A story idea ...

In Bart the General the last scene has Herman (has he been retired as a character?) and Grandpa writing an armistice styled after the WWI Treaty of Versailles for Bart and Nelson to sign. One of the points of the armistice was that Nelson would no longer raise his fists in anger and another point names him as a figurehead of the school playground. Obviously Nelson has used his fists in the role of the bully. So, is there a way to write a script that would parody current events by using Bart in the role of the US, Nelson in the role of Iraq and Milhouse in the role of the French (or somthing like that)?

Of course there is the problem that the characters never age so thusly hardly any time has elapsed since the armistice was signed. So there is a problem with timeline. So how would you work around that without a character looking at the audience with some comment about it?

What else would have to be done to make this work?

Obviously this is just for fun. The Simpson writers and staff are not allowed to read submitted scripts and whatnot. Even if they did read this, I don't think it's a great idea. Just something I thought of after watching Bart the General at the 10:30 airing on the local Fox station and thought I would throw out here to see if anyone had ideas …

Stefan

I find this american attitude very funny - do you guys really not realise that the bully going around threatening nonviolent countries with war is the US and the UK, not iraq? I mean seriously, Bart makes so much more of an iraq than nelson does.

JQM

Yes, Iraq is so very non-violent...

On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:13:28 -0500, Jason Saslow wrote:

He was obviously joking. Only someone with the intelligence of a gibbon and the moral sense of an Auschwitz guard could have meant that seriously.

It's always possible he was joking; however, I don't think there was anything particularly obvious about it given the context (spelling and grammar notwithstanding)...

I wasn't. America is merely throwing its weight around because it thinks it can. They go on about weapons found only a few years ago and asking where they are now, which begs the question - why wasn't action taken then? The answer is that there is no moral justification for this war, and i'm willing to bet a lot of money that anyone who says there is isn't actually prepared to die for it. It is an OFFENSIVE war, not a defensive one; Iraq has not threatened the countries attempting to make war with it. And then there's all the other tyrannical dictators that are being left alone, blah blah blah. Kindly note lack of personal insults, if you have an intelligent response i'm only too happy to read it but i won't reply to any stupid bouts of name-calling.

JQM

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

Really. Look at the 200,000 man army Iraq is putting in Canada.

(d'oh!)

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 04:48:05 GMT, "John Harlow" wrote:

See, and this is the reason you "anti-war" types are so unpopular.

Saddam Hussein has invaded Iran and Kuwait, has committed genocide against the Kurds within Iraq, has slaughtered thouands of Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims, and routinely tortures and murders political opponents and others. He has attempted to assassinate a former US President, operates terrorist training camps, gives shelter to terrorist leaders, and pays off the families of Palestinian suicide bombers who kill Jews. He has spent 12 years violating the terms of the cease-fire he agreed to when his troops were expelled from Kuwait. He has chemical and biological weapons and has a long history of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Personally, I think this monstrous tyrant should be removed from power *before* he acquires nuclear weapons, but if you believe that Saddam should remain in power, then feel free to make the case. Surely there is always a fairly respectable case to be made against going to war?

If instead, caught up in your lunatic fantasies of moral superiority, you offer up some snotty, pseudo-clever, pro-Saddam quip like the above, most people will treat you like the pig-ignorant, morally bankrupt filth you demonstrate yourself to be.

Mmm, no. We are becoming much more outspoken and popular.

This can be said about MANY leaders in other counrties. Remember duhbya's "Axis of evil"? (what a great international relations statement) What about them? We're gonna knock 'em all out to our pleasure? Perhaps; see below... BTW, what about OUR "weapons of mass destruction"? Can you say "hypocracy"?

Absolutely. We should not be the world police. However, that doesn't go along with you buddy duhbua's master plan: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Presidents_Real_Goal_Iraq.html

Your spewing of nonsensical derogatory statements regarding my morality is merely an excellent demonstration of your arrogance.

The Simpson’s is an American produced and distributed product that is intended to be consumed by Americans. However, like most American pop culture internal consumers begin to feed the production of the product. It’s kind of like our farmers crowning corn and wheat that is sole to Americans and also distributed to the rest of the world.

I’m sorry that you feel that America is being the aggressor. It is a role I really don’t feel comfortable with. We should not be the world’s police officer. Often through we have been asked to provide aid to other countries. We usually provide this aid and to be honest we expect a little something in return.

Since the days of WWII America has been in the position of being able to destroy the world in a contest we had with Soviet Russia. In the 80’s the Soviet threat ended due to a lack of financial resources. America won a cold war based on outspending the competition. Since the Berlin Wall fell America has greatly reduced spending on the military. This means a smaller army with fewer weapons. This included disarming a percentage of our nuclear arsenal (manning all those missal silos in Kansas and the Dakotas). America was able to convert the economy to a product/service-based structure (preparing for Y2K).

The Gulf War infringed on our desire to move away from a war based society. Luckily this conflict ended quickly and we were able to move on. If 9/11 never happened, most likely we wouldn’t be eyeballing the weapons that Iraq may or may not posses. Most likely we would turn our heads from the horrific acts that Hussian’s government commits on their own people like we do with most other countries that experience unrest with-in their own borders.

My original posting was for fun. Discuss how the writers can use a past episode to write a new episode based on current events. I wasn’t suggesting that Bart run around with an American flag or that Nelson is depicted with a bushy mustache and setting a shotgun off in the air or that Millhouse runs around with a loaf of French bread (notice I left out running around with a white flag). Maybe the writers could have some fun coming up with a solution for these characters to live by.

Yes Hussian has failed to meet the conditions of their surrender. We left him in power. We are now paying for this by having to be the aggressor. Terrorism won’t end because we stabilized Iraq. However, it is a very big stone that’ll be un-turned to protect lives.

By the way, what’s your solution?