| Author |
Message |
    
Alan Yim (Alan)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 10:48 pm: | 
|
Hi people. I'm not from the US but I did watch bits and pieces of Bush's State of the Union speach but I was wondering what you folks thought of it. I know there's a bit of a split in opinion in the US about what he's doing regarding the Iraq situation and some of his decisions on the domestic front but just wondering what everyone thought now after the speech.
Hope I'm not opening too big a can of worms. I'm just on the "outside" looking in and wondering. |
John Moore (Jmoore)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 11:00 pm: |
|
I thought it was a good speech. I liked what he said about fuel cell research, AIDs in Africa and that Colin Powel would present a case to the UN on Feb. 5th regarding Iraq.
-John |
paul londrigan (Neversummer)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 11:20 pm: |
|
The situation here is really not an easy one, one side people say war, the other say fix things here at home, and me a fence sitter. Now I would not be to happy to be blown to kingdom come tomorrow, or die from some poision in my water, but at the same tokken our economy sucks ass right now and it seems that every last little thing that Bush says always concerns Iraq. I obviously odn't have the answer but I'm pretty sure he doesn't either. It just seems that he is a little to trigger happy, and others in congress and the house seem to want to try and resolve things in a more peace orianted manner, which would be preferable to me as well. I don't know, the whole thing sucks, lastly history shows that when the market ends on a down note in January the trend usually progresses throughout the rest of the year, here we are jan 28 and the market did close up today, but there are only three days left here and I would hate to see the economy blow for the rest of the year, or at least a better part of it. |
Carter Simcoe (Carter)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:49 am: |
|
Well, I'm pretty much a fence sitter at this point as well but war tends to benefit the economy not hurt it. Not that I am in anyway saying we should go to war simply to pull ourselves out of this recession. |
Pugsly (Pugsly)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:58 am: |
|
I don't know, seems like a pretty good reason to start a battle...
I mean, Bush cannot stop now - gotta do something over in the Middle East. He just needs for it to be quick so we can all get over it and move on. |
Pugsly (Pugsly)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 01:00 am: |
|
btw, I was in the Middle East last time from the first casting call to final curtain... 7.5 months living in a tent in the middle of the desert. |
mantaray (Mantaray)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:35 am: |
|
the best part was the Senate Minority Leader laughing at him when he spoke about lowering taxes. truly the best part to me was the part about alternate energy. we really need to get serious about this for more reasons than just dependance on foriegn oil. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:58 am: |
|
Mantaray,
I don't think that is funny. Not one bit. That is the equivilant to Hillary Rodam Clinton talking and making jokes while the President was addressing the nation after 9/11. Democrats are so rude that they will bash the President not only on the Media, but during historical speeches like the State of the Union that aired last night. You know, if they hate the President so bad and think this country it going to shit, then maybe Clinton and Daschle should move to fucking Canada. But then again, I am sure the Canadiens wouldn't want them either; so maybe France is in order.
Americans should try to work together. Okay, I am now off to find more coffee. |
TPH (Snowman)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 08:42 am: |
|
I missed the Senate Minority Leader laughing. If this is true, it's very sad. The lives of U.S service personal are at stake, including possibly some of my friends. I did not vote for Bush Jr. but the day he was elected he received my respect and support because he is OUR leader.
Overall I thought the speech was pretty good. I do wish it could have contained the information that Colin P. will release on Feburary 5th.
I think we all know what's going to happen and it sucks. In ending, going it alone is a bad idea and will lead to more U.S. backlash worldwide. Hopefully a few more countries will join in after Feburary 5th.
S- |
adtoolco
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 08:53 am: |
|
George is a poker player and that was George going "all in".
-Chris |
Rans (Rans)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:10 am: |
|
I liked the speech. He addressed the issues I was concerned about, I like the tax proposals, I like the AIDS research money (do any other countries offer 1/10th of the world aid we do??), and I liked his reasoning on containing Saddam Hussien. I hate war. I protested the Vietnam war, but never at the expense of our boys that went there. I lost a few very dear friends and I was disgusted how we as a country treated our returning veterens. Still and all it was an unjust war and our government deserved to be protested.
I really sincerely hope we do not have to go to war with Iraq, if the postering works great, if they can negotiate a resolution then great, but if not, then we have to do what we have to do, and France and Germany can kiss my ass! Ungrateful assholes. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:38 am: |
|
I didn't watch it, but did hear the clip, "we can't trust Saddam Hussein's sanity" Something to that effect anyway. IMO opinion that is exactly what he is doing by attacking Iraq. I think Saddam is so nuts that he won't care about exile or saving his ass. He will go out in a blaze of "glory". Taking most of the mideast with him...via chaining, he takes out substabtial portions of the Israelie people, Isreal attacts Iraq. Kuwait, Saudia Arabia, Jordon et al attact Israel for attacking a fellow Arab nation...wouldn't be supprised is Pakistan doesn't become embroiled in it, which means there goes India. There are a lot of nukes and chmeical wheapons over there. Gee...do I sound like a pessimist? LOL
God do I hope I'm wrong. Talk about a downturn to the economy.... |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:17 am: |
|
I wasn't able to give the President's speech my full attention (Phx Coyotes hockey game in front of me and TV tuned to the speech behind me), but it seemed like the President made things very clear and simple so that even the lib dems could follow along. No surprises on terrorism/Iraq - sadam's governing body has consistently failed to comply with UN resolutions for 12 years, and now that leadership will be held accountable...with or without UN support. A US Military strike is completely up to sadam. Same as it was with Desert Storm. Don't know about you, but I respect a man and government that stands firm and defends it's populace. Even if the general population includes thankless, over-privileged and under-educated airheads like susan sarandon... I was, however, truly amazed when the President indicated that making tax cuts permanent was a priority, and all the dems just sat on their hands instead of clapping. What's the weather like in your world, you die-hard dems? Lot's of sunshine? Or lots of snow? |
charles pastrano (Charles)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:27 am: |
|
I just dont want to pay ten dollars a gallon. My Rover sucks on gas as it is. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:36 am: |
|
walking is free  |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:39 am: |
|
I don't think they can see in all the darkness of having their heads shoved up their asses Blue. Some people just don't get it and never will.
For every one that is against war.. How many more people have to die before we fix the problem? Nuke in a van in downtown NY city durring lunch time on a week day? Little plague let loose in LA? How about some small pox in the midwest? All of which are very possible. Drugs get into this country every day. You think that a nuke and a crazy idiot can't, all backed by a rich, powerful Iraq leader with the means and money to do it? How about a few nukes in key places. Or even a shit load of nerve gas let loose in every major city in the US at the same time. What are you going to tell people then if your the Pres? I didn't want to stop the people responsible cause you "The People" didn't want me to... That's crap... Every one would be dumping on him cause he didn't stop it. So he's trying to stop it from happening.. I don't see the problem. Yes, people die in war.. People die in peace time too. You think that this is just going to go away if we do nothing about it? |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:55 am: |
|
Greg, your first line is also a good decription of the folks who think taking out Iraq will put an end to terrorism. We could take out Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Israel, N. korea, China, well, on and on. In fact, we could take out the whole damn globe except us and there would not be an end to terrorism. As far as I know, Tim McVeigh was from the US. Abortion clinic bombers are from the US. The guy who set off the bomb at the Olympics, who's still at large, was from the US.
George Bush is being a simpleton when he says he is going to put an end to terrorism. It was true when he first spewed that bilge, and it's even more true today. In simple terms, taking out Iraq is going to create *more* terrorists. If we decide that that's ok, then go for it, but I don't want out elected officials lying to us (not that it's anything new) about how it's going to put a stop to terrorism. There are WAY too many people in the country who can't think and knno nothing of history who will think it's true. |
Yomtov
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:03 pm: |
|
Give the Pres a break ! No one could ever imagine the tragedy of 9/11 and all the hard times that followed. Who would have done a better job ! No one can tell. After the Florida ballot fiasco everyone thought Bush was a stumbling, bumbling fool from Texas who made it to the White House by luck ! To tell you the truth at this point in the state of the world I think President Bush is doing a credible job. What Democrat would have done better ?????? |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:07 pm: |
|
hey, you will never stop or put an end to terrorism, but, if you know some of the people that are doing it isn't it a wise idea to get rid of them? Hey, I got an idea, how about I come over and blow up your house killing your wife and kids while your at work and see if you get pissed off and want to kill me. You going to turn the other cheek and walk away hoping that I don't go over to your brother's or sister's house and kill them too. Some how I don't think that you would.. We made them, they turned on us, we know who they are, we know people that are supporting them, we are going after those people. I don't see the problem. It won't make world peace but, it very well could save many more lives then it cost. But, hey, if you want to just deal with every thing that happens to you and do nothing about it then more power to you. But, I don't want to hear you bitching about it when you don't like it or things don't go your way. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:10 pm: |
|
Well that's a good question. Al Gore invented the internet, so I am sure he would have saved the planet from all wrong doers.
 |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Paul, it looks like SBC Communications invented the menu in 1996, so they want royalties from all businesses that use menus on their websites now.
i wish there was a law that would revoke the business license from anyone attemting to claim rights for something that existed long before.
peter |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:29 pm: |
|
Yeah that is funny. I remember Prodigy when I was still using a Commodore in the '80s. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Who said anything about a democrat? There is a core of democrats and republicans who have a bit or moral integrity, the rest are mere chaff, on both sides of the aisle.
Eric....you missed my point. I said, whatever you decide to do, be honest about it. Don't lie to us and say taking out Iraq (or anyone else) will stop terrorism. As for Iraq specifically, I've seen no evidence that Iraq has attacked the US. From what I hear in fact, Saddam doesn't even like the Bin Laden and his ilk.
As for your analogy, it would be more accurate, from what I've seen, to say you are sitting in your house, loaded for bear, threating to blow up my house, and cheering on those who have tried. Is it right for me to then come over and blast you? Unless things have changed alot, here in the US, it is not ok to do that. Which goes back to my point from some other thread, it is not our role as the US to be the world's police force.
It reminds me of Gandalf talking to Frodo, in The Lord of the Rings. (paraphrased) "Yes, I could take the ring. I would take it and use it's power to do good. My deeds would come from my desire to help others. But no! The power would soon corrupt even I, and I would want to rule. I would become the new Dark Lord"
Also, it doesn't come down to right or wrong, but whether or not we can get away with it. During the cold war, there was the fear, perhaps real, that the USSR would attack us. There were those nut cases who wanted to laucnh a premeptive strike to take them out, but most knew we would get devastated as well. So we didn't. I suspect that now terrorists are gettting as much aid (as many weapons) from Russia and former Soviet bloc nations as they are from Iraq. Why don't we attack them too? Well, one reason, many of them aren't Muslim countries, but mainly because we couldn't get away with it amongst the western nations. We can get away with a prememptive strike against Iraq. But not with the Arab countries I don't think.
It all comes down to, quick fucking lying to me about the reasons. At least have the guts to be honest about it (not you, the politicians). If Bush and his pals REALLY and truely believe what they are saying is the truth, this country is in far more danger than I think. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 12:56 pm: |
|
Tom,
unfortunately, both U.S. and former S.U. not only sold arms to third world, but also the technology. So, while I belive Russia doesn't do much of arms trade with Iraq right now, there's a lot left from the days past. China, North Korea, just about anyone who ever traded with Russia in the past, are cranking out the clones of everything from Kalashnikovs to SCUD launchers. I believe a lot of weapons in Iraq's posession now came from the U.S. during the Iran-Iraq conflict. Same thing happened in Afghanistan.
peter |
Greg P. (Gparrish)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 01:00 pm: |
|
Yeah, and Xerox or someone invented the mouse and the Graphical User Interface, but if they were dumb enough to be so short sighted as to give them to Steve Job's, then what do you expect when Apple makes money on the idea. Of course, Apple fell prey to the same disease by letting Microsoft inside.............................
Lot's of short sightedness in this world. I'm just waiting on the "save a nickel on gas" speeches to start. I don't think people really realize the short sightedness in sticking your head in the sand and hoping problems go away.
Good God, if Gore had won we would probably be shipping Iraq weapons right now because they are underpriviledged and down trodden. We wouldn't want to wage an unfair war against them. I mean, that would not be very fair..................... Although, I'm sure Al would have just bombed them with some new Internet code he could whip out of his "Internet Creation Files" in the sacred safe of false claims made by bumbling politians.
Isolationism doesn't work. WE'VE TRIED IT.
Maybe we should ask Iraq for the secret map to where everything is hidden. If we send them subsidies and welfare I'm sure they would be cooperative. Think of the last time we stuck our heads in the sand and ignored what a crazy person in another part of the world was doing................................ Hmmmmmm, I wonder. Both have a black mustach, both kill their own countrymen, and both are/were dangerous men. We took care of one, atlthough it was a little late for millions of Jewish people. Now, we are looking at a situation where we need to protect "American Citizens", of all religions, races, backgrounds. Even the nut cases that blow up buildings or mass murder people will be priviledged to be included in this protection because they live in America.
Anyone that doesn't think we already have operatives in Iraq is short sighted. Anyone that can't see the potential of what Sadam and Iraq under his control can do, is short sighted. Anyone that doesn't think he will continue to be a thorn in the side of the world, is short sighted.
The UN will take years and years to find the evidence necessary to convince themselves. The problem with this is that it gives Sadam free reign to continue on his path during that time. Every day that passes is a day that he gains strength and the ability to harm. Imagine sending 100 men to California to find a stock pile of illegal items. I mean, we have thousands of men there now and they can't stop or control the movement of drugs, illegal militia hardware, gun trafficing, etc. Why do we think 100 UN employees can do the same in an uncooperative foreign country.
It sure seems like history is a selective memory for some people and groups. Peace and security are gained through military action. Peace is prolonged through diplomacy. |
Jake Hartley (Jake)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 01:23 pm: |
|
Tom:
You idiot. If you don't think that Saddam is a threat to this country, you must have spent the last ten years with your head up Scott Ritter's ass. President Bush is combating terror, a step at a time. Will terror be eradicated overnight? No, but each asshole who is x'd out by US Forces is one less potential murderer of an American. Will the war on terror take us to other countries in south west Asia? You bet, unless they learn to straighten out from the ass-kicking we are about to unleash on Iraq. To sit and do nothing while our country, our familes, wifes and children and all others are at danger is the supreme act of cowardice. We are a free people, when someone threatens our freedom, we react standing up and solve that threat. The day when our country quits doing that is the day we should collectively drop our pants and bend over, because every anti-American asshole in the world is coming after us.
I have been to other parts of the world and seen how they live and what it is like not to be free, and I would rather die than live like that. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 01:33 pm: |
|
Tom, that's the thing, you and I don't know if Saddam is funding them or not. Just cause someone somewhere says he doesn't like them doesn't really mean anything. However, if Bush has people spying on them and seeing that they are then that is what he is going to go with. I'm sure he isn't going to go running out and bomb Saddam just cause Bush doesn't like the color of the guys hat. Bush, has given the reasons, the guy is building arms of mass destruction and has a past of using those weapons and it's also not like he ran out and helped us find Bin and friends even if he doesn't have anything to do with them. He isn't even co-operating with the UN inspectors. What would you do? Sit around and not care what goes on in the world around you? What do you think would happen if the US didn't go fight Hitler? You think Hitler would have stopped after he had control of all Europe? Hell, no. He would have been coming after us too. Hey, you got your opinion and I got mine. I want to see the fucker die before he kills me or hundreds/thousands/millions of others and I'm not just talking about americans either. |
TPH (Snowman)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 01:59 pm: |
|
I've heard that Saddam would be allowed to go to another country if his power base is toppled in Iraq? That's nuts, he needs to be hunted down like the rabid dog he is and shot. It seems so clear to me I can't imagine another option. By the way this is a great thread. It's a perfect example of the freedom we have here in the USA. All these opinions offered publicly and we still keep our hands and heads, unlike Iraq!
S- |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 02:38 pm: |
|
Eric...well, maybe I believe Bush has evidence, maybe I don't. But his statement "Saddam tried to kill my daddy" doesn't help me to believe it's not a persaonl vendetta, and he's gonna use young men and women from our armed forces to extract that revenge.
Comparing one nut case (Saddam) to another (Hitler) isn't apples to apples. Hitler had invaded a number of other countries. Do I think it was right to oppose Hitler, absolutely! Would it have been right to invade Germany in 1937? No.
Was it right to go to the Gulf in 91, yes. HOWEVER, it was NOT right to tell Iraq, as they were massing on the border of Kuwait obviously prepared to strike, that is was not our business and we were going to stay out of it. Nor was it right to tell the american people it was about freedom, democracy and all the other BS.
If Iraq attacts another country, yes, crush them. But I can't accept, and least not so far, a premptive attack on another nation. Just as I think it was wrong for the US to provide WMD to Iraq to help his war with Iran, who Iraq had attacked.
Snowman. I was hearing that this morning as well. However, I don't think Saddam is sane enough to accept that. He is going to, I'm sure, drag as much of the mid-east down with him as he can.
I'd like to see the US have the balls and moral integrity to offer assistance to ANY country that is attacked by another. Or else be isolationist. BTW, I think isolationism is wrong.
Jake, if *you're* waiting for a reply, I don't reply to people who resort to personal insults. |
Greg Davis (Gregdavis)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 03:01 pm: |
|
Tom, I'm just curious. At what point do you think an attack on Iraq would be justified? Just trying to see things from another's perspective. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 03:34 pm: |
|
Um, hasn't Iraq been pushing all of it's neighbors around for decades causing other countries to help keep that from happening? I will put Saddam and Hitler together. Only difference is that Saddam hasn't started yet. Hitler didn't just do every thing in one night. Saddam is like a baby Hitler waiting for everyone to turn their head so he can strike when they aren't looking. So in my opinion Hitler and Saddam are apples to apples..
What do you want Tom? You want Iraq to nuke us before we do anything? Or for them to nuke Iran, Kuwait, or how about he nukes Russia and makes it look like we did it? I for one don't want to be the poor fuck pulling the handle for my pack of Marlboro's on the cig machine bomb in drag (if you saw "Sum of all fears") I don't know you, and don't agree with your view on this but, I wouldn't want to see you or your family die cause we didn't feel like getting involved. As for the "Saddam tried to kill my daddy" comment. He did, and I'm sure that was used in context along with many other reasons all at the same time but, as ussual the press only heard that one phrase. Either way, the guy is killing his own people, launched missles at all of his neighbors, and trying to get his hands on long range nukes so that he can drop them on everyone else. Would you nuke your next door neighbor knowing that you would get the fallout? So why would you not think that he would use those a little farther away. I would like to see other countries beside us have the balls to help out anyone the way that we have helped them. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:13 pm: |
|
Greg, to be honest, I don't know. I guess, maybe, some incotrivertable evidence from some country other than the US. We have been lied to for so long, to such a degree that I have very little faith in the veracity of anything that comes out of washington.
You've no idea how it depresses me to say that. Someday, someway I hope the country (and the people) turns around and becomes less self interested. That's what keeps the politicians lying to us. From day one of being in office, all they care about is being re-elected, or at least it factors into their every decision. But on the other hand I'm opposed to term limits. I believe we get who we deserve.
I DO know that if Iraq attacked another country, then we could have another coalition as in 91. Then it would be justified. If Iraq attacked us, then it would be justified, coalition or not. Short of that, I don't know.
Part of me feels like we did alot to make Saddam (and others) hate us. That we're gonna have to learn our lesson, hope he doesn't do anything, but deal with him if he does. It's harsh, but if I came to your house and kept yelling at you and poking you in your chest, I'd expect you'd take a "poke" at me. If I then went home, and a few days later you came over and started shooting at me, I reckon I'd be justified in shooting back, even though I'd started it days before.
Given what I've read and heard, or not read and heard, if I felt we were going to REALLY stop messing in countries' internal affairs and antagonizing them, then I might accept a premptive strike. You know, "ok, we've really screwed the pooch on this, but we are going prevent further damage by taking this on now. And hence forth, we are going to be a role model"
How's that for a non-answer. I sure as hell don't have the answers.
Eric, yes, they are/were both nutcases, but the situation isn't apples to apples. Saddam hasn't invaded anyone, as far as I know. And as far as launching missles, yes, in the Gulf war he did, on Saudia Arabia because we were based there, that's to be expected, and a normal response, even we would do that. On Israel in the hopes that it would draw them out and cause a complete breakdown in the Coalition, which it almost did. Don't forget that Kuwait was more than readt to attack Israel if they responded to Iraq's attacks. There, Saddam failed miserably. He won't fail there again, at least not according to Isreal. I haven't heard of him launching any since then.
So I have a question for those who are prepared to premetively strike Iraq. Assuming Saddam is insane, assuming he won't accept exile, and assuming Israel keeps their word (they pretty much do as far as I've seen). How much destruction in the middle east are you prepared to accept in order to oust Saddam. Iraq will, I'm sure, be a wasteland, but how many other countries, and which one's, are you willing to sacrafice?
On a side note, I have no faith that the US won't try to set up a puppet in Saddam's place. And on all of this, I truely hope I am proven completley wrong. except for the fact it will probably be license for us to keep on as we have in the past. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:31 pm: |
|
Iraq may not become a waste land. The only thing that you need to do to oust Saddam is find him and kill him. Not very easy to do, but, it can be done. However, if other countries are going to stand up and fight us to protect him then they will have to face the same fate. In answer to your question as many as it takes to get the job done. I think we should bomb France too just for the hell of it but, that's just me. Or maybe a 747 flown into that tower of theirs that they like so much. Bet they'd be real pissed then. However, I don't think that many other countries will stand up for Iraq if we start pounding them. The middle east has always been Iraq messing with Iran and Iran messing with Iraq. It's been that way for as long as I can remember. That's that areas history. They've been going at each other like that way before the gulf war. Saddam is a baby Hitler. The only difference is countries like us are stopping him before he gets enough power to really do anything full scale. That whole region has done nothing in the past but beat up on each other. And now he is harboring people that want to scare and hurt other countries as well. |
charles pastrano (Charles)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:40 pm: |
|
This conflict is about many things oil, terrorism, power, control, etc. Bush has a mindset "Why wait for the rattlesnake to bite again". In way he is right. Imagine another World Trade Center attack or imagine paying $10.00 or more for a gallon of gas. This man has got to be stopped. The question is at what cost? There needs to be some backing from the U.N. as whole. Money, troops, weapons, aide everybody needs to contribute a share. I am not saying a unanimous backing, but some backup would be needed. As big and as bad we are we shouldnt do it alone. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:42 pm: |
|
Eric,
my mother told me once that as a little girl she saw Stalin's cortege driven down some rural highway in Soviet Georgia. 12 identical black cars, with a Stalin sitting in every one of them. Something tells me that hunting Saddam down will be much like hunting down Bin Laden - he'll disappear and reappear, and you'll never know if that's him or not.
btw, i have a feeling that french wouldn't mind something big flown into that tower they might as well consider selling the whole thing to Las Vegas.
peter |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:46 pm: |
|
Actually Peter, Saddam uses look-a-likes all the time. Thus, why I said it would not be easy to do. But, if we started killing all of his look-a-likes we'd get him at some point. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:46 pm: |
|
At what point do you think an attack on Iraq would be justified?
Quote:I guess, maybe, some incotrivertable evidence from some country other than the US. We have been lied to for so long, to such a degree that I have very little faith in the veracity of anything that comes out of washington.
You've no idea how it depresses me to say that. Someday, someway I hope the country (and the people) turns around and becomes less self interested.
You trust another country more than your own? Unbelievable... Why are you still here? You're certainly here by your own free will. Maybe the good parts are too good to give up? But wouldn't that be a bit hypocritical? Man, that's a tight spot to be in. How do you do it?
Quote:I DO know that if Iraq attacked another country, then we could have another coalition as in 91. Then it would be justified. If Iraq attacked us, then it would be justified, coalition or not. Short of that, I don't know.
I shudder every time I hear this. Wear your blinders, wait for the attack, then respond. Try as I might, I simply cannot comprehend this method of thinking. Tom, what do you think of that susan sarandon ad? Doesn't she say something like, "I need to know what Iraq has done to me?" I wonder what Hitler did to her? What did osama bin laden do to her? Was she directly affected by 9/11? Who's "self interested" in this situation?
Quote:So I have a question for those who are prepared to premetively strike Iraq. Assuming Saddam is insane, assuming he won't accept exile, and assuming Israel keeps their word (they pretty much do as far as I've seen). How much destruction in the middle east are you prepared to accept in order to oust Saddam. Iraq will, I'm sure, be a wasteland, but how many other countries, and which one's, are you willing to sacrafice?
Whatever it takes, Tom. But then again I'm just one of the "self interested" people who depresses you. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 04:57 pm: |
|
and Tom, whether or not Iraq is turned on it's head by the US or the UN is up to sadam. The ball's in his court - has been for 12 years - we're only mandating that he do something with that ball. |
Jake Hartley (Jake)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 05:49 pm: |
|
Tom:
don't usually hurl insults, but your postings were infuriating. I lost friends on 9/11. The last General I worked for,LTG Timothy Maude, was incinerated in the attack on the Pentagon. I ate dinner at his house, I knew his family. There is plenty of evidence that Iraq is tied to Al-Queda and UBL, even if he wasn't he has pushed his own brand or terror on the world for years. I just can't understand guys like you who can't see the forest for the trees. A war on terror will take on many shapesand involve many countries and organizations. It is best to let the grown-ups do their work and support your country.
lets not forget these famous lines
" If you don't love it, leave it; let this advice be a warning. When you are putting down my country, you're walking on the fighting side of me"
Merle Haggard |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 06:06 pm: |
|
Jake, I'd like to buy you a beer. Ever get down into Scottsdale? |
mantaray (Mantaray)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 06:19 pm: |
|
Paul - if you had seen i followed by "truly the best part..." it is sad that she was laughing, but i do find comedy in it. maybe it's because i have to work with a guy that is a militant republican and blindly follows the party, no questions asked. to him democrats = stupid (and this is just the tip of his ignorance). so to me, something that would show him that his party is not this perfect ordered thing appeals to me. i'm an independant, i will vote for the candidate that i think is best for the job. Bush is not that man (and no i don't think Gore would've been either). i'm just glad he has a competent cabinet. but that's all from me on this subject. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 06:56 pm: |
|
Manta,
You are so correct about voting for the best man for the job. Some years it really sucks that the choices aren't so good. Personally, for the last Presidental election, I was all for Mr. McCain, but that just didn't happen.
Jake,
In regards to US troops stationed overseas, what do you think the outcome would be if we pulled out of Germany, Japan, and Korea? Also, what if we just said NO when other countries of the World asked for help or become overrun by the likes of Saddam or Milosovich (sp).
I was in the Phillipines when all of those American soldiers were getting shot. We were not allowed off base for Liberty, but I was flying in missions to Manila almost daily. Shortly after my squadron returned to CONUS, our (US) lease with Subic Bay and Clark AFB was not allowed to be extended. Then one year later, a big ass Volcano blows up and all of a sudden it's okay for the Americans to be there again. See where I am going with this.....
I guess I just don't understand where the world leadership is heading these days......... |
Jake Hartley (Jake)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:21 pm: |
|
Blue:
I have never been to Scottsdale, but I want to. my sister lives around Winslow, on the Hopi Nation Lands. Her hubby works for the National Health Service. I might get down there this summer, if the offer for the beer is still good, I would love to take you up on it.
Paul:
I would not mind seeing us leave Germany and to a lesser extent, Japan. No real need in Europe for a forward based force to fight the USSR coming through the Fulda Gap. The Germans don't want us there, and there are not as many of us there as there used to be. Hungary would be a welcome place, or Poland if we need a small contingent outside of CONUS. Japan, I think that it is a good thing to have our forward naval forces there, but it would most likely be as stategically located somewhere else (Australia?), (back to the PI?) As far as Korea goes, I am afraid that right now the threat of US reprisals from an NKPA attack is all that keeps them from rolling across the border into downtown Seoul. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:28 pm: |
|
Ok, time for a history lesson on Iraq leading up to the Gulf War because all this talk of Hitleresque aggression really needs to be put into perspective especially for many of you who hadn't even emerged from puberty by 1990. This is going to be a long post but please bare with me and read this post before beginning directing your flame war on me. And I offer up this qualifier: I am in no way a supporter of Saddam Hussein and in fact would be throughly pleased to see him removed from the world stage. He is an evil despot who has been cruel to is people and his enemies but he is not crazy and he does not act without a high degree of polittcal cunning.
First, prior to initiation of the Iran/Iraq war, Iraq had a triving, westernied culture. In fact, n the 1970's Iraq had one of the lowest inft ortality rates in the Middle East. It also had one of the highest literacy rates and education and medical care were among the best in the region.
With the fall of the Shah of Iran, our principle ally in the region and the invasion of Afghanistan but the USSR a wave of Islamic Fundamentalism was engulfing the entire region. Iraq, with no access to a port for shipping its oil, had been in conflict with Iran for some time over the region from Basra extending down to the Gulf. Finally,in September of 1980, with the support of the West and most of the Arab states, Iraq launched an attack against Iran aimed at securing axcess to the Gulf and, hopefully, undermining the entire Fundamentalist Revolution that had not only consumed Iran but threatened every other Muslim state.
During the next eight years the two ocountries engage in a War along the line of WWI with brutal combat over the same turf resulting in upwards to one million casualties. Initially, it appeared as though Iraq might achieve at least its goal of axcess to the Gulf. But, even with the assassination of the Iranian President in 1981, the likelyhood of reversing the Fundamentalist Revolution was nonexistant
It is during this war that Iraq, with a sorely outnumbered army, employs several types of chemical weapons against overwhelmiing numbers of invading Iranians. At the time, the west was remarkably mute about the use of these weapons. Now, I'm not trying to be coy but we know that much of this arsenal and the technology for using these WMD came from the US and other western nations. We know it to be a fact that our currrent Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfield in fact visited with the Iraqi leader on more than one occasion during this period of time. We also know that operatives from the CIA were training Iraqi military in the use of these WMD.
However, it is not my desire, at this point to beleager this issue of who provided what to whom.
When peace was finally reached in the war the Iraqi economy was in shambles. Eight years of war had reduced a country that had assests in excess of $35 billion to a debtor nation, in the hole for approximately $85 billion. To add to the shakiness of the economy and the misery of poverty for it's people, Iraq had a standing army that, at the time, was said to be the fourth largest in the world.
At the end of the war Hussein, as he had done during the war, called upon the oil rich Arab states that he had been protecting from Fundamentalism to help his nation get back on its feet. He called on Kuwait especially to help by doing two things. Absolve him of his debt to the Emirs of Kuwait and, most importantly, stop exceeding the quota for oil production agreed to by OPEC so that Iraq might actually earn some revenue from its reserves.
Kuwait was not the ony Arab country exceeding its quota in oil production. The Arab Emirates were also over pumping. This was only serving to depress the value of oil to the point where Iraq was unable to really make a dent in its debt. The condition was exacerbated by the fact that Kuwait had built side drilling wells along its border with Iraq in the area around Rumalah a major oil producing region on the other side of the border.
Iraq took their claim to OPEC and beseeched the Emirs to rein in Kuwaiti oil production which had caused prices to plummet worldwide. Most of the Arab nations turned their back on Iraq so they turned to the west for help. None was to be found and all the while things were getting worse on the homefront.
Having a military force as large as Iraq's with no way of paying them or keeping them occupied, Hussein quickly realized that he had to do something. In an effort to whip up nationalist fervor and to strike a little fear in the Kuwaiti's, Hussein began amassing large numbers of troops on the border. Naturally, tensions where heightened and by July it appeared as though an invasion was imminent.
In one last attempt to get the US to broker a deal between Iraq and Kuwait, Hussein called for a meeting with the US Ambassador to his country, April Glaspie. It was at this, most important meeting between senior officials of the two countries that Ambassador Glaspie relayed the US position. In so many words, she said that the US would not get involved in inter Arab conflicts. Within days, Iraq had occupied Kuwait.
I want to interject a question here. I wonder what Iraq did between the end of the war with Iran when it clearly was a most favored nation and the onset of the Kuwaiti invasion to alienate the US and make it unwilling to even negotiate help with its ailing econmomy after eight devastating years of brutal conflict? |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:29 pm: |
|
Good Point about Korea. I guess 37,000 troops along the DMZ is a bit of a deterrent. But then again, China is enjoying the economic benefits of doing business with the US. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:41 pm: |
|
Paul, I couldn't help but notice that you said Gore claimed to have invented the internet. I have to do a check to find the name of the reporter but in fact, that was a misquote. In fact, what he claimed was that much of the legislation that he and the commitee he had been invilved with in the Senate in the '80's had laid the groundwork for the internet. Give me awhile and I'll come up with the reporter's name.
Greg, you made a comment along the lines that if a Democrat were President he would probably be selling Iraq weapons right now. Well, because of the interuption of oil from Venezuela, we have upped our levels of Iraqi oil from 500,000 barrels a day to one million. Instead of guns, we're just sendinghim boat loads of cash.
Eric, if you read my post above you would have seen that during the '80's Iraq was playing the roll of Policeman in the Middle East, doing what it could to prevent and maybe even reverse the Islamic Revolution that had swept the Shah (our previous policeman) out of power in Iran. When the Shah fell to the Ayatollah it sent a chill through most of the regimes in the Middle East. During the eight years of war between the two countries hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died and billions of dollars in loans and gifts were given by the Arab states as well as the west so that they could continue the war. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:44 pm: |
|
Howdy Mr. Grant,
The quote about Gore and the interent was a joke. I chalk that up with Quayles spelling antics.
Interesting point though about Venezuela and Iraq in regards to oil. Venezuela's general strike has put a strain on the world's oil supply, therefore we are not the only ones affected. Isn't Carter down there right now trying to fix things up? |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 08:02 pm: |
|
Paul I did a quick google search and found this peice which addresses a number of misquotes.
http://www.perkel.com/politics/gore/internet.htm
BTW, I want you to know that I didn't vote for Gore and I am note trying to start a Gore/Bush debate, I'm only looking to set the record straight.
Cheers. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 08:15 pm: |
|
Paul, last I heard, he was trying to broker a deal involving new elections. What with the likes of Otto Reich as Deputy Secretary of State for Latin America, I have visions of the assasination of Salvatore Allende dancing before my eyes. Yikes! I better get some rest!!!!
You know, I went to lengths to find documentation of the misquote because too many people never get to see the retractions or corrections when the media makes a mistake. Before long, misinformation become fact and that, to me, is very frightening.
I think that most of the people here are pretty sane, passionate people who hold their beliefs very close to their hearts and that is a good thing. For the most part, discussions like the ones we have been having these past few days are important because if we should come away with just a bit of new information, an undiscovered fact, a different spin on what we thought was settled, then we're all the better for it.
Gotta go now. |
charles pastrano (Charles)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:19 pm: |
|
That was an excellent post Paul. |
Dan
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:35 pm: |
|
Paul
I totally agree with you, why risk a war on a theatrical threat. I mean Sadam may or may not attack us, so let’s error on the side of caution. He’s no worse than UBL, he threatened to kill American’s for years, but Clinton did the right thing and waited for him to actually do something. So ok, 2500+ people died, but at least we didn’t do something rash. |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 11:50 pm: |
|
Paul Grant,
What do you think President Bush should do? |
Dean Chrismon (Chrismonda)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:11 am: |
|
Who ever said that the Quran is for peace is full of shit. It in a round of bout way states that Christianity is not the correct way to go. I am tired of these left wing socialist assholes saying that we should cater to these assbrains. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 06:23 am: |
|
Dan,
"So ok, 2500+ people died, but at least we didn’t do something rash." Wow! What a comment! In my opionion, if 1 person dies from a foreign threat, the whole country is affected. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 07:50 am: |
|
Good morning Paul, I think Dan was employing that brilliant, sarcastic wit of his when he made his post about not acting too rash.
Dean, I'm happy to see another Middle Eastern scholar offering his insightful opinions into the mix. Frankly, I think a thorough analysis of the Islamic faith had been missing until your post.
BW, I will post a lengthy reply to your question when I have more time, either today or tomorrow but in the meantime, if you give my posts here and on other recent threads a cursory glance I think you'll get an idea of what my position is. |
Landy
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 09:35 am: |
|
Another article to fuel the argumentation
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2003/0203/cover/story.html?cnn=yes
As for Eric N, I do not think that bombing France anymore than it already has in the past 80 years will further the position of the US administration and the freedom of speech... |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 10:38 am: |
|
That's a great article. It cuts right to the principle reasons why "old Europe" is so against a US war with Iraq. I caught that link earlier this morning on one of those commie/pinko/fag sites I so regularly frequent! Here's another compelling op.ed. peice from that liberal rag out of New York. I hope the link works.
http:/www.nytimes.com/2003/01/30/opinion/30SAID.html?th. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 11:20 am: |
|
Landy, either do I, I just don't like French people and French Canadian's even less.
Paul G, my point was that they have been fighting each other already.. I personally don't care if Saddam started it or finished it. Point is the guy has people that killed americans on his turf and is doing nothing to help find them, and is building bombs that he shouldn't be building and hidding them and has used them on people in the past. His time has come.
You guys would really love my view on what to do to fix the AIDS issue in Africa then. Or even the world. Line them all up and kill them, then burn the bodies. Force every one to take mandatory blood tests weekly and instead of handing out medicine hand out condoms. If someone test positive for HIV/AIDS or anything that is directly linked to it. Kill them on the spot. Isn't it a great thing that I don't rule a country? |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 11:36 am: |
|
BW, here is what I think George Bush should do.
It is and always has been my conviction that the real source for terror is not in Iraq but rather in the conflict taking place over Israel's occupation of the West Bank. It is here that our administration needs to focus its powers of persuation first and foremost.
As it stands now, our total support for Sharon casts a long and dark shadow over anything we do in the Middle East regardless of how honorable or intentions may be. For the youth in Nablus, Gaza or Bethlehem the helicoptors they run from, the bulldozers that tear down their businesses and the missles that blow up their homes all have "Made in America" written all over them. We are percieved as partners in these aggressions taken out against civilians.
NOW BEFORE YOU START FLAMING ME OVER SUICIDE BOMBERS UNDERSTAND THAT IN NO WAY AM I IMPLYING THAT SUCH BEHAVIOR IS IN ANYWAY ACCEPTABLE.
Actions such as what we've seen with children strapping bombs to their bodies and walking into crowded public places are reprehensible and need to be stopped immediately. But have we seen any success at all with the actions the hardline Sharon has opted for? More Israelis have died during this Intafada than in all armed conflicts since 1948!
What has gone on in Israel should also serve as a model for how we should not proceed in the Middle East. By taking such strident approaches, the Sharon administration has actually increased the level of terrorism perpetrated against his people. For every lowly Hamas soldier killed in a 'preemptive' strike another ten children step up to answer the call against US backed Israeli aggression. The West Bank is a breeding ground for terror from ALL sides.
Again, the US needs to commit every ounce of strength it has to bring about a peaceful, fair settlement to the Palestinian question and I'd like to stress that little awareness of the regions history would go a long way towards assuaging fears on both sides.
Now, as far as Iraq is concerned, all we hear about, should we go to war, are the neat little scenarios that invision the military rising up in support of our actions, people flocking to embrace us as liberators, ect. We seldom hear about other possibilities such as a complete breakdown of what little order is left in Iraq, plunging the country into civil war with bloody results. How many of you remember the events after the first Gulf War when George Bush Sr. called upon the Sh'ia and Kurds to rise up and overthrow Hussein. A bloodbath followed, especially in the south where Sunni's were slaughtered by Shiites who then were butchered by Hussein when Coalition Forces did nothing to intervene. We could see a disintegration of the country into violence akin to Afghanistan after the Russians left. Do we really want to commit 100,000 of our brave soldiers in such a risky no win situation?
Furthermore, even if we invade and things turn out as well as we've hoped, how long do we intend on occuping Iraq? Until the first democratic elections? What is a Sh'ia fundamentalist wins a popular democratic election? It is a possiblity. Do we invoke a second regime change until we get something like what we have in Afghanistan with Karzai, an ex-official of Unocal Oil, running the show?
Basically, I'd like to throw a question back to you BW. At what point would you feel that we are sufficiently safe from terrorism. How far along are you willing to take this continuing war. Surely you don't believe that the instant we remove Sadam Hussein from power our worries are over do you? Then where to next?
What I find frightening about that last question, 'where to next?' is that I really don't think the average American has really thought to deeply aboutwhat all this means and where it all leads to.
Let's just offer up the hypothetical possibilty that fundamentalist overthrow the Mushareef government in Pakistan. Suddenly, you have a group of clerics in power who not only have DIRECT ties with Al Qaeda but the have know nuclear weapons!!! What do we do, nuke them first?
What about the effect that a fundamentalist uprising might have on some of our other allies in the region such as Saudi Arabia. No one thought in 1977 of 1978 that our greatest ally, the Shah, would fall to fundamentalist insurgencybut look what happened there.
BW, we need to have a sense of history for the region. We need to try to develop an understanding of these people and their cultures so that we don't come off like Dean who in his post above calls Muslims "assbrains." Above all, we need to NOT commit ourselves to a war that has such tenuous backing from the West let alone the Middle East.
Another point that I want to make with regard to the continuing war on terrorism is how do we pay for these costly forays. From a financial point of view we are in no position to move from battle to battle, war to war. Our economy is in shambles right now and I have no interest in pointing fingers or assigning blame I am simply stating a fact. Our local and state governments are facing deficits heretofore unseen. Several states are talking about early release for non-violent criminals. Connecticut has laid off 2500 workers and will announce another 1000 in February. Most of these workers provided much neded services to the sick, the poor and children.
We have to think about what kind of country, what kind of people we run the risk of becoming as we continue to drain the coffers to fight a never ending war on terrorism. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 11:45 am: |
|
Blue..."You trust another country more than your own? Unbelievable"
Read my whole post. We have been consistently lied to by our government. Add that up with the fact that we are pretty much the only country in the world that is hot to trot on attacking Iraq. If your president keeps telling you 2+2 is 5, and every other leader in the world says it's 4, who do you believe?
"Why are you still here?" I was wondering when someone was gonna start the "love it or leave it" crap.
I, for one, happen to think this country is great enough, and strong enough to take *any* critical comments from it's citizens. I know many people in the US think we are weak, and everyone who doesn't go along with the masses should sit down and shut up, but I can think for myself, and expect the same from others.
I don't know anything about a Susan Sarandon ad. I don't watch TV ad's becuase they are about 99.9% pure crap, ALL if them. It's not worth wading through the crap to get to that .1%
"Doesn't she say something like, "I need to know what Iraq has done to me?" "
Beats me, but if you read "me" to mean the US, I'd have to agree. So far, I haven't seen any evidence for what Iraq has done to the US. "supporting terroists" isn't enough in my book. At least not until I see consistent evidence that the US is no longer supporting terrorists.
"I wonder what Hitler did to her?"
Actually, I don't think she was alive in the 1930's. In any case, Germany was sinking US ships before we entered the war, if I remember correctly. It was wrong of the US to sit on the sides at that point. Or even when Germany began attacking other countries. And I'd have to say that we should have told him to stop gassing people, in no uncertain terms.
"Whatever it takes"
So you'd be fine if the scenario I descrivbed before takes place? Iraq, Kuwait, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Pakaistan, India are all devasted in war, and massive terrorist attacks occur in western nations, as long as Saddam is removed? Interesting outlook on our role in the world.
Jake.."don't usually hurl insults, but your postings were infuriating."
I'm sure. Just as I'm adamantly opposed to the death penalty, but if someone harmed my family or a friend, I'd do my best to hunt them down and kill them very slowly. I would be very cold blooded about making sure they suffered long. That's why we have police, so, supposedly, cooler heads will prevail. Our leaders should have cooler heads. They should be methodical, not make comments like "he tried to kill my daddy" (that was totally out of place). Not try to whip the populace up in a fit of rage. They should be honest, careful, straight forward. So far, I haven't seen evidence of that. And I *am* sorry for your loss.
But I'd also be angry at the intelligence people who were handed over two men from the Phillipines (I think) three years ago who had in their posseion documents describing plans to hijack airliners and fly them into the WTC towers.
Paul Grant. Good post about Iraq. I actually don't know your position on war with Iraq, but I do like accuracy. It was and overdue history lesson. Sadly, I don't think many people have any interest in learning from history. It keeps repeating itself.
I too have been put off by the Gore "quote" I've known it was a misquote, but gave up a looong time ago. It's been repeated so much it is now fact. Just like Ronald Regan's "Trees pollute more than cars" Although he really said that, people now believe it to be true because it was repeated so much.
"she said that the US would
not get involved in inter Arab conflicts"
That statement pissed me off more than anything about the whole affair. If i'd been present I would probably have slapped the shit out of her for saying something so assinine. But I also can't believe that Saddam fell for such a bald faced lie. That is one thing that so pisses me off. I'm sure she was just repeating what she was told to say. But if she had half a brain she would have known it was not true, that we would NOT stay out if Kuwait was invaded. She should have had some principle and resigned, rather than repeat such hogwash. And if she was so stupid as to actually believe it, then she should never have been the ambassador in the first place.
Dean...and Chritianity says the same about other relegions. Most relgions are easily bastardized to justify all kinds of evils. Just look at two of our "christian" leaders (I say christian in quotes because I think they are as christian as Bin Laden) Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. They both say that the US deserved the attacks of 9/11. I was not supprised by the attacks, but they were certainly evil incarnate. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:05 pm: |
|
Eric, to quote a German author who won the Nobel Prize for Literature after the close of WWII in 1946:
"Only through understanding do we get the better of destiny."
I really believe that a good part of your bluster is for the sake of attention but regardless I do pity you your lack of compassion. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:33 pm: |
|
"If someone test positive for HIV/AIDS or anything that is directly linked to it. Kill them on the spot."
Eric,
I think I would have been just a *tad* upset if you had killed my uncle who contracted aids from a blood transfusion in the early 80's. But he was an elderly retired minister and he died shortly thereafter, so at least you have some positive news from here today. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:35 pm: |
|
Don't pitty me. I don't need attention nor do I want or need pitty. If they want to keep spreading the shit to each other (which they are) then they deserve what they get. It's not like they are just getting it from breathing the air. They aren't doing anything to prevent it so fuck them. They should die so that they don't infect any one else. Let your heart bleed away for the losers that's your call. Me on the other hand. I don't care about them. What I do care about is the spread of it and the only way to stop the spread is to stop the people spreading it. Wear a condom, if you don't have a condom don't have sex, don't exchange fluids, it's not a hard thing to do. There is no excuse for that. And I'm not just talking about people in Africa either. I'm talking globaly. You play you pay. That simple when it comes to AIDS. Keep turning the other cheek and giving out the handouts if it works for ya. I'm sure they will be more then happy to take advantage of you and every one else like you. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Tom, tough break. However, that still doesn't change my view at all. I'm sure you would have been upset. However, that's not my problem is it. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 01:16 pm: |
|
Actually Eric, I suppose you have a good point. In fact so good a point that I think we should start shooting people who drive cars that use unleaded fuel. The benzene in unleaded has been proven to cause lukemia that is fatal more often than being positive for HIV. You know, you play you pay.
I'm sure we can come up with a host of other contagious illnesses (or activities that affect others) to shoot people for as well. Soon we won't have to worry about any diseases at all. And what a great place the world will be. :-) |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 01:33 pm: |
|
My eyes have been opened. I no longer trust the government to gather intelligence and ultimately defend me from those outside of my grasp. They are all liars! I'll rely on another country to tell me the truth (but I think I'll stay here because, after all, I kind of like the fringe benefits). If another country vouches for Iraq, or if Saddam himself says he's on the up & up, well then, that's good enough for me. Now, mind you, if someone kills or harms my family or countrymen, I'll be stomping mad. And I'll demand that those liars in Washington to do something about it post haste! But if I am killed in an attack, I won't care because I'll be dead! My wife and daughter can fend for themselves, I'm sure. Who cares anyway? I'll be dead!
You know, I think I can get used to this viewpoint - the sun is shining, birds are singing, and everything has a lovely rose tint. And what's that I see on the horizon? Why, it's a beautiful mushroom cloud. We'll have beautiful sunsets for years because of this! Gotta think positive!
OK, on a serious note Tom, you responded to almost everything I posted, and I do respect that. I don't necessarily think the "love it or leave" argument is crap, but I'd really call it a "love it or fix it" argument. Love it or leave it is too simplistic (kind of like 2+2=5 or 4). If you don't love it, then it is up to you to decide which resultant category you'll fall into: a fixer or a whiner. I admit that I'm a bit confused by your statements, and I don't know into which category you'd put yourself:
Quote:We have been lied to for so long, to such a degree that I have very little faith in the veracity of anything that comes out of washington.
You've no idea how it depresses me to say that. Someday, someway I hope the country (and the people) turns around and becomes less self interested. That's what keeps the politicians lying to us. From day one of being in office, all they care about is being re-elected, or at least it factors into their every decision. But on the other hand I'm opposed to term limits. I believe we get who we deserve.
At any rate, if you hate it and believe it can't be fixed, or you don't care to try, then you are nothing more than a poor citizen. Poor citizens need to leave. (note: "you" refers to a hypothetical person, not referring to Tom here).
But I am still shuddering over the *reactive, not proactive* approach. That's a risk I NEVER take. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 01:40 pm: |
|
Tom, you do have a good point about benzene. It is indeed a known human carcinogen. The problem, however, occurs when there is an unathorized release of benzene-containing fuel to the environment (i.e. spill or leak). The corrective action in this case is not to shoot the consumer of the fuel, but to FIX the problem through a variety of remedial techniques. There are also very strict PROACTIVE requirements enforced by the GOVERNMENT to DEFEND the environment from unauthorized realeases. Still, some bad things happen in the real world, so that same GOVERNMENT requires that the RESPONSIBLE PERSON BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their actions. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 02:04 pm: |
|
Tom, you are right. The Human race is killing this planet and all the people on it. Killing the planet is bad however, killing all the people on it isn't a bad idea. We are like fleas to it and at some point in the future the earth is going to find a way to get some flea shampoo. Every thing that we do has a negative effect on some one else or some thing else. I think a nuke war between everyone that has them is just what this planet needs. It would give the earth a new start. I just hope that no humans survive it so that the earth truely does get a fresh start. How's that for you? |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 02:16 pm: |
|
Ok, really though, fun is fun, but, why are we going to waste all this money helping Africa fight aids when we should be spending the money in the continued effort to find a cure for it? What is in it for us to help Africa? Oil? Money? Mangos? What? What will we get out of it? I think Bush just threw that out there to make us look better towards other countries cause we are going to bomb the crap out of Saddam. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 02:26 pm: |
|
We'll feel good about ourselves, Eric. I believe that is the answer to your question. I'd feel better solving "in-house" USA issues with my, & your, taxpayer money, but that's just my self-interested nature shining through again. Truthfully, I'd rather have a tax break. Talk about self-interested.... |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 03:01 pm: |
|
Paul Grant,
I'm a block head, so bare with me. It was a little difficult picking out what you recommend Bush should do in the middle of the history lesson.
So you think the President should do this:
1. Shift his focus on the tensions between Israel and Palestine. More specifically, you think Bush should reduce his support to Sharon and seek a resolution that will appease both Israel and Palestine.
2. Not invade Iraq until Iraq attacks the U.S. or until the United States has unwavering support from the rest of the world.
These correct?
To answer your questions:
"At what point would you feel that we are sufficiently safe from terrorism?"
I don't think the United States will ever feel safe from terrorism again.
"How far along are you willing to take this continuing war."
Until all known terrorist are imprisoned or exterminated.
"Surely you don't believe that the instant we remove Sadam Hussein from power our worries are over do you?"
No.
I'd like to make a couple of comments regarding your suggestions, but I'd like to confirm that the above suggestions are in fact an accurate representation of your views.
BW |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 03:38 pm: |
|
Quote:2. Not invade Iraq until [..omitted..] the United States has unwavering support from the rest of the world.
which sounds like only a matter of time to me.
i'd really like to hear and see what Colin Powell will have to say and show.
peter |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 03:43 pm: |
|
at least Africa's #1 spokesman appreciates us
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/30/sprj.irq.mandela/index.html |
Dan
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 03:59 pm: |
|
>It is and always has been my conviction that the real source for terror is not in Iraq but rather in the conflict taking place over Israel's occupation of the West Bank. It is here that our administration needs to focus its powers of persuasion first and foremost.<
There is no doubt that our support for Israel is the source of a lot of ill feeling towards America in the middle east. But as it pertains to the subject at hand, Saddam and UBL, it is not a major factor. Yes, they both adopted it as part of their cause, but only to try to sway opinion in there favor in this conflict. UBL started his jihad against America mainly because we stationed troops inside Saudi Arabia. And because he see Islam as this chosen religion and wants to see the fundamentalist overthrow all the corrupt governments now in power, and the US is the only thing stopping them. Saddam lobbed Scuds into Israel in an attempt to draw other countries into the war, but again this was mostly an attempt to save his ass. They do use our support of Israel to entice others to do their bidding, that all.
One view they did share about America was what our response would be to their actions. Both assumed you and like minded people would prevail and the US would do nothing. That we were to soft and weak to fight and risk losing lives in an armed conflict. UBL was counting on you Paul and you let him down, I can see you’re trying to not let that happen this time and I’m sure Saddam appreciates it.
As for the Israel Palestinian conflict I must admit I find it amusing when I hear the Arabs say that if the US would extract itself from the situation they could deal with Israel, yeah right. How long did it take last time, six days? I feel we should give them what they want and wash our hands of the matter, then see how long it takes before the Arabs coming running to us to stop the Jews before they wipe them off the face of the earth. |
Dean Chrismon (Chrismonda)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 04:17 pm: |
|
What I do not understand is alot of actors in Hollywood are anti Bush. Alec Baldwin, Susan Surandon also her meat head husband Tim. Do these people actually think that if they were living in Iraq or any other fundamentalist country they would even have the importance that they think they have here in the US. Oh and Tom I am not here to blame our problems on a certain religion, as you said. But I hate to tell you that all of the hijackers were of "Islamic origin" and you should read the Quran it is anti christian and Jewish. I also did not see Pat Robertson or Falwell fly two planes into the WTC or the Pentagon. So your response is mute and does not carry any intelligent meaning. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 04:28 pm: |
|
Blue, so far, there are two ways I know of, of "fixing" Government. Well, three, if you include castration ;-)
One, vote.
Two, don't ignore the problems and pretend they don't exist.
On the first one, the validity of that is being removed as we move to computerized voting machines that take away the possiblity of a recount, and also prevent any indepented groups from verifying the system hasn't been tampered with. I've just descibed the system we now have in Georgia.
Unfortunately, people are so enamoured of technology, that they can't believe anything is wrong with it. I don't have much hope it will be fixed. So I'll probably leave Georgia.
On the second one, being willing to express your disatisfaction with the way things are, and admiting that those problems exist is the way to hopefully wake some other people up. This requires being not bothered when you're labled all kinds of nasty things and you're pissed on. I got that in high school, so it's nothing new for me. Unfortunately, way too many people don't want to hear anything that goes against their beliefs. They don't like having their beliefs challenged.
Personally, I go out of my way to challange my beliefs. I read and listen to far right and far left wing ideas, and everything inbetween. That makes One, a more educated choice.
"Love it or leave it" is crap, "love it or fix it" is spot on. Or better, "love it AND fix it"
Other options, like running for elected office, wouldn't work for me. I would always vote no on bills that have unrelated admendments. Also, I wouldn't vote on something I didn't read and understand. I wouldn't "vote for yours if you vote for mine". In other words, I'd last about 5 minutes in elected office. And also, I suspect, I'd be quickly voted out by "certain" people because I don't have a problem saying things that I feel stronly about but that make me unpopular. Not that I would even get elected because I wouldn't accept pac money and all the other large funders
"But I am still shuddering over the *reactive, not proactive* approach."
Actually, we are being reactive even if we attack Iraq. If we'd been proactive, we wouldn't have gotten ourselves into this situation. And yes, I know we are not totally at fault, but we do bear a good share of the responsiblity. Most people will not hate us without some cause.
Eric, why waste money on Africa or wherever? Well, first of all, I firmly believe we should take care of our own first, if it's either or. There are alot of issues here at home that need to be fixed. On the other hand, "goodwill" is never wasted, ok, seldom. Heck, goodwill is even and asset in the tax codes. One thing that has kept people in other countries liking Americans, even while they burn our flag, is that they know the *people* here are overall good, and help others. Also, when we turn a blind eye to poverty and illness, it eventually becomes war, genocide and a new crop of terrorists.
Interestingly, this goes back to the Hitler theme. He came to power because of the poverty in Germany (the great depression). He saw an opportunity to blame someone, and he glommed on to the writings of Henry Ford, saw good scape goats in the form of Jews, Gypsies, and Communists, and off we went, WWII. Not that we could have done much about poverty in Germany at the time, we had enough here at home to deal with. But it does illustrate what happens when people feel no hope and someone charismatic comes along who appeals to their baser insticts.
I'd much rather see aid in the form of medicine and food, than guns and poisons.
And Blue, I'd like a tax break too. But I'm not rich enough to get one. ;-)
Actually, I'd rather have flat tax, above a certain minimal income level. No excemptions. At least then I'd feel everyone was paying their share.
Anyway, I think this is all I'll say. When I start repeating myself, I know it's time to stop. I *will* continue to read the thread though. It's too much fun to miss. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 04:39 pm: |
|
BW, first, in no way are you a block head or would I never think such a thing. Thank you for taking the time to answer my queries and I will attempt to satisfy yours so that you can offer a more complete rebuttle.
You are correct in your observation that I feel the conflict between Israel and Palestine is the one that needs ur complete attention. I think it is safe to say that the majority of Arabs in the region would agree. I suggest that you take a look at both my link and Landy's link above because they both address how the lack of US involvement in the West Bank has tainted most of the Arab world's perception of us.
If we are trying to "win the hearts and minds" of Arabs and Muslims in particular we re going about it in a most peculiar fashion. Perhaps I'm wrong, we have no desire to reach any kind of common understanding with the second largest religious group in the world. Maybe we would rather battle it out with any and all who choose not to fall in line with our perception of the world's reality. Our president did say you are either with us or against us.
I hope that this kind of posturing isn't really how we feel as Americans AND citizens of the world because if it is we could spend the rest of our lives, our children's lives and their children's lives chasing fear into every corner of the world. Frankly, I doubt we have the resources or the will to really carry on endlessly.
By the way, did you ever read Orwell's 1984 because in it he talks about the never ending war. It only serves to ultimately sap our strengths and undermine our freedoms. Give it a read, his prescience is remarkable.
Getting back to the West Bank and the conflict there. I cannot help but feel, as I said in an earlier post, that is the true breeding ground for terrorism. The sooner we bring about a fair and just end to the conflict, the quicker we can begin to truly affect more positive change throughout the Arab world.
Resolution to the conflicts there will not be easy and Israel is going to have to make many concessions but it is vital that we realize the history involved here ON BOTH SIDES. I truly believe that we can bring about resolution but it will not be easy nor will it be quick but it is ESSENTIAL if we ever hope to be taken seriously as the world's only superpower and not the world's superbully.
If you want specifics on how to bring about peace between these two warring parties, I believe it , again, comes down to history. If we look back to the nineteenth century when the notion of a Jewish homeland first entered into international thought, through the 1920's when England first addressed the Palestinian Mandate, through the UN's establishment of the nation of Israel in 1948 and to the present you will see continual disregard for the Arabs and a continual whittling away of their territories.
No, I am not trying to discount the wars of '48, '56, '67 or '73 and the gains made from them by the Israeli's but we need to understand what motivates both sides. Hell, the current land grab going on with new settlements in the West Bank look like what we did to native Americans as we pushed our way westward. It is not just,it is not fair.
Let me get on to your second observation regarding Iraq. No, I do not think that we should wait until Iraq attacks us first. I do think that we should allow UN Inspectors all the time they need to do the job they've been assigned. Should they find something or reach hedecision that heir mission is not successful then I am willing to accept some sort of action but only under the banner ofthe UN and not in some unilateral fashion.
I know you're probably tiring of my stressing history but again n this instance we can learn quite a bit. First, since the end of the Gulf War twelve years ago we have not been able to link Iraq or Saddam Hussein with any involvement in terrorist activities. Yes, I know that he wanted to assassinate Bush Sr. when he was visiting Kuwait but that attempt was like someting out of the Three Stooges.
To this date we have not been able to ascertain any direct links between Iraq and any of the terrorist organizations we are so in fear of. We have also been unable to find the perverbial "smoking gun." I'm tired of hearing that we have the evidence but we can't tell you. Hogwash, if this country wants to violate international law and set dangerous new precedents for us by attacking first, then it damn well better have the proof and be willing to show it now!
More than once, departments within our own government have contradicted this administrations evidence, the last being the mystery convoy that secretly moved large portions of Iraq's WMD to Syria in December. The CIA has been reported as saying such convoys are commonplace and ther is no way to know what was being transported. So, do we bomb Syria too?
We wait, that's what we do and we allow the UN to do its job. What I want to know is what, besides 9/11 which was utterly unrelated to Iraq, has happened since we withdrew inspectors at the end of the nineties to justify this belligerence. I've seen no evidence printed anywhere to make me believe that he has grown his 'stockpiles' of WMDs over thelast few years. I know all about the aluminum rods and again there are satisfactory explanations for them. If sanctions and inspections worked for the ten or so years after the Gulf War until we removed the inspectors, why, suddenly, is it no longer effective?
Now, I have a couple of questions for you and I wish to express, again, my appreciation for the time your are taking in both reading and answering my posts.
When I asked how long you would like to continue this war on terrorism you said, in essence, until the last one is caught or killed.
May I ask your definition of a terrorist and please keep in mind that on man's freedom fighter is anothers revolutionary terrorist. I think it's easy, in the wake of 9/11 to draw extrapolations but the further out we move, the murkier it gets.
Another queston I have, and this relates somewhat to my mentioning of the book "1984," how many freedoms are you willing to give up in this continuing war on terrorism. On another note, how much are you, personally BW, willing to spend on this continuing war on terrorism. By that I mean, how many services from the government are you willing to sacrifice as it cuts back because of military needs? Are you willing to give up your Social Security, your medicare when you are elderly and in need of it becase of astronomical health care expenses. How about your children. Are you willing to compromise their education because money traditionally earmarked for schools simply isn't there.
We haven't fired a single shot nor instituted the latest round of tax reductions and yet in today's newspaper I read how the deficit has soared to $199 billion dollars. In May of 2001 the Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan group predicted a surplus of $5.6 trillion for this decade but has been forced to re-evaluate and state that it hopes for a $20 billion surplus for the same period. That's quite a change and you better believe if those numbers are right, they will have an awful impact on most Americans and again, that is WITHOUT figuring in the cost of war.
BW, thanks again and I look forward to your reply.
Cheers,
Paul
PS please pardon the typos! |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 04:50 pm: |
|
Tom, you will always have poor people and homeless people in the USA cause most of them (well 90% of all the ones I've met) don't want to work. They want the free hand out and as long as someone is handing it out they are going to take it. I don't think that we should help Africa, I think that we should go after Saddam and anyone else that harbors people that want to kill the dirty evil Americans and have tried. That's just me though. I have a lot of built up hate and anger.
Peter, I really want to hear what Powell has to say too. I think it will open some people's eyes a little wider and give them a better understanding of what is going on. Sad thing is that there will be people that think he is lying. |
Alan Yim (Alan)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 05:13 pm: |
|
Eric,
Are you suggesting that your country scrap its welfare and unemployment systems? |
Kyle
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 05:30 pm: |
|
Well you know how much I love these topics and I dont really think the president needs an excuse to get the American people behind him. They fire on our jets and they constantly threaten us. That in itself is enough in my book and anyone not behind a president that is trying to call them to the mat for that needs to move on over there .
Always remember that this country was built by the blood and sweat of our grand fathers and their fathers. Peace was acheived and kept through war. You have the liberties and luxuries that you have today because your nation was full of people that were willing to kick a little ass to give them to you.
I dont wanna hear "Democrat" and I dont wanna hear "republican" , it makes me sick that two different clubs can squable non stop and all the while putting their clubs interest and their personal agenda above all else. Never forget that with most politician its about getting votes and getting cash. Dont overcomplicate something so simple. SURE , it gives you something to talk about non stop and an opportunity to show how educated you are but is overcomplicating it really making you seem smart ?
Kyle |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 05:48 pm: |
|
Boy - you've been burning up the keyboard while I have been gone.
I'd like to make on point - this is also about the UN or League of Nations. They have enabled this mess by enacting resolutions and not enforcing them. Bush has called their bluff. If we take out Iraq without the UN you can kiss them goodbye. If I was working in NY for the UN I would find a new job. Maybe they can relocate to Seoul and get a new perspective on life.
A couple of articles from Canada:
Bush's pressure is on UN, not just Saddam
Toronto Sun ^ | January 30, 2003 | Peter Worthington
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/832800/posts
It's time for Kofi to get out of town
NationalPost ^ | 01/30/03 | George Jonas
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/832479/posts?page=3 |
C. Brown
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 05:53 pm: |
|
Hi everyone...
I took the better part of today trying to play catch up...there is a lot of emotions flowing into these comments and rightly so...as a Bush supporter I think that he has attempted to make the most of a situtation that has been left, for the most part, unattended for so long...while the previous "leadership" in this country spent the better part of their adminstration breaking wedding vows and various oaths and cajooling the public with rhymes and no reason, UBLs and Saddams were able to increase what little power they had unleashing it with devastating results...as now, Bush has actually shocked us into reality and we are having a hard time dealing with it...for 10 years Hussein went unmonitored...why? It is now obvious that we are trying to back track and to find out what he has been doing for the past 10 years and he IS NOT COOPERATING!! I want to know what he has and if he won't fess up, then screw the bastard...I would rather find out now than later...don't know about you but my lungs are not made to handle nuclear fumes etc...as far as I am concerned the UN is full of wussies and lacks the creditability to justify their existence...the fact that Syria sits on the Human Rights council can attest to that...instead of keeping pressure on Saddam, they just left him alone to do Gods know what...I am not 100% for attacking Saddam, but I hope that the pressure that is building for Iraq will cause them to break down and fess up...wishful thinking maybe...I have nothing to loose:-)
The middle east situation is definitely not helping, the US screwed this up in 1956(?)at the time that Israel moved into the territory, Palestine was promised by the British AND the US that they would also get their own state and that is the only reason Palestine agreed to allow the Israeli state...so the US alone cannot be blamed for the situation there, we are reaping years of mistrust from the Palestinians...they are still waiting for their own statehood and I think they deserve one now, not later...but in a sense the Muslims and every other religous group has caused whatever wrath received on themseles, each religion thinks they are better than the other and that pompous, arrogant attitude has taken many lives...it will never change, it will only gets worse...
Economy...it is known fact that the economy goes in waves...it will never stay up forever and it will never stay down forever...so that is my 2c there.
I don't recall the person with the AIDS Phobia...Eric maybe? (forgive me if I am incorrect) god forbid that someone in your family conracts it through no fault of their own, like say, blood transfusion...would you also line them up to be shot...but on the other hand, the AIDS fund package probably is an appeaser for the crying heart dems...I believe it is a bad disease but shooting them just having it it not the way to go...if the money is used for sex education then maybe it will help, but I seriously doubt it...
Thanks... |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 06:33 pm: |
|
C, yes, if some one in my family got it I would still feel the same way. It would be doing them a favor to end it quick and it would be doing every one else a favor by making one less person able to spread it to some one else. The only way to get rid of AIDs is to get rid of it. Since there is no cure for it yet keep it from spreading by getting rid of anyone that can spread it. How right is it for some ass wrangler to go and get his boy friend up the ass who has AIDs with no condom, didn't bother to tell him he has AIDs, and then the loser goes and gives blood two months later and he has HIV though he doesn't know it. Then some other poor shmuck comes along and gets it cause the hospital didn't do a good enough job testing it. If the ass wrangler with AIDs was dead then that wouldn't have even happend.
Alan, I wouldn't say scrap them but, they cold use some changing. The current system really helps promote people that don't want to work not work. I'm all for helping people that are trying hard to make it but, are having a hard time doing it. However, I don't feel people that aren't trying should get any help at all. |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 06:41 pm: |
|
the UN is indeed a frickin joke. it's on its last leg. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 06:58 pm: |
|
Eric,
i don't believe Powell would lie. I also very much hope that we have solid intel on what's going on in the middle East. I don't know if any of you had this feeling, I personally couldn't figure out why the fuck it was Afghanistan we were after, all of a sudden. Guess we did have some information beforehand, just did not have it all together, and did not have an analyst who could piece things together, and have enough credibility to initiate action. A bit Tom Clancy-style, it all is. So I'm all ears. I am just as puzzled why Iraq all of a sudden, and never Saudi Arabia (that produced most of the terrorists, and financed probably all of them). Just think of how much oil is Saudi and Iraq selling, and how many people share the profits.
Now, speaking of AIDS - you're off the mark here. AIDS virus is a nature's way of regulating things. I am sure we'll learn how to deal with it not too far away from now; not too long ago, pneumonia was nearly a death sentence, now it's almost over-the-counter deal. The mankind will have to deal with new viruses forever, this one just happened to manifest mostly as sexually-transmitted. For Africa, with medical care so poor, the only way to keep the population up is to reproduce as fast as possible. The AIDS virus just happened to mess up with a centuries-old habits.
peter |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 07:11 pm: |
|
Ya, well, animals killing and eating other animals is a natural way to thin the herd too. I'm not into eating people so the killing of them will just have to do. I think that part of the issue in Africa is that there are too many people for that land to support. Breeding more isn't going to help any. But, hey, that's my opinion. You're entitled to yours just like I am mine. That's what makes this country so great. I can sit here and say whatever I want and it's OK. |
KJ
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 07:26 pm: |
|
Eric, honey, who spit on your candy today? Mellow out, have a brew or ten, you're about to be somebody's daddy you know. Kristin's in the home-stretch, isn't she? Keep us posted.
As for these arguments about the truth-telling or lack thereof in our government, it's a serious mixed bag. Humans in general seem to have trouble telling the truth, let alone when money and power are on the line. Then there are the mis-information campaigns that are purposefully waged. What are we to believe? We laymen are not in a position to be well-informed. I was raised as a military dependent, was proud of that, proud of my country. In my young adulthood I was a victim of our government, very personally and for an extended period of time. So, in my own life I've seen things from various perspectives. Don't believe everything you think you know.
Karen |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 07:27 pm: |
|
c'mon Eric, there's enough land in Africa to support its population. And many of it keeps the lifestyle that's been around for ages. Even the virus was there nearly forever - monkeys had virus-transmitted immune deficiency way before. The virus itself has changed and started killing people. Killing the ill (AIDS or not) is the worst kind of eugenics (as opposed to sterilizing some and breeding the others). Have you read Orwell's "Brave New World?"
funny, Orwell surfaces up again.
speaking of budget deficit - does anyone know how much is paid annually as welfare? I remember having a feeling of something going wrong, seeing a ho getting out of the social services in Detroit with a fistful of foodstamps and into a shiny cadillac. (jeez, what an alliteration)
peter |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 07:52 pm: |
|
Here you go Peter.
http://www.concordcoalition.org/federal_budget/charts/budget_history_percentage.html
I hope the link works. |
C. Brown
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 08:06 pm: |
|
Eric, chill out...what the heck are you afraid of...a cure will be found and AIDS will be irradicted and then we will have another epidemic on our hands...way of life or should I say circle of life...
On the UN...I find it ironic that they are located on US soil and are as anti-american as they come...what is the deal with their lease...I say revoke than damn thing...have them set up shop in Iraq...hehehe
C... |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 08:13 pm: |
|
Paul G., I'm deferring to you. So far you're voicing my views much better than I have been able to.
Ok ok, I'm really gonna stop now LOL.
Besides, there's two really interesting shows on PBS about the HMS Hood (sank in two minutes, 3 survivors) and the Bismark |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 08:14 pm: |
|
C,
I think you have to take that up with the Rockefeller Foundation if I'm not mistaken. They either own the land or donated it to the UN. A nice chunk of real estate I'm sure The Donald would be quick to develop should it ever become available. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 09:38 pm: |
|
Paul, i don't know what the heck is discretionary, what are the social security distributions (what welfare makes out of it), etc.
looks like national defense spending steadily decreases, and more so if compared to social security. meanwhile, people keep complaining about inadequate returns from social security system... hmmmm... and now, S.S.#, originally meant ONLY to be used for S.S. purposes, now is on everyone's head like a labor camp tattoo...
can't get a job, can't get a driver's license, can't open a bank account without it. and it made everyone vulnerable to identity theft!
peter |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 09:53 pm: |
|
Chill out?? I am chilled out. What you think that I'm getting worked up over here or some thing? I'm not. I'm affraid of lots of things but, AIDS isn't one of them as I don't do anything that would make me come in contact with the virus.
Ok, so great we find a cure, but, in the mean time why the hell are we going to waste money on a bunch of people in Africa that gets us nothing in return? How cares about them? Let some one else help them... Oh wait, no one else wants to help them either.
Hey, I got and idea, lets herd up all the AIDs cases and send them to fight Iraq. Kill two birds with one stone so to speak. Then once it's over we can make some really big walk in microwaves for the team that wins. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 10:11 pm: |
|
OK, really though, all kidding aside don't believe every thing that you hear or read since it's always in the view of the person that wrote it. If you knew me you would know that more than half the crap I have typed in this little topic here is complete crap. But, then again, maybe it's not. |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 10:38 pm: |
|
There is a cure for AIDs. It's been there all the time. It just doesn't meet the leftist and 60's generation free love agenda.
Sexual Abstinence Behind Uganda's AIDS Success Story
Cybercast News Service (cnsnews.com) ^ | January 13, 2003 | Stephen Mbogo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/825666/posts
There is also a reason for it's spread in the US. But reality doesn't meet the homosexual agenda of total acceptance.
MAG: 25% OF NEW HIV CASES IN USA ARE MEN WHO SOUGHT OUT VIRUS
Drudge Report ^ | 1/21/03
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/826898/posts
These people are sick, and I don't mean AIDS. It will be impossible for the world to erradicate AIDS with the current strategy. |
KJ
| | Posted on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 11:21 pm: |
|
Mark and Bev,
Quoting the Drudge Report pretty much kills off your credibility with me.
Karen |
Ronnie McKinney (Ronnie)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 12:33 am: |
|
Look I don't want to get into a political debate with anyone on here about whether we should fight a war in Iraq or whether we should be sending money to Africa but I did see a couple of things I wanted to comment on.
Someone mentioned way back at the beginning of this thread that we should not criticise the president. I think Theodore Roosevelt had a pretty good quote when it came to that subject, "to announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
The second thing has to go with Eric's idiotic posts about AIDS/HIV. With your comments about 'ass wranglers' I'm assuming your against homosexuality based on moral/religious grounds. Fine by me but I'm guessing that those same religious beliefs make you think that giving out condoms in school or sex education in school is also morally wrong.
Not everyone in this country or this world has your incredible educational background and knows the best ways to prevent the spread of HIV. It's easy to come up with solutions like just kill them all when you might have to work a little harder to come up with a reasonable solution... |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 08:04 am: |
|
Ok, new topic I guess...LOL
"Sexual Abstinence Behind Uganda's AIDS Success Story"
I've no idea how true that is. In fact, I don't think it really matters. I read a study some years back, that of course I don't have in front of me, but I can try to find if anyone really wants it. It was a report on nation in Africa, I can't remember which, where sex outside of marriage is more taboo than it is here with the christian right. However, the country is devastated by aids. They finally traced it to tattoos, which are extremely popular. The average annual income for a resident of the country is about what a vacine syringe costs, so needles are reused.
Personally I'm not a fan of tattoos, but my point is HIV isn't only transmitted sexually. And to think it is is naive and puts you at great risk of contracting it.
Eric, you are lucky you don't do anything that might expose you to HIV. Unfortunately your doctor probably does every day, surgeons certainly do. Emergency workers do as well.
How many rescue workers who contracted HIV while helping people bloodied by the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon would you like to shoot? And I'm assuming you'd also like to shoot any military personel who were exposed to it while helping their fellow personel. And we all know how bloody war is. I guess we should not allow any service personel return from Iraq after the war, at least for 6 months, so we know which one's to allow back, and which one's to shoot. Kinda puts into a whole new light those calling them names on their return from Vietnam. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 08:33 am: |
|
OK, two quick things here and then I'm done..
Ronnie, I don't believe in god and I never have.. Nuff said on that one.
Tom, I don't have a doctor nor have I been to one since I was 18. They make latex gloves. Wear them. Also, you're not going to get them just by touching someone that has it. Or their blood for that matter if you don't have any cuts where you touched their blood. And if you are a doctor or rescue worker with a gaping wound then you should not be working on people cause you could spread crap to them or yourself.. Kinda common sense on that one. AIDs is spread because people don't take precautions to keep it from spreading. You can get it from needles but, not if you use a new clean one. If you're an idiot and let someone give you a tattoo with a dirty needle then you deserve to be shoot cause your fucking stupid.. There is always some thing that can always be done to prevent the spread of AIDs. It's just that people don't think before they do. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 08:51 am: |
|
OK, I tried to stay out of this one but I just had to comment.
You know what Eric, being obese is a real problem and not just for the overweight. I think we'd all agree that there are certain incontrovertable facts linking obesity to heart disease, certain forms of cancer, diabetes, ect. The list goes on.
By being obese not only do you put a strain on yourself but you but an awful strain on the medical health care system. You cost me money with your obeity becase of increased costs in health care that are ultimately passed on to insurers across the board. But, hey, with a little self control, a bit of will power and a few less Crispy Cremes and voila no more weight problem.
Say it's a chemical imbalance , well they've go drugs to help you. There're even a variety of groups out there to coddle you while you learn how to eat like most humans. But no, since you can't control yourself and it is obvious that you are a medical and financial burden to us all, I say we send a crew over to your place to round you up, take you out and shoot you.
Frankly, I see no more twisted logic in my argument than in yours. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 09:26 am: |
|
Hey Paul,
What do you think about Nelson Mendala's remarks from Yesterday? Looks like he has had enough of us Arrogant Americans. Also, apparently Daschle was shown the light during a closed door session with the Man. And I see that Italy and the UK leadership has stopped by the WH for a chat with Bush for the same light.
On another note...Please don't shoot me, But according to those Medical folks, I am obese. Apparently, being 6'4" and 255 lbs, I am waaaaay out of control. It's not the Krispy Cremes that get me, it's all that great beer. Man I love good beer. I'll keep that in mind when I am running three miles at lunch and when I am mountain biking many miles this weekend. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:13 am: |
|
Sure Paul G., go ahead and come on over. If you can do it, then do it. You get a law passed that says all fat people should be taken out and shot then great. Come get me. However, in my case I'll make sure that I take a couple of people out with me. More fun that way. To each his own. You don't like fat people, I don't like fags and people with AIDs. I also don't like people that deal crack, coke, heroin and ice. I think that they should be lined up and shoot too. I don't like people that change lanes and don't use their turn signals, or people that ride their brakes, or people that pull out in front of you just to hit their brakes and drive slower then the speed limit. They should all be shoot as well. You aren't going to change my view of things anymore then I'm going to change yours. Make no difference to me what you think of me or what anyone else does either. I'm me, I'm going to continue to be me, and there isn't anything you are anyone else can do about it.
Beer!!!! Now we're talking.. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:50 am: |
|
Eric, you sidestepped my points by focusing on the technicality that you haven't been to a doctor since you were 18. Congrats on that BTW. I haven't been so fortunate.
Latex is not impervious to scalpel cuts during surgery.
As a former emergency worker, I know how easy it is to be cut during rescue operations. And to be cut and not even know you are. I personally have had bloody puke spewed on me while trying to extricate someone from a car. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.
I've never been in combat, but I'm fairly certain that wounded bleeding soldiers are often called upon to help their wounded bleeding comrades, or choose to do it because it's the right thing to do.
Can I be there when you tell the NYFD members who worked the WTC if they test positive for HIV they should be shot?
Or at the staging area in Iraq where the military personel are preparing to return home? Though I suppose it would be easier to shoot them in their hospital beds. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:58 am: |
|
Sure Tom, maybe you'll get to see them shoot me instead.. If you got aids, there isn't anything to cure you of it. You're already dead.. It's just a matter of time. Why allow them the chance to spread it to others? Well, off to spread my evil on the population of the USA. I'll check back in tomorrow and spread some more of my popular rantings. Maybe we can talk about my plans to do away with Telemarketers next |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 11:54 am: |
|
oh oh..can I help you with the Telemarketers!?! :-)
*Heading home to get my rifle now* |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 12:08 pm: |
|
In the west, with anti-viral medications available HIV has become more of a chronic health issue. I have one friend who was first diagnosed in 1988 and is doing just fine. If you are fortunate enough to have the means, HIV is no longer a death sentence. Just look at Magic Johnson, with the help of anti-viral medications his tests show virtually no trace of the HIV virus in his blood system. We have the technology in hand already to help reverse the spread of this modern day plague.
However, when in comes to third world nations and HIV/Aids, we a faced with almost insurmountable cultural issues compounded by an utter lack of education that turns application of these complex anti-virals in to danger. We all know that in dosing the anti=viral cocktail consistence of application is essential. The patient must make a variety of meds at various times during the course of a day and the importance of consistency cannot be stressed enough. The problem is, however, how do you insure that a patient in sub-Saharan Africa will take his meds at 12pm, 3pm, 6pm ect. when not only does he not own a watch but he doesn't even know how to tell time!
We can either through our hands up in the air and walk away cursing the stupidity of these people or we can try to do the Judeo-Christian thing of helping your brother. I know for some, brotherhood stops at the border and for others it doen't and I'm not trying to make issue of that here. Yet, to ignore what is going on with this disease and not try to contain it through means other than genocide, as one poster advocates, is a failure on several fronts. The most important reason for containment is that these viruses are continuing to mutate and present great difficulties regarding treatment. Left alone, HIV/Aids could eventually evolve into a far greater threat to mankind and the bite it takes our of civilization, the west's included, may be far worse than we could ever have guessed.
Paul, don't worry, if they come for you, they're coming for me too. I fall outside most insurance industry actuary table recommendations for ideal weight also.
I haven't had a chance to read Mandela's comments but I think we're all waiting with anticipation for what Colin Powell has to say next week. BTW, if you get a chance take a look at the op.ed. page in the NY Times. There is a piece there by Steven Pelletiere, an ex-CIA chief who was in Iraq in the '80's, he makes some interesting observations. I'll try to post a link.
As far as Eric goes, all I can say is the only thing that's going to help him is prolonged visits to a psychiatrist to deal with all those anger issues and the acute need for attention. It just makes you wonder about one's unbringing? |
TPH (Snowman)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 12:20 pm: |
|
My wife is in medicine and works with blood and needles everyday. She has been stuck with needles that could have contained a virus, that was very unpleasant. The pre-cautions taken in hospitals are strict but accidents do happen. I mention this because many people other than the "usual suspects" can be stricken with this, I'll leave it at that. The cultural/religious differences with the use of condoms will always be a brickwall.
Eric your posts on this subject have become like a car wreck to me, I know I should'nt look but I can't help it. You've become my D-web Howard Stern. No offense intended. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 12:46 pm: |
|
Eric, by the way, i'm with you on people who drive under the speed limits
too bad the slug i drive daily spins 4k rpm at 65mph
peter |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 02:07 pm: |
|
Funny, Paul G.. You are posting just as much as I am.. Do you lack attention in your life? As for the shrink goes. Who's to say who's sane and who isn't. That's all personal opinion there. I think that you need the shrink.
That's OK TPH, for the most part I'm messing with people here because all of sudden this place has turned into DIS-GOVERNMENT-WEB.ORG. Figure I'll piss some people off and rub some folks the wrong way.
Any way, got to go to the baby doctor and then off to my KKK meeting and then after that it's out for drinks with my fellow Nazi Skinhead Org members.
You people crack me up.. |
TPH (Snowman)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 03:11 pm: |
|
LOL  Have a good weekend and good luck at the baby doc! |
carter simcoe (Karter)
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 03:27 pm: |
|
Politics has nothing to do with 4x4 get your yuppie ass off out of this post and go to old man emu .com . I'm in a yuppie lashing mood |
C. Brown
| | Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 04:44 pm: |
|
Eric, may God bless and keep you safe and healthy...
C. |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 03:03 am: |
|
Paul Grant,
Here are a number of responses to your comments on the middle east. I tried to reply to each suggestion you made.
Israel and Palestine:
I agree that Israel is the center of gravity for most of the tensions in the middle east. However, I do not think that any resolution will satisfy both Israel and Palestine. Coming to a compromise might be possible, but will only be temporary.
Iraq:
I do not agree with your opinion on this subject. In my view, the UN inpsectors completed their job back in the late 90's. It was the UN that reported the existence of all the WMD that Saddam had stockpiled. It was the UN, not the U.S. The "smoking gun" that everyone wants to see NOW was discovered by the UN prior to them getting the boot. So the world knew back then that Saddam had all these weapons. So you see, the current inspections are just a ploy. Why do we have to prove WMD still exist. It's up to Saddam to prove that he got rid of them.
Answers to your questions:
Define a terrorist:
Someone who uses violence to intimidate for political purposes, idealogy or religion.
How many freedoms am I willing to give up to fight the war on terrorism?
Sense the question is ambigious and I haven't read your book reference, I can not answer this question.
How much am I willing to spend on this continuing war on terrorism?
Every penny I make. How much is your life worth? Don't you think the widows and widowers of 911 would've sold everything they own to save their spouses life?
My theory:
As I mentioned before, I think all roads lead to Israel, and I agree that the history of this region is vital. In the scope of things though, the last century to these people are irrelevant. The people in this region could care less what was signed or what was mandated by whom. Both sides have their religious claims and that's why I think peace is nearly impossible.
You compared the Israeli occupation of the West Bank to the European occupation of North America. I disagree entirely with this. What happened here in the U.S. is embarrassing. What's happening in the West Bank is a Holy War.
In my research, the majority of middle easterns do no hate "America". They love our way of live, they respect our sense of organization and our economic achievements, however they despise our government. More specifically, they despise our support to Israel.
Make no mistake about it, every terrorist attack against the United States is ultimately designed to cripple the logistical aid pouring into Israel.
Intelligence:
Releasing satellite photos, signal intercepts and human intel reports is a BIG deal. By releasing those products we can no longer use those resources. I just assume they never release anything to the public. Key allies like the UK have seen enough to warrant aggression against Iraq, why does that not suffice to the masses? How many prime ministors does it take?
Deception and denial is the United States biggest weakness. You can thank agent Hanson for that, or should I say inmate Hanson.
Listen.
Bush is trying to elimate a threat in Iraq. Of course Iraq does not threaten us militarily. President Bush is not staying up late at night studying photographs and chemical overylays. The men and women who work for him are some of the best and brightest in the business. If Bush says Iraq is linked to the terrorism, you can believe it. |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 08:03 am: |
|
"If Bush says Iraq is linked to the terrorism, you can believe it."
"Read my lips, no new taxes"
"Any issues between Iraq and Kuwait are not our concern"
President orders U.S. bombers to retaliate for North Vietnamese torpedo attacks against US Destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.
Yup, we can surely believe anything and everything the President tells us.
The president is a politician. Politicians lie when it serves their purpose.
*True* patriots will always question what we are being told. Otherwise we are nothing better than lemmings, like many in Nazi Germany, communist Russia, China...and many other places. I hope the US is better than them. An attack on Iraq or not, that doesn't change it. I would be quesioning what I hear as much if we had a president saying he would do anything and everything to *avoid* war. |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 08:42 am: |
|
OK Tom . . . what should Bush do? |
Greg Davis (Gregdavis)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:02 am: |
|
I've already asked him that. |
the Big Daddy
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 09:52 am: |
|
Anyone got a pic of the gentleman servicing his range rover... Was a nomex condom in use ? Can the Aids virus be transmitted via autosexuality ? Perhaps we need a study done by the General Accounting Office....... |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 11:16 am: |
|
Quote:The president is a politician. Politicians lie when it serves their purpose.
*True* patriots will always question what we are being told. Otherwise we are nothing better than lemmings, like many in Nazi Germany, communist Russia, China...and many other places. I hope the US is better than them. An attack on Iraq or not, that doesn't change it. I would be quesioning what I hear as much if we had a president saying he would do anything and everything to *avoid* war.
Right you may be, but at some point you have to form an educated conclusion based on the data available. Also ponder your last sentence...I think you hit a lot closer to the truth than you intended. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 12:43 pm: |
|
Tom,
before you jump on the lemmings living in totalitarist countries - you don't know jack shit what it is. I admired your posts until I saw the last one - it is really easy to stand erect and proud when nobody gives a damn about what you're saying. It may be very different, and so may be your attitude.
I was raised in milder times in soviet union; which means that i wouldn't be shot on the spot for calling some party honcho a dick in public. However, doing this was very likely to produce some consequences:
(1) get expelled out of college. This automatically meant that you're headed to the boot camp, for two long years. Depending on times, you could be sent to Afghanistan, and never live normal life ever since. You'd never go back to college again, and never get the job you had in mind when you went to college.
(2) you get through college, but don't get security clearance. which means that the only job you'd get is counting dolls at the toy factory (if that didn't produce something alongside that required the clearance).
(3) if you ever start bitching about outcomes (1) and (2), you'd learn that police had found drugs or foreign currency or whatnot in your apartment, and you're headed to the labor camp for a couple of years, as a petty criminal. You will always have a prison term in your personal file, which would afford you a job as a construction worker.
(4) if you ever start bitching about outcome (3), there's a mental clinic for you with endless supply of aminazine (or whatever this stuff is called). you get out of there at a tender age of about 35, unable to feed yourself or zip your pants.
So I take it you ain't a lemming like hundreds of million of people who lived (and some still do) like that, but a proud fella who'd stand up and denounce the system? (provided you'd get five or ten people who wouldn't run away from you like a rabid dog)
no totalitarian regime was ever overthrown by "proud" people - all of them died a slow death from devastated economy, or as a result of a war that exhausted their resources. Communists in Russia slackened the reins when the regime ran out of money, Chinese may live longer with that because they seem to subside on less food and heat. Iraq could slowly break apart if the U.S. kept the tab on the embargo for a bit longer.
Oh, by the way, do you think people in totalitarian countries are stupid enough not to question what they are being told? |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:31 pm: |
|
you mean we shouldn't believe everything we read Peter?! |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:39 pm: |
|
Boy, I thought this thread had run its course but I come back after a day or two and find the topic has shifted away from Aids/HIV and obesity and back to the Middle East.
BW, thank you for your length reply and your answers to my questions. I hope you'll bear with me as I go back over your post and offer my comments.
I'm pleased to see that we agree about the importance the of Israeli/Palestine issue. One of my citicisms of the Bush administration is its complete withdrawal from any attempt to involve itself with negotiations. This decision was reached within the first month of the administration taking office and, I feel, was something akin to the sheriff leaving Dodge City.
As bad as the beginnings of the Intafada were, the bloodletting that occurred in 2001 and 2002 raised the massacre of innocents on both sides to an heretofore unheard level.
We NEED to be involved, in a fair and just way, with the search for a peaceful resolution to this conflict. It MUST take into account an historical perspective because the Palestinians themselves are looking to post-'48/pre-'67 agreements in an attempt to establish peaceful co-existence.
On the otherhand, Israeli's best offer of "land for peace" really was no offer at all because it didn't even try to restore Palestine to the condition it was in prior to the 1967 war. A war that, all to often is forgotten, Israel started with a "pre-emptive" strike.
I respect your right to differ with me as far as the neeed for war with Iraq. After all, as we have had shown to us by many, that is what makes this country so unique. The right to free and open dissent is truly a wonderful right to enjoy. One that, without a doubt, most every Iraqi be he Sunni, Sh'ia, or Kurd lacks.
I do want to mention just a couple of points that wish to take issue with. First, the inspectors were not kicked out of Iraq in 1998. In fact, the Clinton adminstration was the one to pull the plug on the UNSCOM inspections. They were removed and within short order, over 100 non-military sites were bombed by US airplanes in an attempt to punish Saddam Hussein for his unwillingness to allow Baath Party headquarters and one of his palaces from being checked. It was Hussein's contention that further inspections were unnecessary and that they had merely become a cover for US espionage.
In November of 1988, it was the firm belief of Richard Butler, UNSCOM's leader, that well over 95% of all Iraqi weapons, conventional and otherwise, had been destroyed. The UN inspectors had been extraordinarily effective in seeking out and eliminating Iraq's capacity to wage war. I think the popular statstic thrown about back then was that the inspectors had found and destroyed more than twice the amount of weaponry as the Gulf War!
Inspections worked and could still be effective in containing Iraq. A policy of containment worked with the Cold War and there is no reason to believe it cannot work here. To believe Saddam Hussein is a mad man bent on destruction is as big a mistake as the Democrats thinking George Bush is a fool. Hussein is a man who strives for control over his domain. He is not a risk taker and for those who use Iran and Kuwait as examples of his desire for expansionism I suggest a deeper look at the facts for his actions then were no more rash than ours now. That's my opinion, take it for what it's worth.
Now, regarding your specific answers to my questions about terrorism. Your definition of what or who a terrorist is sounds plausible if we were to look up the meaning in Websters Dictionary. However, you paint with an awfully wide brush when you say that a terrorist is 'someone who uses violence to intimidate for political purposes ideology or religion.'
When and how will we ever now when we have stopped terrorism. Will it be when the last suicide bomber in Palestine is stopped or will it be when te last abortion clinic bomber is put behind bars. When do we begin our war in Northern Ireland and were do we fall on terrorism in Nepal. When is the next fleet sailing off to deal with Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka and when do we parachute in the 101st into Kashmir. Hell, what sides do we even take in some of these wars? Do we prop up a brutal dictator against popular insurgency or overthrow a democratically elected President whose politics we don't happen to like but happens to rule a country rich in oil? Where does it all end?
That leads me to my question about how much you are willing to pay for this continuing war on terrorism. You and I both agree that it doesn't stop with Iraq. I'm concerned where the trail leads next and I'm even more concerned that as the trail gets thinner and longer, the costs will continue to rise disproportionately to the perceived threat.
I am not trying to single out George Bush because what has been going on with social programs preceded him but, even before 9/11 he campaigned on a slate that promised to help increase literacy. No sooner did he become president then he gutted federal funding for Reading is Fundamental a darling program championed by his own mother. Funding for his "Leave No Child Behind" program has been defanged, equally.
When I asked you how much you were willing to spend to combat terrorism you gave me a 'pat' answer. I don't see it that clearly. To me, every dollar diverted away from education, child welfare, and other important social programs that only the government has the fiscal might to provide plants a seed for future problems right here at home.
There has been a lot of talk about class warfare as it relates to many of the budgetary and tax programs of this administration but I think the seeds were planted long before Bush ever became president. Its my belief that his radical conservatism is only fanning the flames. We have to be careful because we might find that while we were abroad fighting radical Islamic terrorism, the children we left behind may be lost in a domestic war we never intended to wage.
Regarding our freedoms, I really suggest you read the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798 along with the Patriot Act of 2001. Then, give Orwell's "1984" a perusal or, if you're in a rush, check out Gilliam's movie "Brazil" for a more pop slant on government's usurping of rights.
One final comment. In your last paragraph you you said "the men and women who work for him are some of the best and brightest in the business." Well, two of the men at the very top are Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, two men who cut their political teeth in an adminstration that was so infused with lying, cheating and double dealing that it was the only one ever to suffer the ignominy of a President's resignation. These two men are relics of a Cold War where battle lines were easily draw. Rumsfeld, in particular, is in over his head and has both the CIA and the FBI questioning this war (NYT 2/02).
You said "if Bush says Iraq is linked to the terrorism you can believe it." Well, line me up with the rest of those terrorists from a bygone era like Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington because I can't just believe the party line.
BW, thanks again for taking the time with my long winded response.
Cheers,
Paul |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:58 pm: |
|
Blue, back in the SU it was normal not to believe ANYTHING in press (except for reports on road closures due to construction work, or suggestions not to use tap water after some very minor chemical spill).
It is different here, in terms that you still can't believe any single source, but can do a decent job by filtering noise and cross-matching different sources. (that is, if you're genuinely interested in finding an answer and willing to spend time digging).
peter |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 07:41 pm: |
|
can we trust this -http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,5921220%5E663,00.html ?
peter |
Blue (Bluegill)
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 11:04 am: |
|
I read that yesterday, Peter. I think that many things will be coming to light in the near future. Of course, some will claim that evidence like this, or any evidence for that matter, is all a lie. Unfortunately this claim is used by some as a de facto foundation for an argument that has no logical resolution. Much like creationists falling back on their infallible bibles in a heated discussion of evolutionary theory. I've heard it all before, but the song remains the same... |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 11:53 pm: |
|
Paul Grant,
Kicked out or not kicked out:
If you don't like the word "kicked out" OK. That's fine. Regardless, Saddam refused to allow the inspectors to do their job. Was the UN's response proper? I don't know, but the fact is . . . Saddam failed to cooperate and Iraq was punished for it. What was he hiding?
Richard Butlers report:
Let's say 95% is accurate. What kind of impact would the remaining 5% do? More importantly, the 95% estimation was based off of what Bulter KNEW existed. He never did get to look at all the palaces. I wonder how many weapons have they developed since 98.
"Wide Brush" version of terrorism:
Broad questions will get broad answers. I don't want to argue about terms and their meanings. I understand your point and it is well made with much room to think about.
Spending and Combat:
My "pat" answer was accurately perceived. I am not an economist. I'm just an average American. The point I was making was this . . . I am willing to do what is required of me in order to prevent another 911.
Your remarks about Cheney and Rumsfeld:
I was not refering to these men as the best and the brightest. These men are not up late analyzing photographs either.
Best and the brightest.
I was referring to the men and women who work for the DoD. The ones who actually analyze all the intelligence that comes in. Make no mistake, the Pentagon makes the recommendation. True, Bush and other officials can greatly impact the mood and "mission" of the intelligence community.
In summary:
You make good points Paul. Many of your concerns are warranted and worth listening too. I think we both believe Saddam is a bad guy. I think the difference is . . . I believe Bush and you don't.
Frankly, I think Bush's "Gung-ho for War" persona is effective. I think we are all witnessing the best PSYOP war the world has ever witnessed.
I'm just happy that we still HAVE a Pentagon that can deliver intelligence reports to the President, or have we forgotten that act of terrorism already? Thank God the aircraft hit the right spot. |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 12:17 am: |
|
Would like to add one point. It is my understanding that there were WOMD found in Iraq during the 90's. Talk to the Kurds who were recipients of chemical weapons. While many think it is the UN inspectors job to find these weapons, this is NOT the case. It was Saddamm's responsibility to account for these weapons, which he did not in the latest documents submitted by Iraq. Failure to account for previously documented weapons is a material breach. It's not a case of believing Bush or Saddamm. Saddamm has not met the requirements set forth by the UN. It is clearly a case of does the UN have the balls to stand behind its own resolutions.
In a very political world, each is jockeying for public opinion. Iraq is stalling for time. The US and Britian are finding out what the UN is made of. This is a defining moment for civilization and the future of Europe. It is obvious that Germany and France are lost in the past and have abdicated the EU leadership role. Britain is not sure it wants to join the EU. It has been presented the opportunity to lead the EU but may not want it. The next few weeks should be very interesting. |
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 12:35 am: |
|
Looks like the French are waking up to realities.
Dextrous president begins to manoeuvre away from anti-war axis with Germany (Chirac)
Guardian ^ | 2/05/03 | Jon Henley
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/836188/posts |
Tom Rowe
| | Posted on Friday, February 07, 2003 - 02:09 pm: |
|
BW.."what should he do?"
Well, I have a REAL hard time with attacking another country that hasn't attacked anyone else. I haven't seen evidence that Iraq has done that since Kuwait. Personally I think Saddam should have been taken out then.
Frankly, North Korea worries me more, and I can't figure out why Bush thinks that can be resolved through diplomacy, escpecially when the US refuses to negotiate, and the Iraq situation can't be.
In any case, if it's decided to attack them, I am opposed to the US going alone. You will be hard pressed to convince me that that is a proper role for the US, at least until we clean up our own act and become consistent world wide.
If I have a 45 cal pistol, and you have a 22, who am I to say that you cant't be trusted with a 22 and that I have a right to come to your house and shoot you, when all you do is stand in your house waving it around screaming like a lunatic? I just have a real hard time with that.
Anyway, if war with Iraq is inevitable, it should be done as the UN. And with the backing of the countries that are most likley to be targets of Iraq.
What I saw of the presentation to the UN, which wasn't all of it so I may have missed something, wasn't totally convincing to me. It reminded me of the great photos and films we saw during the first gulf war, that turned out to be not true.
But all in all, I suppose war it will be, I just hope it turns out for the best, and we don't end up just fanning the flames of hatred. I have little faith that we won't, since historically, since WWII, we haven't.
I suppose in 1000 years, whether we do or we don't, it won't amount to a hill of beans.
Peter, I didn't mean to imply ALL were lemmings, and in retrospect, it was a bad choice of words, and I appologise. What I meant, was that many in power, or near power. Now maybe they didn't really belive it either, and were just out for their own advancement, or protection. And I know it's easier to speak out when you arenn't gonna be shot, or suffer the consequences you listed.
I actually find American's to be very lemming like. Among other things, advertising makes me think that, But it's hard to speak out sometimes. I do it at work, so I have to deal with the fact that I don't get the raises, bonuses, and choice work. It would be easy to keep my mouth shut. Well, not really, but you know what I mean. I'm glad I live in the US though, becuase I probably *would* get in trouble with the "authorities" elsewhere and be living in a box on the street.
Paul G, did you know that as part of the No Child Left Behind program, there is also the No Child Left Unrecruited program. Schools are now required to provde military recruiters with personal contact information of every student in order to receive federal funds. So if recruiting on school grounds doesn't work, that can become telemarketers, calling your house at all hours, or come pounding on your door, demanding to talk to your son or daughter.
Before I'm flamed for being anti military, I'm not. I just don't believe you should be forced to gice out personal contact information in order for someone to sell you something. But then again, I'm one of those nuts that thinks the "Patriot" Act is seriously flawed.
Mark, of course Iraq has chemical and biological weapons. We were instrumental in helping them to aquire them.
Finally, I guess if we are intent on killing Saddam, look for an opportunity and assasinate him. At least a lot of innocents wouldn't get killed. And YES, I am aware that innocents get killed in war, He is killing innocents, and innocents died in NY and DC, but two wrongs have never made a right. The second wrong often feels good, but still doesn't make a right. |
BW (Bwallace35)
| | Posted on Saturday, February 08, 2003 - 02:05 am: |
|
Tom,
So you recommend that the US should attack Iraq with the UN?
Just curious . . yourself and others seem to critize the administration for its decisions.
Ya see . . . I'm all for people voicing their opinions and challenging the administration. The administration SHOULD be kept in "check". But when people harshly critize others actions, I'd like to know what they'd do if they were in their shoes.
So far, I've heard a lot of "war should be the last option"(which I agree with), but I've heard no one provide clear and consise recommendations other than Paul's 'containment by means of inspections'(which I disagree with). But at least Paul has chosen a solution to the problem other than war.
BW |
Tom Rowe
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 08:40 am: |
|
BW... Yes and no. Like I said, I'm opposed to the US going it alone, when another country hasn't been attacked by Iraq. It should only be done as a UN venture, if we have to do it. I'm still not convinced it's required. At least not like it's planned.
With the resumption of U-2 flights, I now lean more towards surgical strikes on WMD targets if Saddam won't come forth. With the notice that any attacks against a u-2 will result in all defensive missle systems being taken out. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
Member
Username: Paulgrant
Post Number: 137
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:03 am: |
|
Tom, don't take this the wrong way but if you're not already familiar with them, here are a few commie/pinko/fag websites you might want to check out so that you may more finely hone that 'liberal' perspective of yours.
http://www.thenation.com It's just a light weight publication that has been voicing a clear and coherent point of view since 1865!
http://www.theprogressive.org Another of those publications that manage to present a perspective over the last century that ruffled more than a few feathers.
http://www.fair.org An opportunity to read about many issues in a way that provides you with a different slant than you're likely to get in the mainsteam.
http://www.buzzflash.com I characterized this as the 'liberal' equivalent of 'The Drudge Report' on another thread.
If you take the time to go to Buzzflash, checkout their links. I especially appreciate the Guardian UK. Frankly, and I think Mark will agree, it has become something of a prerequisite for Americans to read as much international press as they can seeing as The Fourth Estate has be relegated to entertainment instead of news. |
Paul D. Morgan (V22guy)
advanced member
Username: V22guy
Post Number: 1195
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:29 am: |
|
I support our Administration and our Military. But lately, I have been having second thoughts about sending thousands of our troops over there so quickly. If Bush wants to have the UN to handle Korea, then he has to allow the UN to handle Saddam. I think we jumped to the fight to quickly. In regards to UN veto power, I still think that it is a cash flow (trade) issue with China, Russia, Germany, and of course the French. However, one bomb or terrorist incident in a western European or Southeast Asian country would probably change that attitude.
Now as for Korea....South Korean residents are harrassing Soldiers and protesting US policy. Fine, we should remove our 37,000 troops hanging out along the DMZ and tell SK to have a nice day.
I guess the point I am trying to make is: Pull our troops home to defend the Homeland. If the UN needs us, we are a phone call way. Hell, within 24 hours we can insert American Firepower anywhere on this planet.
Thinking aloud...... |
Greg P. (Gparrish)
Senior Member
Username: Gparrish
Post Number: 1005
Registered: 04-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 11:41 am: |
|
??? |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
Senior Member
Username: Paulgrant
Post Number: 138
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 01:18 pm: |
|
Tom,
Jessica Mathews of the Carnegie Endowment for Peace offered this op.ed. piece in the Washington Post the other day. It's along the lines of the Franco/German proposal. Give it a read.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42716-2003Feb7.html
Cheers,
Paul |
KJ (Karen)
Senior member
Username: Karen
Post Number: 6
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 02:43 pm: |
|
THUD! That's me falling over near-dead after reading Paul Morgan's post. Three cheers for you Paul for having the courage to reconsider. I mean that sincerely. You're my hero of the day.
On a somewhat different, yet related note, I heard a book author yesterday say that liberals are becoming self-silencing of late, and this here liberal (if that's what I am, I fancy myself something unto myself, but that might be ego talking) thinks that's true. I'm tired of being shouted down and called less than patriotic if I dare to have a differing view than the current administration. Frankly, it pisses me off to no END when that nonsense gets trotted out to end discourse.
There was an amazing town meeting televised live on C-Span TV last night all about the possibility of war. It was hosted by Congressman Jim Moran of Northern Virginia. There was a General (Army I think), and a female Pentagon spokeswoman on the platform, and Rep. Moran was taking questions from the crowd. The crowd posted wonderful questions, but more than that, they had BRILLIANT, thoughtful opinions. One Viet Nam vet made a moving, eloquent statement that nearly brought the house down. No one could embody patriotism more than this man, and yet his arguments against this war were stunning and true. He pointed out that the leading hawks in the Administration had never done military duty themselves. I think we all know how reluctant Colin Powell has been to sign on to this war plan, and Ret. Gen. Schwarzkopt (sp?) is opposed to this war. Now, who would call them anything but die-hard patriots???? I think it's too easy to send someone else's family members to war when you haven't been there yourself. My father-in-law was an Army test pilot, a career (30+ years) Army officer. He pulled two tours of duty in Viet Nam. He tears up every time he hears our National Anthem. Serious patriot. When he was in Viet Nam he sent word home to his wife that if his sons were drafted they were to go to Canada if that's what it took to not have them go to war. I have to think a man of this character and experience had his reasons. I have to think people who have been there and done that that dissent KNOW something that we civilians only feel viscerally, without the experience. So, from our guts, and from our experience we are perhaps coming closer to agreement. Yes, something needs to be done, but this hell-bent approach the administration is threatening is not it.
Karen |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
Advanced member
Username: Paulgrant
Post Number: 139
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:17 pm: |
|
Karen, it's sounds like your father-in-law is one hell of a man, a truly fine citizen.
You know, I entered into these discussions only after I couldn't take the singlemindedness of them any longer. I've taken more than a few nonsensical hits but in the end I feel far better having made my point as well as I'm able rather than shake my head and stay silent.
Hats off to you, Paul, for reconsidering military action. We might not be on the same page yet but at least we're in the same book.
|
Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
Advanced member
Username: Markp
Post Number: 126
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:27 pm: |
|
Boy, to compare Sept 11 to Vietnam is interesting.
Looks like Powell is "leading" the latest round against Iraq. Ever hear about Good Cop, Bad Cop? Powell was the Good Cop, Bush was the Bad Cop, both were on the same page. Anybody believe that Saddam would disarm unless someone walked up to him with a big stick? We may actually have to walk right up to the brink of war before he capitulates.
As to why Iraq? Terrorism cannot survive without a State. Iraq is one of the States.
BBC News: 'Bin Laden tape to show Iraq link'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2750439.stm
Go to the Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Terrorism" thread to understand the current power structure in Saudi Arabia and the mindset of the Saudi Terrorist. A link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq is like two gangs linking up for common goals. Jump too quick? What are we suppose to do? Wait for another attack? The only solution ot terrorism is to take the fight to the terrorist. I can't see the logic of sitting around and waiting for them to come after you again.
The Franco/German proposal is a joke. Who's troops are they going to send? Neither has a credible military force. Do you think Saddam will allow British and American troops into his country to 'escort' UN inspectors? I think not. As for the Franco/German proposal, I think it would be interesting to 'follow the money' with both of them.
As for North Korea, this is a state that is on the brink of civil war. Starvation is rampant. The world organizations that supply food have basically stopped. North Korea is threatening others to distract the North Korean people from the real problem, it's Communist government. North Korea is not the same as Iraq, there is no proof they collaborated with Al-Qaeda. I actually look at North Korea as the rabid dog on the end of a leash that extends back to China. Interesting that China doesn't want the UN to address North Korea.
China against U.N. N. Korea debate
CNN ASIA | 02.11.03
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/840832/posts
|
Eric N (Grnrvr)
advanced member
Username: Grnrvr
Post Number: 1223
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:49 pm: |
|
Well, the only thing that I have to say is that if we do nothing (like everyone wants us too) and then bombs, plains, or chemicals start raining from the sky around here I don't want to read a 300++ posts here on Dis-government-Web.com from a bunch of people whining about it. Boo Hoo Hoo!!!!! If you do nothing. You get walked on and you will like it and keep quiet about it. No bitching..
So how many American's have to die before use of force is an acceptable solution? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? They aren't just going to go away and leave us alone if we do nothing.
Arguing with people about this is pointless. Everyone has their own opinion, their own agenda, and their own beliefs. So discuss, argue, talk, whatever you want to call it. But, if you don't want to do anything about it then don't bitch if things don't go your way..
That should get you all going.. |
Paul Grant (Paulgrant)
Advanced member
Username: Paulgrant
Post Number: 140
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 04:18 pm: |
|
Mark,
I just went to Google News and read about four pages of headlines from around the world and it would appear as those the tape contains a call for Muslim unity for helping Iraq against an invasion by the US. He calls for suicide bombers to attack US forces but overall, the 'link' between Al Qaeda and Iraq is still extremely tenuous at best. If you check The Guardian you'll find an interview with one of Bin Laden's bodyguards that disputes his link with al-Zarqawi and this serves to illustrate the fact that further ties between Bin Laden and Iraq are far from conclusive.
With the new format, my antiquated computer is taking forever to load this thread. I'm going to start a "State of the Union, Pt. 2" thread so please post any follow-up there.
Thanks,
Paul |
KJ (Karen)
Senior member
Username: Karen
Post Number: 8
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 10:38 pm: |
|
Eric,
You miss one vital point. That is, this war as frontal attack is only one approach to dealing with this problem. I think there are very FEW people advocating doing nothing. Ever read "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu? As I recall, his first premise is that in matters of war it's best to not have a war.
Karen |
TPH (Snowman)
advanced member
Username: Snowman
Post Number: 223
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:21 am: |
|
Karen-
I am not disagreeing with the premise of Sun Tzu, but it's too late. We are already at war but not everyone is quite getting it.
S- |
Dude
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 01:28 am: |
|
One thing is most definitely for sure. Saddam has chemical weapons far beyond our imagination and far beyond what our inspectors will EVER find. Tons of Anthrax and other biological/chemical weapons were left unaccounted for when the last inspectors were kicked out back in '98. Why do you think that they were kicked out? Have you heard what these previous inspectors say?
There is a laundry list of other items that are not accounted for and have not been destroyed. He would also hve nukes if Isreal had not desroyed his plant a few years back.
If we are waiting for definitive proof that he has chem/bio weapons we may not get it until it is too late. Meanwhile we continue to be bullied around the country only allowed to look where he wants us to look we will surely never find anything this way.
We better step up the action much like the article above from Jessica Mathews, otherwise we are headed down the path that W desires without the backing and support of our friends. Note however that it is debatable whether the plan the Ms Mathews suggests could be implemente without him kicking us out as he has done in the past.
Good article references Paul and Landy. |
Eric N (Grnrvr)
advanced member
Username: Grnrvr
Post Number: 1226
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 09:05 am: |
|
KJ, it's pretty apparent that nothing else that we have done has worked. How many times you going to let someone lie to you and walk on you before you do something about it? I'm going to stay away from this post again cause all it does is piss me off. |
KJ (Karen)
Senior member
Username: Karen
Post Number: 10
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:38 am: |
|
Eric,
Once more you miss the point. I've said all along something needs to be done. I just don't necessarily think THIS something is THAT something. There are MANY other ways to deal, and not necessarily all in the realm of public knowledge.
Karen |
TPH (Snowman)
advanced member
Username: Snowman
Post Number: 225
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:56 am: |
|
KJ-
Are you suggesting a nice clean sniper shot?
S- |
Tom Rowe (Trowe)
New Member
Username: Trowe
Post Number: 6
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:59 am: |
|
See my replies in "State of the Union, Part Deux"
Though I think Paul should have named it "Series II" ;-) |
KJ (Karen)
Senior member
Username: Karen
Post Number: 12
Registered: 02-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:11 pm: |
|
Ah well Snowie, you'd need half a dozen of those to be certain you got all the Saddams, you know? ;) Or maybe just drive him to madness with bad heavy metal music like we tried with Noriega Or force him to be a day care worker for toddlers, that would bring him STRAIGHT to his knees! Or, if all else fails, send him to my house. You know what horses say, don't you? "Manure, made fresh daily!" I'd shovel the SOB into submission! Talk about yer toxic fumes....
Karen |
TPH (Snowman)
advanced member
Username: Snowman
Post Number: 226
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:27 pm: |
|
Just wishful thinking.....We naturally have manure all around our area. There's the "clean" smell of manure and the other really bad smell! I actually enjoy it because it reminds me I don't live in a city. But keep your barn boots on.......
S- |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page