamental sort of guy. Interestingly enough, he doesn’t like Sunnis, he doesn’t like the west, and I very much doubt he would go in for freedom of speech, opinion, or faith.
.
If Moktadr, or indeed any of the many clerics vying for power in the simmering stew of post invasion Iraq gain a significant lead, Iraq goes the way of taliban Afghanistan.
Then your much vaunted freedom vanishes.
.
Eventually, the Coalition will withdraw. It has to. No elected government can keep power in the face of the appaling bloodshed. When the Americans go, the British, the Japanese, the Australians, what do you think will happen? They can’t stay, but when they go, Iraq will sink further into hell.
.
There is no way to justify what the Coalition has done. This war is naught but a waste of life.
@ Jingles.
I think you are right.
It is very sad.
There is something very wrong with parents bringing up their children with so much hate.
@Johnny Corvette
“I don’t have the answers I am asking at what point is it necessary to use military force? After how many years of failed diplomacy?”
-
War should always be a last resort. It was unnecessary to go to war with Iraq. As I said, “A careful look at the facts shows that the US overstated the threat that Saddam posed to the region and his regime never posed any threat to the rest of the world. He never possessed weapons capable of striking outside the region and had no links with any terrorist organisations.” Diplomacy had not failed in Iraq and diplomatic options had not been exhausted before the coalition invaded.
-
“Should we allow a state like Iraq to have a full nuclear arsenal first?”
-
This is an entirely fallacious question. At best Iraq was decades away from a nuclear arsenal. There are no serious plans on the table to attack Iran or North Korea who are both much closer to possessing functional nuclear weapons, North Korea may even have them now. In their cases diplomacy is being used, as it should be.
-
As to the two quotes; Firstly, Kofi Annan was acknowledging that Iraq posed a threat, he was definitely not suggesting that force should be used in Iraq. If that is spineless then Colin Powell must also be called spineless for he shared those sentiments. Secondly, Colin Powell was merely stating that even though he disagreed with the decision to go to war, once it was made there was no room for dissent. That is a demonstration of his loyalty not his belief in the righteousness of the war.
-
I’ll leave you with a quote from Dominique de Villepin the French Minister of Foreign Affairs made prior to the invasion:
“France has two convictions: The first is that the option of inspections has not been taken to the end and that it can provide an effective response to the imperative of disarming Iraq; the second is that the use of force would be so fraught with risks for people, for the region and for international stability that it should only be envisioned as a last resort.”
-
Prophetic words, if only Bush, Blair et al. had listened.
hmm, the flying spaghetti monster is getting political eh? I’m no too good with that stuff so let me boil it down a bit. I may not have felt the touch of his noodly appendage on my brow, so it is only a humble opinion, but I do believe that the fsm would never wish for the killing of others, especially massive casualties (such a cold word) of innocent people. And this, in my very humble opinion, is one thing that the fsm and the Christian god have in common, however, there will always be those that lose their way and kill in the name of thier god (i don’t think any pastafarians have killed in the name of the fsm)
Coleoptera Jan 6th, 2007 at 9:57 pm:
RAMen Coleoptera. RAMen.
Johnny’s comment:
Should we allow a state like Iraq to have a full nuclear arsenal first?
Is very worrying in the broader context.
Is he proposing that we should pre-emptively invade all states we don’t like the look of that have nuclear ambitions? North Korea and Iran spring readily to mind.
The main problem with heavy-handed American-style diplomacy is that it doesn’t really work.
The world can’t afford go in the N. Korea and Iran all guns blazing.
Shock and Awe has a terribly propensity to end as Crash and Burn.
The current state of Iraq was recognised as inevitable from the start.
It was appalling naive to expect any other outcome.
Of course it will fraction and degenerate in to in-fighting as the various interests vie for supremacy in the power vacuum. Yugoslavia was expected to and did go the same way after Tito.
It seems to me the more oppressive the regime the greater the vacuum they leave behind.
RAmen at bones’ comment! His comment has detailed what all Pastafarian should strive for! Thank you bones! ^_^
Please keep the Flying Spaghetti Monster pure from flames!
In complete agreement with Cap Noodulous, and as such have approached the Ezichat Corporation ( from my domocilary edifice here in the antipodes) to tithe a percentage of their revenue generated in Australia and New Zealand, to promote peace and FSM..the CEO has indicated an agreement will be achieved before 2nd Qtr “07…
The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.
An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is neither too elaborate nor too spoofy to succeed in nailing the fallacies of ID. It's even wackier than Jonathan Swift's suggestion that the Irish eat their children as a way to keep them from being a burden, and it may offend just as many people, but Henderson, described elsewhere as a 25-year-old "out-of-work physics major," puts satire to the same serious use that Swift did. Oh, yes, it is very funny. -- Scientific American
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. This means you're free to use the content but not sell it. More Details |
