They couldn't guard the damn museum? That doesn't demonstrate a whole lot of foresight, I have to say.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030417/pl_nm/iraq_antiquities_dc_2

This is a shame but it really does not bother me that much. Won't lose any sleep over it, that's for sure.

Idiotic soldiers.

But they were able to protect the oil ministry...

The short war against iraq is actually the best evidence, that this country represented no danger for the world.

Saddams army was (logically after 12 years of sanctions) no adversary. His so-called efficient "Elite-Troops" remained a phantom as well as his weapons of mass destruction.

These beneath the massive disapproval of the "free" iraqi people embarrassing circumstances don't hinder the architects from the new world to continue their next defamations.

The next front has been opened rapidly - again without evidence for the "evil". Against Syria, which is much more defenseless as iraq.

Behind this facade of alleged serious world policy hides - psychological seen - a heavy desease: the self-definition (the "good") works only over others ("the evil"). An existence without enemy becomes unimaginable. Communism was replaced as threat by fundamentalism (and beyond its real menace). But also by all others "that are against us".
This way of thinking in foe images is flanked by a media-produced policy of hate.

Never before more bad jokes about an us-president existed, who measured himself with the iraqi dictator.
Never before there was more malice and disdain for "the americans". No desireable development, but understandable in consideration of the momentary US-acting toward factual, not from anxiety driven existences.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Idiotic soldiers. Any reason is a good reason to bash our soldiers in your opinion it seems. The soldiers do as they are ordered, so if they were ordered to guard some friggin museum they would have. But i guess they were too busy kicking Republican Guard ass to guard a museum.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
This is a shame but it really does not bother me that much. Won't lose any sleep over it, that's for sure.

Yeah, it's just a museum. History isn't important. That's just a goofy subject they taught in high school to keep us out of trouble.

What we REALLY need to be doing is "kicking Republican Guard ass." That temporary gain is vastly more important than the permanent, irreparable damage that's occuring at that silly museum.....

I sware if you guys had your way, we'd be living in the Dark Ages (That's that time period when Europe was living in an oppressed society with little to no science, math, history, art....but there was plenty of warfare. Remember that? You should have learned about it in history class.)

Idiots....

Well said, Leper!

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Well said, Leper! OMG.......Borg, why dont you and Leper just hold a little liberal group grope on the forum. I was just saying that they were a little busy doing what the hell they went to Iraq for in the first place to worry about the museum.

Yay! HaVoK continues to act like an idiot. The stuff in that museum is from thousands of years ago, its some of the only stuff left from mesopatamia. They aren't in any fucking danger anymore, they could have saved history.

Fatkor, nice. All right except the communist part... but I'll let that pass because of the intelligent post!

Originally posted by Blibblob
Yay! HaVoK continues to act like an idiot. The stuff in that museum is from thousands of years ago, its some of the only stuff left from mesopatamia. They aren't in any fucking danger anymore, they could have saved history.

Fatkor, nice. All right except the communist part... but I'll let that pass because of the intelligent post! I personally would rather all the "stuff in that museum" be lost than to lose one more U.S. soldier's life than neccessary. But i know those sentiments are lost on you.

Originally posted by Blibblob
They aren't in any fucking danger anymore, they could have saved history.

Another unintelligent post from the blob. How do you figure they are not in danger anymore? Every day you hear about the possibility of suicide bombers. Fedayeen troups are still active. This war is still not over. I told you this before and ill tell you again: Wake up!!!!!!

Another unintelligent post from the blob. How do you figure they are not in danger anymore? Every day you hear about the possiblitiy of suicide bombers. Fedayeen troups are still active. This war is still not over. I told you this before and ill tell you again: Wake up!!!!!!
Since they were in very little danger from these crappy, undertrained, underarmed, wanna be Guerrilla fighters in the first place. They aren't in very much danger now, the least they could have done was stoped the frantic Iraqis.

I personally would rather all the "stuff in that museum" be lost than to lose one more U.S. soldier's life than neccessary. But i know those sentiments are lost on you.
I'd rather see a now die than a priceless artifact.

Originally posted by Leper

I sware if you guys had your way, we'd be living in the Dark Ages (That's that time period when Europe was living in an oppressed society with little to no science, math, history, art....but there was plenty of warfare. Remember that? You should have learned about it in history class.)

Idiots.... You cannot even spell and you have the nerve to lecture someone and call us idiots? Like the saying goes, "Let a fool talk long enough and he shows the world who and what he truly is". By the way, since you are a fool, ill tell you which word it is. Sware? LMFAO

Originally posted by HaVoK
You cannot even spell and you have the nerve to lecture someone and call us idiots? Like the saying goes, "Let a fool talk long enough and he shows the world who and what he truly is". By the way, since you are a fool, ill tell you which word it is. Sware? LMFAO

Forgive me if my concern for using the correct spelling of "swear" is minimal in comparison to my concern for preserving irreplaceable proof of history.

I tell you what. I'll take credit for not making irrelevant (I'd appreciate it if you checked the spelling of "irrelevant" for me. Thanks!) arguments and you can have credit for being the best speller in the whole wide world....

Oh btw, I have my own little saying for you, "Only people with no original thoughts of their own rely on platitudes to prove their position."

history, LOL, you clowns are all of a sudden so worried about history. It is obvious that to you every single thing that happens is all on done on purpose by the big bad wolf US Government.. Dont you know that war is hell? QUit trying to bring politics to the battlefield and let them do what they do.

Originally posted by Travh20
history, LOL, you clowns are all of a sudden so worried about history. It is obvious that to you every single thing that happens is all on done on purpose by the big bad wolf US Government.. Dont you know that war is hell? QUit trying to bring politics to the battlefield and let them do what they do.

First, have you ever supported an action that was constructive rather than destructive?

Second, claiming "war is hell" is no defense to senseless destruction. And whether you like it or not, politics and the battlefield will forever and always be entangled in a civil society. Then again, you're not a big fan of civility are you?

Originally posted by Leper
They couldn't guard the damn museum? That doesn't demonstrate a whole lot of foresight, I have to say.[
Leper I do agree this is a shame, but it is not a priority. The troops are still trying to clean up a mess, they are still being shot at by snippers. They are trying to establish some sort of law, atleast until the Iraqi's can form a police force. Let me ask which is more important peoples lives, or a statue. One more thing you blame or soldiers for the looting? Well I have yet to see one American running off artifacts. I have seen are troops try to stop looting though. My question is are you sure you are blaming the right people for what is happening?

Well, I wouldn't call it a "priority" I suppose. But I would call it a concern. I really doubt it's asking a lot for our military to guard the place with a platoon at most.

I disagree with your contension that the U.S. has no duty to protect the place. When you destroy the infrastructure of a country, you assume responsibility for the natural and foreseeable consequences of that destruction. Is there any doubt that it was foreseeable for impoverished Iraqis to start looting places stocked with priceless artifacts? I really think so.

I guess you're trying to say the looters are to blame? Well, sure, they should be accountable for their actions but that does not mean the U.S. is not partially, if not mostly, responsible, especially since we're the ones responsible for annhilating the local security.

Originally posted by Leper
Yeah, it's just a museum. History isn't important. That's just a goofy subject they taught in high school to keep us out of trouble.

What we REALLY need to be doing is "kicking Republican Guard ass." That temporary gain is vastly more important than the permanent, irreparable damage that's occuring at that silly museum.....

I sware if you guys had your way, we'd be living in the Dark Ages (That's that time period when Europe was living in an oppressed society with little to no science, math, history, art....but there was plenty of warfare. Remember that? You should have learned about it in history class.)

Idiots....

Leper, shut the hell up, okay? You don't know what you're talking about. In fact I find history and archaeology fascinating. I hate to see stuff like this destroyed. However I feel that focusing on the conflict at hand is more important than one museum. Do I wish it had been prevented? Sure. Am I totally shocked, devastated and angered? No.

No we are not going to go into the Dark Ages because we lost some artifacts from a museum in Baghdad. Dumbass.

Originally posted by DaveTooner
Leper, shut the hell up, okay?

Oh, okay. If you ask me so nicely, I'll be sure to "shut the hell up." :rolleyes:

Baghdad Museum (http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/04/18/sprj.nilaw.artifacts.interpol/index.html)



From this report, it appears that the looting of the museum was pre-planned. Ali-babba & his 40 thieves took advantage of the fall of Baghdad to raid the museum of its' antiquities, rather than it merely being done by looters looking for new tv sets.

Leper I think we should blame circumstance, yes the Iraqi people did do a wrong, but we really can't be mad at them, for all of a sudden having freedoms. As far as blaming our troops, well maybe your right someone should have thought about guarding the museum. On the other hand maybe we should be guarding every single house also. Just a thought, but maybe we don't have enough man power over there to go around playing security guard. I still say there are more important things than a museum. One more thing alot of the Iraqis are bringing the museum stuff back. Hopefully most of it will be either returned or found, but I honestlly think we need to take care of other things first, like helping them set up a police force, set up some sort of government, help them with food, and shelter, etc... People can live without artifacts, they can't live without food and shelter.

Maybe Leper is really saying that he doesnt care about the cost of human life it takes to secure these artifacts. After all, he is the one who can quantify the value of any one particular life. So i guess he pulled out his handy calculator and figured out that the artifacts are worth much more than our troops lives.

Originally posted by mad dog
Leper I think we should blame circumstance, yes the Iraqi people did do a wrong, but we really can't be mad at them, for all of a sudden having freedoms. As far as blaming our troops, well maybe your right someone should have thought about guarding the museum. On the other hand maybe we should be guarding every single house also. Just a thought, but maybe we don't have enough man power over there to go around playing security guard. I still say there are more important things than a museum. One more thing alot of the Iraqis are bringing the museum stuff back. Hopefully most of it will be either returned or found, but I honestlly think we need to take care of other things first, like helping them set up a police force, set up some sort of government, help them with food, and shelter, etc... People can live without artifacts, they can't live without food and shelter.

Yeah, some Iraqis are bringing a FEW items back. I'm glad to hear it. That doesn't change the fact that most items are still gone or destroyed.

And we sure have plenty manpower to guard the oil facilities. You know, people can live without exporting oil too.

There's something else that has been ignored in this post. The U.S. reassured people that they would protect the museum. That imposes even more of a duty on our military; when you say you're going to protect something and you don't, don't you think that's irresponsible?


HaVok-

Gimme a break. No one's going to die from guarding a museum any more than anyone dies guarding anything else.

But now that you mention it, yes I do think you can weigh human life against items of historical value, just like anything else of value. If someone had to sacrifice their life to save all the world's items of historical value, I would rather see the sacrifice of the human life. Of course, I don't know why I'm trying to explain this to you. I have little doubt that from your attitude that you'd rather see a planet destroyed before you see a human die prematurely.

Give ME a break. Just because some artifacts were stolen hardly equates to destrucion of our world. And yes, i do feel that human life is more valuable than some piece of clay, or an old manuscript, etc. Forgive my morals please. And as far as being able to compare the value of a human life against the value of an object seems, to me, absolutely horrid. Even if you could, whose opinion would we go by? What you suggest makes no sense whatsoever.

Originally posted by HaVoK
Give ME a break. Just because some artifacts were stolen hardly equates to destrucion of our world. And yes, i do feel that human life is more valuable than some piece of clay, or an old manuscript, etc. Forgive my morals please. And as far as being able to compare the value of a human life against the value of an object seems, to me, absolutely horrid. Even if you could, whose opinion would we go by? What you suggest makes no sense whatsoever.

Who said stolen artifacts equates to destruction of our world? Not me.

Stolen artifacts equates to the destruction of our ability to research and evaluate history. If you believe history is a worthless subject, then I can see your position. But I do believe there is a reason, a good reason, why we study history, even ancient history. Do you really need me to offer a lengthy explanation of why this is important?

"History is the lie most commonly agreed upon."- Voltaire

HaVoK, how do you feel about an animal dying? I'd much rather see a bloodthirsty human die than an innocent elephant or other creature. Your morals are selfish.

History is the lie most commonly agreed upon."- Voltaire Wow....you actually posted something i agree with Blob. I never thought i would see the day.

lol. What about the rest? Tell me your morals aren't twisted like what I was complaining about.

Originally posted by Blibblob
"History is the lie most commonly agreed upon."- Voltaire

Interesting quote. And what class did you learn about Voltaire in?

Originally posted by Blibblob
lol. What about the rest? Tell me your morals aren't twisted like what I was complaining about. I dont know where you are going with this...but ill try to answer. I think that a human life is more valuable than an animal's life also. I have no problem eating meat. They are animals. I dont think that people should harm an animal unless it is intended for food or if it is uncontrollable. The only exception would be research animals. Within reason, i have no problem for using animals to experiment on medicines that benefit mankind. Hope i answered what you wanted me to.

Ok, another question(sorry). Do you beleive you are more intelligent than an animal? How about better?
Don't start panicing, or Trav the idiot come in here questioning what I post. There is a method to my madness.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Ok, another question(sorry). Do you beleive you are more intelligent than an animal? How about better?
Don't start panicing, or Trav the idiot come in here questioning what I post. There is a method to my madness. Yes i believe i am more intelligent. Better? That question is vague. But i think my life is more valuable if that is what you mean.

we are both more intelligent and better than animals. We were created in gods imag and put here to rule over the animals. If you think a ants life is equl to a human you are messed up, but that wouldnt suprise me, idiot.

Originally posted by Travh20
we are both more intelligent and better than animals. We were created in gods imag and put here to rule over the animals. If you think a ants life is equl to a human you are messed up, but that wouldnt suprise me, idiot.

We were put here to rule over the animals? Geez. I'm not sure whether to laugh my ass off at people like you or be frightened of people like you.

So do animals' lives have any value at all? Or would you sooner see elephants go extinct than see one human die? And if not, how many elephants are worth one human life?

Humans are the only animals that hunt for fun, the only ones that kill for sport, and one of the very very few animals that aren't canibals. We are a waste. And yes, I said animal, we are animals, to go to the definition that some place on an animal(barbarious, cruel, crazy) we are the insanist animals on the planet.

We were put here to rule over the animals? Geez. I'm not sure whether to laugh my ass off at people like you or be frightened of people like you.

So do animals' lives have any value at all? Or would you sooner see elephants go extinct than see one human die? And if not, how many elephants are worth one human life?
To trav, a herd of elephants are probably worth one human life. I'd be afraid, damn fascist collectivist.

And if we were made in god's image, he was an asshole, he should have edited that part out of the bible, Buddha is laughing his skinny ass off(yes, skinny, how the hell can you become fat by living your life out in the middle of the woods eating plants only?).

To me, an innocent human life is worth about as much as an animal. A soldier's a bit less, a officer's, even less, and at the very bottom would be the capitalist pigs who control 90% of the world's wealth.

Wow Travh.....it seems as though these two were waiting for a response such as yours. They completely forgot all about my answers.

Wow Travh.....it seems as though these two were waiting for a response such as yours. They completely forgot all about my answers.
I know, aren't we argumentmongers :D. My post had a little bit to do with your posts. Basically I was trying to find out how many on this board are extreme humanists. Trav really showed his face.

Well, HaVok. I generally don't have an issue with your response. However, I can imagine circumstances where an animal's life is worth more than a human's. One circumstance, where the human is worthless as an individual. Another: where the animal is a blue whale or an extraordinarily rare animal. Have any problems with that?

Almost all the animals are rare compared to us. Therefore, they deserve to live more. I've also never seen a monkey polute the air, water, or earth.

It's interesting how a thread can change from the destruction of priceless artifacts to the value of a human life.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Almost all the animals are rare compared to us. Therefore, they deserve to live more. I've also never seen a monkey polute the air, water, or earth.

It's interesting how a thread can change from the destruction of priceless artifacts to the value of a human life.

You forget that man is not a purely destructive force. Why do you go on living if you really believe what you speak? Under you beliefs, wouldn't the world be better off if you and the rest of mankind committed suicide?

You forget that man is not a purely destructive force. Why do you go on living if you really believe what you speak? Under you beliefs, wouldn't the world be better off if you and the rest of mankind committed suicide?
No, just decided to get better.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Humans are the only animals that hunt for fun, the only ones that kill for sport, and one of the very very few animals that aren't canibals. We are a waste. And yes, I said animal, we are animals, to go to the definition that some place on an animal(barbarious, cruel, crazy) we are the insanist animals on the planet.

And if we were made in god's image, he was an asshole, he should have edited that part out of the bible, Buddha is laughing his skinny ass off(yes, skinny, how the hell can you become fat by living your life out in the middle of the woods eating plants only?).

To me, an innocent human life is worth about as much as an animal. A soldier's a bit less, a officer's, even less, and at the very bottom would be the capitalist pigs who control 90% of the world's wealth.

I never said animals were not important, if anyone knows how important animals are it is the farmer and the hunter, city slickers who profess to love animals so much do it all for themselves and their fragile consciences', for animals are not part of their existance. And humans are the only animals that are gay. No other animal spends it entire life screwing a same sex partner of the same species. It is un natural. So is it fair to say, BLIBBLOB, that if humans are the only killers for sport, and that is un natural, that since we are also the only homosexual species (homosexual for entire lifetimes, not during certain obscure mating rituals) that homosexuality is also un natural?

And Blib, as far as the soldier being lower than animals, I would like to see you say that to one face to face, and not in a car passing by at 60 MPH you jerk off. You are all talk when your at your keyboard, you go in front of a company of infantrymen and tell them these things.

It would never happen Travh. He would be too busy soiling his pants to ever voice an opinion like that.

Blibb wears brown trousers whenever he ventures away from the keyboard, so the incredible stains aren't visible when he deficates in them. Blibb is spouting words & phrases beyond his meager capablities, so there must be a ghost writer sitting upon his shoulder. Got his figures all wrong though : the bottom of the human food chain is filled with the floatsam & jetsam of those that only take from society, bitch about how bad it is, all the while screaming from an ivory tower filled with every luxury the planet can provide. The only conclusion we can draw from Blibb is that he must come from wealth, (s)he's been horribly brainwashed, and that there is more than 99 44/100 % French heritage floating about in his gene pool.
Feel very sorry for the young misguided commie. It's impolite to laugh.

I cannot believe you loons put animals on a level equal with humans. Priceless.

I believe you just did put humans on par with animals, there, Dave, with that analogy. "You loons": A loon is a type of bird, and you compared Blib & Leper to a loon. ;)

All kidding aside, I feel I must reply to Trav:
No other animal spends it entire life screwing a same sex partner of the same species.
Actually, some animals do just that, there have been well-documented papers on the subject. I believe the most well-known was on dogs.

And in reply to your use of "unnatural", aren't houses unnatural? Cars? Computers? Just because something does not occur in nature does not make it wrong.

Originally posted by Travh20
And humans are the only animals that are gay.

Well, just for the record I can think of at least one example that proves this statement is wrong. Hyenas are homosexual. Yes, opposite sexes will mate, but only for the purposes of reproduction. Otherwise, they run a matriarchal society in which males are outcasts. Females actually are equipped w/ fake penises....which they will use.

I believe Blib also said that humans are the only animals that kill other animals for sport. Once again, this is a false statement. Hyenas will serve to prove that one wrong as well. Hyenas kill lions for sport, and lions kill hyenas for sport.

Ah, yes. I had forgotten about the hyenas. Thanks, Leper.

Originally posted by BorgHunter
I believe you just did put humans on par with animals, there, Dave, with that analogy. "You loons": A loon is a type of bird, and you compared Blib & Leper to a loon. ;)

All kidding aside, I feel I must reply to Trav:

Actually, some animals do just that, there have been well-documented papers on the subject. I believe the most well-known was on dogs.

And in reply to your use of "unnatural", aren't houses unnatural? Cars? Computers? Just because something does not occur in nature does not make it wrong.

borg, borg, borg, you both ignore my statements and prove my point all at the same time. I said animals that screw the same sex of their species for an entire lifetime, NOT in some mating ritual or show of dominance, you show me a male dog who penetrates another male dog on a regular basis and I will say I am wrong. I have a male dog and I know he humps on other male dogs, but it is not sexual, it is a dominance thing, there is no actual sex.

Your point about no other animals making cars and computers just proves my point. Any animal with the intelligence to create and invent is more important than a little loon. Whrn a species has within its abilities to both destroy and enlighten the planet that all animals live on that species is special.

Originally posted by Leper
Well, just for the record I can think of at least one example that proves this statement is wrong. Hyenas are homosexual. Yes, opposite sexes will mate, but only for the purposes of reproduction. Otherwise, they run a matriarchal society in which males are outcasts. Females actually are equipped w/ fake penises....which they will use.

I believe Blib also said that humans are the only animals that kill other animals for sport. Once again, this is a false statement. Hyenas will serve to prove that one wrong as well. Hyenas kill lions for sport, and lions kill hyenas for sport.

homosexual for reproduction??? LOL good try, but these animals are not dedicated homosexuals, not like humans who are gay for life. Human gays dont get with the opposite sex to reproduce.

You completely miss my point, Trav. First of all, I was referring to dogs that actually attempt to copulate with other dogs of the same species, and do so on a regular basis. Also, I have never claimed that a human was as valuable as a loon, rather, that we should remember that animals are alive as well and we should not kill off species for our own enjoyment and pleasure.

ya. copulate on a regular basis, show me the proof. And humans dont try and kill off species for their own enjoyment and pleasure you jackass (hows that for an animal comparison?) If anyone kills off species it is your beloved perpetual victims, the third world, with their deforestation and unrestricted hunting, of course, I suppose that is all our fault, right?

Originally posted by Travh20
homosexual for reproduction??? LOL good try, but these animals are not dedicated homosexuals, not like humans who are gay for life. Human gays dont get with the opposite sex to reproduce.

I'm sorry but that initial sentence fragment is uncomprehendable, so I can't respond to that.

Are you trying to say a homosexual person is not homosexual if he/she mates with the opposite sex for reproduction?

Leper:
I believe Blib also said that humans are the only animals that kill other animals for sport. Once again, this is a false statement. Hyenas will serve to prove that one wrong as well. Hyenas kill lions for sport, and lions kill hyenas for sport.
They eat them. By sport I mean to kill, and leave the carcass sitting there. A hyena or a lion usually don't get enough to eat, so of course they eat it.

ya. copulate on a regular basis, show me the proof. And humans dont try and kill off species for their own enjoyment and pleasure you jackass (hows that for an animal comparison?) If anyone kills off species it is your beloved perpetual victims, the third world, with their deforestation and unrestricted hunting, of course, I suppose that is all our fault, right?
You need to define regular basis anyways. I think the Dodo bird was killed off for our pleasure and enjoyment, and the African elephant, that is endangered for our enjoyment, must I continue? Food is fine, but when you go into stupid material items like a nice fur coat from an endangered species, that's too far, and ivory, I don't think we need that either. It's all just unneccessary shit. And shut up about the third world you idiot, they live in clay buildings.

Oh goodness gracious, the grand pubbah know it all Bliblob has weighed in. He thinks because the thrid worlders live in clay buildings they do no harm to the environment, ahhh the freedom of ignorance on display. I dont use Ivory or hunt any animals, I dont agree with hunting an animal to extinction, but does that mean it isnt happening? these people think becasue they are liberals they know everything about the earth, in reality liberals dont know crap besides what they read in some book or greenpeace propaganda web site. Ranchers, hunters, fishermen, farmers, these are the environmentalists, and are overwhelmingly conservative. Birkenstalk hikers and weekend kayakers talk a big game, bu in reality know very little.

Oh goodness gracious, the grand pubbah know it all Bliblob has weighed in. He thinks because the thrid worlders live in clay buildings they do no harm to the environment, ahhh the freedom of ignorance on display. I dont use Ivory or hunt any animals, I dont agree with hunting an animal to extinction, but does that mean it isnt happening? these people think becasue they are liberals they know everything about the earth, in reality liberals dont know crap besides what they read in some book or greenpeace propaganda web site. Ranchers, hunters, fishermen, farmers, these are the environmentalists, and are overwhelmingly conservative. Birkenstalk hikers and weekend kayakers talk a big game, bu in reality know very little.
Oh, and you know a lot? I know a hell of a lot more than you. I've gone to a farm every summer. My grandfather's.

congratulations, you spent your summers on a farm, now you know everything there is to know about farms. Get a life kid.

congratulations, you spent your summers on a farm, now you know everything there is to know about farms. Get a life kid.
Well, I'm sorry, you said I knew nothing. Then you said that only the farmers, and hunters, and fishermen knew. WELL, I think I proved that I do know. And all you can say is that shit!?!?!

Originally posted by Blibblob
They eat them. By sport I mean to kill, and leave the carcass sitting there. A hyena or a lion usually don't get enough to eat, so of course they eat it.

I know what you meant. Actually, I'm not certain that Hyenas don't eat the lions. But I know Lions will kill Hyenas and leave the corpse. The two animals hate each other.

I've SEEN cats kill mice for sport too (Yes, that means not eating the carcass).

Originally posted by Blibblob

You need to define regular basis anyways. I think the Dodo bird was killed off for our pleasure and enjoyment, and the African elephant, that is endangered for our enjoyment, must I continue? Food is fine, but when you go into stupid material items like a nice fur coat from an endangered species, that's too far, and ivory, I don't think we need that either. It's all just unneccessary shit. And shut up about the third world you idiot, they live in clay buildings.

The Dodo went extinct primarily due to the introduction of predators to a previously predatorless environment. I think the Passenger Pigeon is the victim you're looking for.

leper we all know that believing no animal kills for fun is for dreamy eyed animal lovers who think animals can do no wrong. I bet even old blibblob has seen a cat stalk and catch a bird and walk away during all those decades spent on grandpas farm.

I agree with Trav. We are animals, and we kill for fun all the time.

ya, just look at sadaam, he was an animal who killed for fun a lot, its funny how the liberals wanted to keep him in power to save iraqi lives, LOL, talk about twisted.

When critters kill, humans call it "instinct". A well fed kitty cat needs not to stalk & kill birds, but since it's a low intelligence critter, and a predator, we don't mind. We're certainly not going to convince a cat not to chase birds. Humans do the same thing, we call them mass-murderers, or at the very least "stalkers". Those types get special attention, and we park them in their own cages. Too bad we can't charge admission to view them ....

Yeah, humans aren't "predators" by nature.

humans are omnivours by nature, and we are not scavengers, because we dont have the proper chemistry to digest rotten meat, so it would be safe to assume we are hunters, or as you say, predators. Remember the term Hunters and Gatherers? We are only not predators by nature to the "good times rock and roll plastic bannana feel good crowd", I love that line.