how many of y'all actually care if we go to war with iraq?
- Thread starter CHRISHOGGALYPSE
- Start date
@Chris --Do you know of any websites that translate Korean rap into English? There were some coo ass doods in San Leandro a while back that used to bump some of that shit, & Iam wondering now if any of their rap speaks on issues like their government policies like Woodie's & Northern Expozure's speak on ours. I can't ever really believe much of what any media is feeding us, and I feel like I hear a lot of social truth in rap music, like the spirit of it is often closer to reality despite the entertainment dramas.
no i don't about the korean rap thing
and i think alot of people are misguided in rap. some speak on it well, some just talk about shooting cops for being pulled over. i think that is kinda fucked up. speak on shady cops all day or specific names like c-bo has, but to provoke shooting officers who may actually be cool and let you off anyways is fucked up. there is plenty of scandal in all law enforcement, and homeboys have gone down, that is a thing we all don't like, but i just feel that when some rappers speak on it, they don't really understand all of situations with the law.
and i think alot of people are misguided in rap. some speak on it well, some just talk about shooting cops for being pulled over. i think that is kinda fucked up. speak on shady cops all day or specific names like c-bo has, but to provoke shooting officers who may actually be cool and let you off anyways is fucked up. there is plenty of scandal in all law enforcement, and homeboys have gone down, that is a thing we all don't like, but i just feel that when some rappers speak on it, they don't really understand all of situations with the law.
Some older cops are hella understanding-- To know how good a lot of cops CAN be pisses me off even more about the bad bullies. What's fucked up is that when you see the power of discretion that cops are ABLE to use as part of their good judgement, it makes the bad cops even more hatable. People going out for the police department in the first place are tested and judged on their ability to use common sense and discretion, and it is their CHOICE on whether or not to enforce many laws based on extenuating circumstances. Cops CAN choose to ignore or enforce a whole lotta things, and it really does piss me off that say, in Nando's case for instance, the cop didn't have to write him up for having a bat but did. That was fucked up. I had a buddy that carried a gun on his camping trips & when he got pulled over, the cop was hella coo, understood the situation, and ignored it cuz my friend was totally relaxed. Lots of cops around here ought to be knowing that a lot of regular guys HAVE to defend their lives, families, and homes, cuz cops can't or won't. They should be more understanding of letting people go unless the person they are arresting is intentionally victimizing somebody. If cops were better at policing themselves and making examples of the few really bad bully-type loud-mouthed two-faced cops in the community rather than trying to cover up, I bet people would be a lot cooler wit cops in general who are actually trying to keep neighborhoods running smoothly. Until they police themselves tho, the whole force really just looks like an arbitrary vicious joke, especially when they are entitled by law to lie to YOU when they are investigating things to try to bluff you into confessing. That right there makes the whole system an ugly witch hunt, cuz you can't assume cops are all working for "noble" community reasons-- alot are there for the paycheck and the chance to get over on people by using a badge. I wish the "noble" type cops would clean house, for real, cuz they really missing what people on the street see every day.
They have two basic choices--enforce laws strictly by the book, or keep the peace by using good judgement. Good cops keep the peace.
They have two basic choices--enforce laws strictly by the book, or keep the peace by using good judgement. Good cops keep the peace.
^^^^^well, in nando's case, it can be thought of 4 ways. A) the cop was just doing his job that he was sworn in to do, B) with all the gang violence that has been going down (there have been a few homicide gang related deaths in the area and gang violence has increased incredibly lately) he wrote him up as a precautionary measure, and as a police officer you have to think, what if he is going to someone's house/area to beat them to death? by doing his job by the book, he may have stopped a crime before it happend. by the book, there is nothing wrong with what he did. nando broke the law and got caught. C) the cop is a dick and should have let him off because it wasn't that big of a deal. the other cop he was with didn't have a problem with it, so he should have just let it go too. D) cops are always trying to harass us and there are more important things they could be doing like stopping real crimes instead of harrassing him about a bat.
see what i mean?? there are like 4 sides to this story. i know it sucks balls. i have been in similar situations of harrassment, not quite the same, but the harrassment was there. but in most cases in our generation and lifestyle, we are guilty sadly enough, so we have no fuckin right to whine about the shit when we know we broke the law. a good police officer like you said should keep the peace be whatever means the laws allow. you have to think ahead of time about the consequences of having the bat in the vehicle and whether it will be worth it or not when you go to put it in the truck. case closed. Nando will need a good lawyer or a forgiving judge
see what i mean?? there are like 4 sides to this story. i know it sucks balls. i have been in similar situations of harrassment, not quite the same, but the harrassment was there. but in most cases in our generation and lifestyle, we are guilty sadly enough, so we have no fuckin right to whine about the shit when we know we broke the law. a good police officer like you said should keep the peace be whatever means the laws allow. you have to think ahead of time about the consequences of having the bat in the vehicle and whether it will be worth it or not when you go to put it in the truck. case closed. Nando will need a good lawyer or a forgiving judge
aight man.
SAY WE DO GO TO WAR.
THERE ARE 2 ENDINGS.
1.
WE SEND TROOPS, THEY GET BOMBED. (IN IRAQ and or KOREA)
WE BOMB IRAQ (and or KOREA) AS WE GET BOMBED AND THEN WORLD BLOWS UP.
ARMEGEDON.
THEN LITTLE SLIMEY FISH CRAWL FROM THE CRUSTY, NUKED UP WATER, AND A CIVILIZATION OF EVIL NUCLEAR WORM PEOPLE WILL CONTROL EARTH.
2. WE WIN THE WAR(S) AT IRAQ (AND or KOREA) AND WE TAKE OVER THEIR COUNTRY AND SPEND MILIIONS AND MILLIONS OF $ RUNNING THEIR PIECE OF SHIT COUNTRY WHILE OUR EDUCATIoN SYSTEM AND CRIMINAL REFORM SYTSEMS SHOULD BE GETTING THE MONEY.
HOW LONG WE BEEN IN PACISTAN?? HOW LONG WE BEEN IN ALL THE OTHER COUNTRIES WE TOKE OVER AND FORCED INTO DEMOCRACY????
TOO MANY!
WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE U.S. BEFORE WE TRY AND FIX THE WORLD!!!!!
2. WE WIN THE WAR
SAY WE DO GO TO WAR.
THERE ARE 2 ENDINGS.
1.
WE SEND TROOPS, THEY GET BOMBED. (IN IRAQ and or KOREA)
WE BOMB IRAQ (and or KOREA) AS WE GET BOMBED AND THEN WORLD BLOWS UP.
ARMEGEDON.
THEN LITTLE SLIMEY FISH CRAWL FROM THE CRUSTY, NUKED UP WATER, AND A CIVILIZATION OF EVIL NUCLEAR WORM PEOPLE WILL CONTROL EARTH.
2. WE WIN THE WAR(S) AT IRAQ (AND or KOREA) AND WE TAKE OVER THEIR COUNTRY AND SPEND MILIIONS AND MILLIONS OF $ RUNNING THEIR PIECE OF SHIT COUNTRY WHILE OUR EDUCATIoN SYSTEM AND CRIMINAL REFORM SYTSEMS SHOULD BE GETTING THE MONEY.
HOW LONG WE BEEN IN PACISTAN?? HOW LONG WE BEEN IN ALL THE OTHER COUNTRIES WE TOKE OVER AND FORCED INTO DEMOCRACY????
TOO MANY!
WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE U.S. BEFORE WE TRY AND FIX THE WORLD!!!!!
2. WE WIN THE WAR
the problem homie is this^^^^ if we don't go to war, the countries that harbor terrorists do not care about the fate of this planet. like the suicide bombers, they believe that they will see glory by doing these acts of terror in the name of Allah. if we don't go to war, we die or never live comfortably in this country again. i don't like war, but things do need to happen, am i wrong in saying that? do you believe just the opposite?
if whoever was going to try and pull the plug on the earth was going to do it, i think they would have done it by now. if that is what God wants for this planet, i stand behind that decision. death does not scare me, God will either protect me on this planet, or it is my time to be with him in heaven. either way, i can't lose
if whoever was going to try and pull the plug on the earth was going to do it, i think they would have done it by now. if that is what God wants for this planet, i stand behind that decision. death does not scare me, God will either protect me on this planet, or it is my time to be with him in heaven. either way, i can't lose
a report from yahoo about a draft
summary: the pentagon opposes a draft because they say it is unfair to minorites and other americans who don't make as much money or who don't have parents who where college educated.
WASHINGTON - Trying to head off a proposal to reinstate the military draft, the Pentagon (news - web sites) Monday disputed charges that blacks and poorer Americans bear an unfair burden in fighting the country's wars.
"Contrary to myth, data show that the enlisted force is quite representative of the civilian population," the Defense Department said in an 11-page paper arguing the merits of the all-volunteer force that has been in place for nearly 30 years.
The position paper was in response to a proposal by Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., to require military service and other types of national service.
A veteran of the Korean War and opponent of military action in Iraq, Rangel says he believes Congress would be less likely to support war against Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) if their children were the ones to be put in harm's way.
He said late last month that military service should be a "shared sacrifice" asked of all able young Americans and that minorities make up a "disproportionate number" of troops.
The Pentagon countered Monday that while blacks make up 20 percent of enlistees and only 12 to 14 percent of the general recruit-age population, there tends to be fewer in combat jobs. They make up only 15 percent of the combat force, while accounting for 36 percent of support and administration and 27 percent of medical and dental positions, the Pentagon said, citing a 1999 report.
On social and economic status, it said 32 percent of recruits come from homes where the father is a high school graduate compared to 31 percent of the general population in their age group. Twenty-two percent of recruits have fathers who have at least a college education, compared to 30 percent of the general population in their age group.
The paper was released at an hour-long briefing by a senior defense official who appeared before reporters on condition he not be identified by name.
Saying America's armed forces today are more professional and efficient because they are comprised of people who have chosen to join, the official said military leaders are "horrified by Mr. Rangel's proposal to return to the days when people were forced to serve."
Under the current system, however, men are still required to register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18th birthday.
summary: the pentagon opposes a draft because they say it is unfair to minorites and other americans who don't make as much money or who don't have parents who where college educated.
WASHINGTON - Trying to head off a proposal to reinstate the military draft, the Pentagon (news - web sites) Monday disputed charges that blacks and poorer Americans bear an unfair burden in fighting the country's wars.
"Contrary to myth, data show that the enlisted force is quite representative of the civilian population," the Defense Department said in an 11-page paper arguing the merits of the all-volunteer force that has been in place for nearly 30 years.
The position paper was in response to a proposal by Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., to require military service and other types of national service.
A veteran of the Korean War and opponent of military action in Iraq, Rangel says he believes Congress would be less likely to support war against Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) if their children were the ones to be put in harm's way.
He said late last month that military service should be a "shared sacrifice" asked of all able young Americans and that minorities make up a "disproportionate number" of troops.
The Pentagon countered Monday that while blacks make up 20 percent of enlistees and only 12 to 14 percent of the general recruit-age population, there tends to be fewer in combat jobs. They make up only 15 percent of the combat force, while accounting for 36 percent of support and administration and 27 percent of medical and dental positions, the Pentagon said, citing a 1999 report.
On social and economic status, it said 32 percent of recruits come from homes where the father is a high school graduate compared to 31 percent of the general population in their age group. Twenty-two percent of recruits have fathers who have at least a college education, compared to 30 percent of the general population in their age group.
The paper was released at an hour-long briefing by a senior defense official who appeared before reporters on condition he not be identified by name.
Saying America's armed forces today are more professional and efficient because they are comprised of people who have chosen to join, the official said military leaders are "horrified by Mr. Rangel's proposal to return to the days when people were forced to serve."
Under the current system, however, men are still required to register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18th birthday.
People are missing a HUGE difference between what makes war reasonable NOW, versus war being so grotesquely wrong in the Vietnam War years ago.
The US was not being directly targeted by enemies in the Vietname War. We went to Vietname as a so-called "police action" to "control the spread of communisim" and protect the overseas interests and assests of our allies and our corporations. There was no threat to mainland USA then.
There is a HUGE threat to our USA mainland and our American interests worldwide now from various groups. I won't argue about who's morally right or wrong about what brought us to this point, but the fact is, fanatics worldwide are chanting that they want to see America DEAD, and they believe God will eternally reward them for killing us. These people WILL come kill us if we don't do something to stop them. It wasn't like that in Vietnam. This war makes sense to me as much as war on scrapas or any other group of people outright saying they want to see any Northern Califa homie dead. Yes they've been abused by powerful people, but don't let them take their trouble out on me or my family. It may sound horrible to a few, but til they shut they mouth and quit threatening and taking shots at us, it's ooooonnnnnnnnn.
The US was not being directly targeted by enemies in the Vietname War. We went to Vietname as a so-called "police action" to "control the spread of communisim" and protect the overseas interests and assests of our allies and our corporations. There was no threat to mainland USA then.
There is a HUGE threat to our USA mainland and our American interests worldwide now from various groups. I won't argue about who's morally right or wrong about what brought us to this point, but the fact is, fanatics worldwide are chanting that they want to see America DEAD, and they believe God will eternally reward them for killing us. These people WILL come kill us if we don't do something to stop them. It wasn't like that in Vietnam. This war makes sense to me as much as war on scrapas or any other group of people outright saying they want to see any Northern Califa homie dead. Yes they've been abused by powerful people, but don't let them take their trouble out on me or my family. It may sound horrible to a few, but til they shut they mouth and quit threatening and taking shots at us, it's ooooonnnnnnnnn.
If we don't get that oil, Great Britain, Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, Isreal, or the former Soviet Union will. What a powder keg that would be. Just think if we weren't there as this big hulking monster country laying a claim to it, all those other countries would be warring each other for it. Those are old countries origionally built as empires conquering small countries to take riches, not as democracies desgined to achive happiness and equality among commoners. Afghanistan and Iraq will lose it regardless, and would have lost it faster if the USA wasn't around. The Soviets built the pipeline to the sea, and if we don't go in and control it, some other country will very likely abuse that desert country worse. It's not like the Afghani's thmselves really engineered the pipeline and all he technology it takes to make that underground oil an actual asset they could have sold us on their own. Without that technolgy from developed countries, their oil had no value. We have an interest in that oil just like all those other industrialized countries, and while our abuse of the Afghanis and Iraquis is not very nice, I'd rather we controlled it that Saudi Arabia or the Former Soviet Uniion or any other country that would be at war with Iraq for it if we hadn't been on top first. At least we TRY (at least for the media) to make an effort to respect human rights and feed people. China's record and Korea's record (at least from our point of view) is horrible.