 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Another Bush war? (Bush, Iraq)
|
|
|
Subject: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 28 Aug 02 - 12:46 PM I havn't seem much on this topic here, so, I'm wondering if anyone besides me has contacted their Senators? That creep says he doesn't need congress to declare war! Since when? Search for "Bush, Iraq" threads |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: SeanM Date: 28 Aug 02 - 01:47 PM Actually, at this point, Bush has said he doesn't need Congress OR allies to attack. Maybe there can be a resolution that if he can't get congressional OR international support he has to do it all by himself? I get a great image of GW on camel-back ranting at a wall... M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: curmudgeon Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:05 PM I seriously doubt GWB's ability to read the Constitution, let alone undersatnd it. As far as I can discern from the mumblings of his minions, his desire to circumvent the Constitution is based on previous Congressional resolutions, also of dubious constitutionality, as is the War Powers Act itself. Had I two senators who represented anything other than the Republican status quo, I might contact them, but it would be a complete waste of time and energy, which will be better spent in getting them replaced on election day. I do seriously hope though, that there are enough thoughtful members of the House and Senate to start applying the brakes. Thus it is all the more important for those of you who have reasonable representation to follow Kendall's lead and make your views known. Tom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Ebbie Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:10 PM Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice, Bush- and the least of these is Bush... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:12 PM Yeah, Kendall, been wonderin' 'bout that my ownself. Seems that on one hand that Junior Bush Laden doesn't want to be perceived as trying to turn back the clock or finishing his daddy's unfinished business but is quick to point out that the declaration from Congress during his daddy's term is still in effect. Hmmmmmmm? If that's the case, heck, why not nuke Hanoi while he's at it. And North Korea. Awww, heck, since treaties don't mean anything to him, he could just revoke all the peace treaties and just go ahead and nuke the about 90% of the planet. I mean, where is the logic? Yeah, right after this post I'll send another letter to my reps in Washington and would encourage others who see thru Junior's motives to do the same... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: katlaughing Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:17 PM Kendall, here's something Anudder Mudder sent to me the other day. It might help some to feel they've at least had a voice, even though today was the day for petitions to be delivered. I am sure they will be ongoing. Please read it and see if you agree. If you do, please sign the petition and pass it on. thanks, kat ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Bush White House is aggressively promoting war on Iraq, against the advice of its diplomats, and without strong support from Congress, the American public, or our allies. Please join me in signing an online petition to oppose a war that would likely undermine both national and world security. Let's show our representatives that they have strong public support to stop this war. If you join me in signing today, your comments will be hand-delivered to your Senators as part of a national day of action on August 28th. Constituent meetings are being organized with Senate offices everywhere. Sign the petition at: http://www.moveon.org/nowar/ It's important that we speak out against a war in which many of our young people, and likely many more innocent Iraqis, would die. Even top Republican leaders are publicly questioning a war: Brent Scowcroft, the former National Security Advisor, says a U.S. invasion of Iraq "could turn the whole region into a cauldron and, thus, destroy the war on terrorism." He also says "there is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks." Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) says the CIA has "absolutely no evidence" that Iraq possesses or will soon possess nuclear weapons. Henry Kissinger says, "The notion of justified pre- emption runs counter to modern international law, which sanctions the use of force in self-defense only against actual -- not potential -- threats." Kissinger also says, "American military intervention in Iraq would be supported only grudgingly, if at all, by most European allies." Dick Armey, the House Majority Leader (R-TX-26), says, "I don't believe that America will justifiably make an unprovoked attack on another nation. It would not be consistent with what we have been as a nation or what we should be as a nation." We've got to speak out too. Please join me and do your part, at: http://www.moveon.org/nowar/ Thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:34 PM Ho Hum. Kat you ARE a believer in petitions aren't you? I never thought I would see the day when you and other Catters would promote Dick Armey's POV. I'm not convinced the Kissinger's comments aren't taken out of context myself. The New York Times recently ran a story about Kissinger's take on the current situation which he refuted. If Bush proves to be right, and doesn't try to displace Saddam, and Saddam uses a nuke to wipe out NYC, you same folks will be at Bush's throat because he did nothing! Kendall: Are you implying that your representatives from Maine can read? :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: alanabit Date: 28 Aug 02 - 02:48 PM Doug, just how do you think Saddam HUssein is going to nuke New York? It's about as likely as a gorilla eating your granny. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 02 - 03:00 PM Yeah, Doug? I mean Sadam ain't no rocket scientist. First of all, if he could even make a nuclear device without blowin' up half of Iraq, which is questioable, how's he gonna test the danged thing without someone knowing it? What, fire it off when no one's looking? Right. Hmmmmmm? Okay. let's say that Sadam does build hisself a bomb and he's fired it off in his garage so as to not let the world know he's got it, now he's gonna have to start testing his rockets in the garage, too. Think about countires who have been trying to figure out how to deliver their nukes and you'll come up with very few that have a clue. Oh, sure, they might be able to deliver them a few hundred miles but from Iraq to the US? Come on, Dougie. You're giving Sadam a little too much creedance here, my man. If he were an ally of the US and we were helping him with technology, it would still take him 20 years or so of testing and failures to come close to mounting a nuclear attack on the US... Unless, of course, the US just took some of their own nukes over to Iraq and fired them back at ourselves.... Which ain't too likely according to the latest Vegas odds.... Yeah, I don't loose any sleep worrying about Sadam but now Junior and Co.? That's a different story... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 28 Aug 02 - 03:04 PM Maybe they can't read Doug, (both of them are republicans) but, I will have my say. Doug, there is not one scrid of evidence to show that Hussein has, or ever will have nukes. And, as I told my senators, if he is such a threat after 8 years of inspections, where is the proof? How come the shrub is the only one who believes it? Thanks to his tax cut for the rich, we are asshole deep in the red right now! Where the hell is the money coming from to defeat Hussein all by ourselves? Our Arab allies have made it plain that we will not be able to use their bases. Can Bush read the constitution? can he add and subtract? How can anyone support that asshole? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: harpgirl Date: 28 Aug 02 - 03:07 PM what I'm nervous about is the fact that Dubya's daddy couldn't quite cut the mustard, so Dubya is going to prove he is a bigger man. A very dangerous psychological game, in my view. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: katlaughing Date: 28 Aug 02 - 03:14 PM Doug, you say that like it's a bad thing. If you don't think petitions get the pols' attention, I would suggest you do some research. Didn't you have any of this kind of stuff going on when you worked with the National Symphony? Lobbyists use petition numbers all of the time. Here's a good opening bit of a very informative paper at this site: clickety: A Presentation by EDWARD A. GREFE Chief Political Consultant Legislative Demographic Services to the PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL Transforming Public Affairs for the Global Arena Washington, DC - May 19, 1999 One time, when I was new to lobbying, a legislator told me that he had received only four letters on the bill I was discussing. "And," said he, "three of them were opposed to you. So, I got to figure 75% of my constituents are against you." I quickly learned the power of the grassroots to demonstrate the views of large numbers in the community. As time went on, I often met with legislators who wanted to help a client. Many would say to me, "Build me a fire." In other words, prove to them that there is real public support for my client's position on the issue, that there is documented and demonstrable support in case someone challenges the politician on their decision. In short, get three letters supporting us to every one opposing us. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 02 - 04:02 PM Yeah, Kat, I agree. Hey, what these folks want more than anything, is to get re-elected. I'd suggest a couple of minutes on emails to 'em, too. It's easy. www.congress.org 10 minutes and you'll have them all covered... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 28 Aug 02 - 04:35 PM I didn't work for the National Symphony, kat, I worked for the National Endowment for the Arts. And yes, I've seen how politicians treat petitions, and post cards that all say the same thing, and letters that all say the same thing. They end up in the round file by some clerk's desk. Some folks even believe when they get a letter from their Congressman or Senator that it was signed by the big guy/girl, him/herself. Keep at it, though, because the postal service can use the money! :>) Kendall: when did I say ALL Republican politicians can read? The kind of Republican politicians you have way up there in Maine might as well be Democrats anyway. They think like them. :>) DougR
DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: artbrooks Date: 28 Aug 02 - 05:01 PM Hum...Declaration of War...seems to me that the last one of those we had was December 8, 1941. Please don't misunderstand me...the last thing I want to do is support this "go to war with Saddam tomorrow" crap. To me, the issue isn't whether or not Iraq has weapons of mass destruction (the buzz word of the 21st century) or the means to deliver them. You can make chlorine gas from household bleach and napalm from soap flakes and gasoline, and deliver either one using a glass bottle and an M-1 right arm. The real question has to be, does Iraq plan to use these weapons on us...the U.S. not our myriad of allies and fair-weather friends...and, if we can prove they do, what is the MINIMUM that must be done to prevent it? There are a lot of countries (and entities) out there that don't like us, with or without justification: Iraq, Iran, Libia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, India, Haiti, Cuba...and any of you can expand on that list. ANY of them have the ability to produce either chemical weapons or a so-called dirty bomb. Do we take them all out because of a POTENTIAL danger? Again, to me, the dangerous thing is that either Mr. Bush seriously believes that (1) Iraq is a direct threat to the U.S. and (2) he has the authority to take military action to eliminate this threat, or else this is all a smoke screen to keep everyone's minds off of everything else that is going on. At one time in my life I took an oath to "Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" and to "Obey the orders of the officers appointed above me", in that order of importance and precedence. I am beginning to become very afraid.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 28 Aug 02 - 05:05 PM I think there's a huge difference in the impact of an online or email petition and a letter or a phone call. There's no way to verify that all those online signatures are, in fact, real people or constituents. So the opinion of the signers isn't much use except as a publicity ploy. (Which has it's own benefits.) One of my Reps informed me (at a breakfast meet-the-people meeting he has occassionally) that electronic petitions are pretty much ignored. On the other hand, letters and phone calls are carefully. Volumes of worthy (or unworthy) prose are only read enough for the clerk to figure out what it is you're talking about and whether you are for or against it. A short, concise note will suffice. Email handling is a mixed bag. Some Congressman treat it like a letter, some don't. I happen to know mine DO tabulate emails if you use their web site forms (that check your address against their constituancy), but if in doubt, send a postal letter, or a fax, or call. Some Congressman are behind the technology curve. :) Speaking of meeting your reps, a lot of them do have occassional meet-the-public events, where you can really have your say if you are polite and brief. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 28 Aug 02 - 05:07 PM Bobert: While I support your views generaly, don't get carried away. Let me point out that a tactical nuclear device powerful enough to do a lot more damage than the September 11th flythroughs did could easily be floated up to Wall Street in a rowboat. And I don't think all the warheads once aimed at democracy by the USSR have been accounted for, now have they? They don't require testing, probably -- they're production devices, not prototypes. A little rewiring and a 5 horse Johnson and dust's your uncle! However, I too am incensed that these polit facists we currently call Gummint have the nerve to invite us all into an international war without specifying the threats or real harm against which we are asked to fight. Hussein may be a psycho, but with modern C4I systems there should be hard evidence presented before anyone plans a goddamned invasion of a foreign nation against whom no war has been declared. All of this smoke is being promulgated as a side effect of our declaration that we are in a "war against a generalized condition, terrorism, which has no location and allows unlimited pursuits with or without grounds. It is a highly risky situation, and I just hate seeing it being taken advantage of. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 28 Aug 02 - 05:15 PM Well said, Art. I'm not a total non-interventionist, but the reasons we choose are so transparently self-serving at times that it discredits us. I personally consider a direct request from our allies to help (with demonstrated justification of their) another reasonable cause to intervene. That's what being an ally is. However, I think it telling that our allies who ARE within range of missiles that we KNOW the Iraqis have are not happy about our current round of chest thumping. Perhaps because they know if we attack Iraq they are the ones most likely to suffer from his retaliation? And if we attack Iraq, a military response on their part would be certain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: katlaughing Date: 28 Aug 02 - 05:40 PM I think you will find the moveon dot org is taken a bit more seriously than you might think, Nicole. If you go to their FAQs page, scroll down and read about What is a Flash campaign, you will see that they do more than just collect signatures online. Through grassroots volunteering, they hand-delivered over 200,000 signatures to over 400 individual congresspersons' offices. Those were hand-delivered by constituents of each congressperson's district; they would ignore them at their re-election peril. As well, petition gathering was also followed up by thousands of volunteers phoning their congresspeople. From what I have seen, moveon dot org has a legitimate, well-established voice which is respected and heeded. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 28 Aug 02 - 06:49 PM I didn't mean to knock any particular organization(s). I'm talking about the value of chain-letter email petitions and online guest-book style petitions. Would you take a generic list of electronic names seriously if you had a petition directed at you, without knowing which ones were constituants, which ones were duplicates or fakes, which ones were registered voters and which ones were even US citizens? While there's nothing wrong with signing an electronic petition, one shouldn't overestimate their value compared to the kind of verifiable feedback a congressman may get from a more personalized contact. Make the effort and do the followup action. It's bad enough that as long as campaign $ spent = votes money donations speak louder than opinions. No need to degrade your voice even further by hiding behind internet anonymity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: michaelr Date: 28 Aug 02 - 07:32 PM This whole situation is so f**ing dangerous it makes me want to scream. If Shrubya really goes in and attacks Iraq, there'll be hell to pay for decades. It's all a smokescreen, anyway: There is mounting evidence that the Saudis are really the ones behind Sept. 11, but it's being suppressed, discredited, and spun like mad, because Bush & Co. CAN'T go after Saudi Arabia. Why not? It's the oil, stupid! And if you think about it, Shrubya doesn't have even the authority to flush a turd -- because he is not the legitimate holder of the office of President. He was installed by the Supreme Court in what amounts to a putsch. I'm really, really worried. And where the hell are the Democrats, who are supposed to be the opposition? Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 28 Aug 02 - 07:43 PM Doug, my friend, if they are really democrats, why did Collins try to gut the medication bill? Why have the drug companie given her well over $100.000 for her campaign? Her opponent has gotten ZERO from them. How come? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 02 - 07:43 PM Oh, heck, Amos. I know that. Any teenager, with use of the internet and a small supply of urainium, could build a nuclear device, stick it in a rowboat in New Jersey and make a big ol' mess... But that's not what I'm talking about. It's Junior trying to paint a picture of Sadam being able to take on the USA in a nuclear shoot out that has me bygged becuase it is rediculous... Yeah, what we need is some good intellegence, some good police work and Tom Cruse to deal with Sadam. Wouldn't hurt to have an inclusive and less arrogant foriegn policy that Junior doesn't have a clue about to go with the good police work... But, you're right, Amos... Ol' Bobert does get carried away at times and needs to be reeled in. As long as you're doing the reeling, I'm just fine with it... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 28 Aug 02 - 08:50 PM Well, okay, Bobert -- I'll reel and you cavort -- but don't drop the line! :>) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Charley Noble Date: 28 Aug 02 - 09:28 PM Too bad we can't convince a majority of other Americans that an invasion of Iraq is a stupid objective, and one that is bound to isolate this country even more than it is. I doubt if there is a more efficient way to motivate and mobilize another wave of "terrorists" to wreak vengence on this country. Even some of the soldiers that our Defense Secretary was addressing today were willing to question the sanitly of the U.S. going it alone, at least according to ABC News. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 28 Aug 02 - 09:40 PM It's a blatent case of Testosterone poisoning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Taliesn Date: 28 Aug 02 - 09:53 PM Alright , I gots ta weigh in on this thread as I've been watchin' ol' Frat house brat G. Dubya like a hawk ever since the powers that be that wanted him in surrounded him with all the "usual suspects" from the Papa Bush league; from Cheney to Kissinger to James Baker III ,and so on. Here's the stone in my "comon sense" shoe. With all of this war talk including the "taking over of Iraq's oilfields" in order to supposedly calm the markets over the inevitable oil price-spike during a still shakey market , I have *yet* to here a single millitary strategist/talking head make mention of an obvious threat should we attempt to "take his oilfields". Anyone remember the biblical proportions of the Kuwait oil fires that burned for a solid year . Knowing that Hussein has already proven that , when cornered , has no hesitancy to practice a scorched earth policy again. This is to say the moment our special forces get near those oil fields to "take possession" they will discover that Sadam is already predisposed to affect an '"If I can't have my oil, then *no* one can" posture and set off "dirty bomb" charges on each and every wellhead for all the world to see on CNN, CNBC, etc as it happens and then watch the market implode again. The masters of war working president 'Muppet's' strings are quite literally playing with fire. On a more positive note; the only thing really holding back this "pre-emptive strike" are the risks of failing to have any viable plan of "nation rebuilding" afterwards because if the G.Dubya Gang fails there they will be roasted alive for repeating the half-arsed job that the Papa Bushites left dangling. Lord how well i remember when James Baker the III, in true Texas-style intellectualism , made the final case, whilst addressing a live audience , for going into battle with Saddam in '91; " it's about jobs, jobs, jobs!" I rest my case. Carry on |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 28 Aug 02 - 10:10 PM In all fairness to Bush 1, he did not have a mandate to take Saddam out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Barry Finn Date: 28 Aug 02 - 10:23 PM Ya gotta love him, in this global society we give away farm (or ranch) to the village idiot & he's not even aware that in his small world he still does have neighbors. With a toddler's gasp of the here & now he can't possibly remember any lessons that might've might have been learned 30 yrs ago. I guess our bouncing, bubbling Toxic Texan baby has grown into the good ole boy we always knew he could be. Bewteen him & his vice chain mail man the pair couldn't get a cabbie's license in most states that have laws about thinking & drinking while driving (TWI) & he's got a license to wage war, it's the attempt at thinking that's the most dangerous if not cutiest of his outstanding qualities. The man is nothing if he's not one of the most generous, caring, giving man whose's walked the hollow halls since the beginning of mime. Hasn't he given us a new lease on liberty & what about that lease on life that run out of time before we could use it & didn't we want to see a future where we are all americans, everywhere. And isn't he the man to give us all the fuel we'll need to burn, I can just smell the sweet scent of my fossilized bod going up the chimney in a pure puff of concentrated ash while my kids are toasting marshmellows over the glow of the warm mid eastern men. You really do have to love the little p imp & all the money he's bringing into the household & thank God we have him to bring us into a brave new world. What & where would we be with out him & where will we be if he had never been. Good night sweet heart, good night. We really do love ya, sleep in peace, forever. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 02 - 10:26 PM Nor does Junior Bush Laden, Kendall. Make a stink! Heck, last I looked, Junior didn't have a mandate to do anything. President included!!!! If it weren't for Katherine Harris's Jim Crow efforts to purge 57,700 Democratic voters from the eligible voters, Junior would now be doing the only job that he does well: unemployed! Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: InOBU Date: 28 Aug 02 - 10:58 PM Well there is something on the bush war... check out the post, "New Song Old Tune (Old Story)" shoulda' said it was about Iraq.... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 28 Aug 02 - 11:27 PM Rave on, Bobert! I love to read it! As to how would old Saddam get a nuclear device into New York Harbor, ever heard of Cargo containers? The ones that arrive in such large numbers daily in American ports that there is not enough manpower to inspect all of them? As Amos pointed out, getting the nuclear device into the country woudn't be that much of a problem. Also, as he pointed out, there are enough missing nuclear devices from the Russian arsenal to make it possible for Saddam or other terrorists to have them. The device does not have to be one that would wipe out New York City, or Chicago, or San Francisco, or Los Angeles, it could just be large enough to kill 100,000 people. That's still a lot of people, though, isn't it? If you folks, and many like you, who have absolutely no hard rock "intelligence" (I use quote marks so you don't think I am referring to your thinking capacity)are willing to take the risk, so be it. I will go with the guys who do have it. And if they decide it is the right thing to do, I'll support it. I don't think Bush will do it unless he has it. Kendall is right. George the I, had no mandate to take Saddam out, and if he had, all of you would be bitching because he exceeded his mandate. Kat: if you want to believe that urging people to send email petitions, or petitions by mail, or send cards and letters will change the course of history, have at it. I can tell you, though, that when a constituant writes a Congressman or Senator, it would be a rare occurance for that elected official to see the letter. A staff member assigned that task does read them, puts them in one stack or another (depending upon the issue), and a "stock" reply is sent (if any is sent at all)that has been approved by the AA and key staff members. In most instances, the letter is signed by the staff member who had become very adept at signing the boss's signature. As I say, the Postal Service can use the money so keep encouraging everybody to write. If it does nothing more, it will make the writer feel better, and maybe keep the cost of postage stamps within reasonable limits. As to Intelligence, Bobert, no president is going to share sensitive intelligence with us! He/She would be dumb to do so. We have no idea what information the Intelligence services have supplied to Bush. I don't believe that he, Clinton, or any president in our history would start a war against another nation unless he/she had the intelligence to support it. Those of you who think Bush would do this because his father didn't do it, are just whistling "Dixie" in my opinion, and that is a postion not worth debating. Charlie: do not be too dismayed. The majority of the U. S. citizens may support the president's views, and I realize you consider that a sad thing indeed, but by golly he hasn't won the support of the majority of Mudcatters! So perhaps there is still hope. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Barry Finn Date: 28 Aug 02 - 11:41 PM Did some one say share intelligence, it's not gonna be coming from the whitehouse & it won't be because there's an overabundence of it there either. I guess it stored away if the interests of National Security. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 29 Aug 02 - 12:14 AM Barry: Huh? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Clint Keller Date: 29 Aug 02 - 12:52 AM Doug R says "I don't believe that he, Clinton, or any president in our history would start a war against another nation unless he/she had the intelligence to support it." Look up LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin. Or look up Grenada. Clint |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Kaleea Date: 29 Aug 02 - 03:18 AM In these days of electronic media, the men & women of the US Senate & House DO take hand written letters very seriously. This from a buddy who works very closly with a particular politician who is against all of this. Now to the subjects I would like to mention. After the "Desert Storm" campaign, 60 minutes showed on a report that the Bush family made it's $$$ in oil. Then when pappy was head of the CIA, he used our tax dollars to fund the creature of the deep who is still in power in Iraq! Then (all this from 60 minutes--remember) pappy used the family arms company to arm said creature! (OK--I'd like to know what all deals were made over oil, but I digress!) Then pappy manages to get elected on the heels of poor Mr. Reagan who was in the early stages of Alzheimers (anyone who has a family member with this disease or has worked daily in a facility for Alzheimers could ascertain this from watching the press conferences he gave!). So he decided to bomb the h-e-double toothpicks out of the country of Iraq. The entire middle east hates, loathes & dispises pappy for having turned upon the man he claimed as a brother & put into power. After the first 2 weeks of nonstop bombing, I am listening to the figures that newsman Dan Rather gives on the numbers of Iraqui "royal guard" troops that can be accounted for--darned if the figure isn't about 180,000 smaller than before the bombing began. the Iraq creature from the deep is still in powser. Hmm. Then more campaigns with patriotic sounding names--lots of bombing & presto--he's still alive & on national tv defacing all of America & her people for the games pappy decides to be involved in. (I have friends who were "over there" & have serious illnesses from nobody knows quite what!) Gee--all that bombing sure got rid of that dictator, didn't it?! pappy could not catch the critter, so how does dubbleya junior think he can? hmm. The folks from the middle & far east, & most of the rest of the world community hate, loathe & dispise dubblya. hmmmm. So now dubbya is going to go over & bomb with not so much as a "howdy do" to/from congress. hmmm. Sounds like a personal vendetta of the bush famblee!! Hmmmmm . . . So now dubbya just HAS to go "over there" in order to rid the world of a menace &/or at least put him at an inconvenience . . .except it ain't HIS life on the line, it ain't his body which could be surrounded by a deadly virus in the form of gaseous stuff. OK-so how does dubbya think he is going to justify this stuff of war to the American people who root for the underdog? Not to mention the fact that some of the middle eastern countries are saying they will not leg Americans fly on a certain date which is the anniversary of the most tragic terrorist event in the history of the USA. Things that make you go . . ."hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm . . ." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 29 Aug 02 - 03:40 AM "I don't believe that he, Clinton, or any president in our history would start a war against another nation unless he/she had the intelligence to support it. Those of you who think Bush would do this because his father didn't do it, are just whistling "Dixie" in my opinion, and that is a postion not worth debating." Oh, Doug, you have no idea how much I needed a laugh tonight. Thank you! Your faith in the good intentions of our government is touching. But NO government runs without a big dose of self-interest. Not in the US, not anywhere, and that won't change as long as we have humans running things -- which is why check & balances is so important, and why watching our government and raising bloody hell over every stupid, self-serving thing they do is a civic duty. But while we are fantasizing: The government would also not test unapproved medications and peerformal medical, chemical, and nuclear experimental treatments on US soldiers and citizens without their knowledge. Nor would the government allow legislation to be written by special interest groups and corporate lobbyists and rushed to the floor for a vote at 11pm on a Friday before anyone has had a chance to read it. Nor would the government hold people of specific ethnic and religious groups in prison without pressing charges, notifying their families, making it a matter of public record, or allowing them access to independant counsel. Nor would the government secretly spy on personal and private communications between *suspected* criminals while in jail, and then build a prosecution case around it. Etc., etc. In truth, I sometimes think the very last people we should allow to run the country are the ones that *want* to. If you are power hungry, maybe we really shouldn't give it to you... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Sledge Date: 29 Aug 02 - 04:05 AM I'm Currently working in an Arab country so I'm watching all this with some concern. All we seem to hear from the whitehouse is that Saddam is evil and would like to own weapons of mass destruction, thats hardly news to anyone. There may of course be new intelligence that the CIA et al have passed to the shrub, but lets face it they managed to completely miss such things as the invasion of Kuwait until it appeared on CNN. So my confidence in their ability to garner new information from a country as closed as Iraq, is not too great. It is also worth bearing in mind the current opinion held by the Arabs should Iraq be attacked, if there are no bases in the area open to the US then it will be a lot harder than Desert storm was, and it may even provoke some of them to join Saddam. This may not seem to be a big problem for the US military, remember however that the US is a long way from the middle east. Without local support US casualties will surely mount, Terrorists will gain recruits, and the US may then be more of a target than it was. Sledge |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Bagpuss Date: 29 Aug 02 - 04:57 AM Lets see. There's this one country which is stock-piling weapons of mass destruction and hell bent on attacking another country. And then there is Iraq... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 29 Aug 02 - 05:17 AM Doug, consider this; if it is so easy to slip a nuclear device past the port inspectors, what good will it do to destroy Iraq? It would only create MORE enemies! We cant blast everyone out of existence! I saw David Horowitz on tv running his mouth, and I couldn't believe that an obviously bright man could be so wrong. Intelligence and common sense are not always found in the same person. As I see it, Shrub needs an enemy which the gullible Americans can focus on. This Will-o-the wisp, Bin Laden, is too hard to find. Can you explain to me how taking away our rights is going to save our freedom? That small group of bellicose old hawks will get us all killed. Another hard question, Doug, if Saddam is such a threat, how come only the Bush gang sees it? Even our best allies are "jumping ship". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Butch Date: 29 Aug 02 - 08:56 AM Did any of you read the Sept 14th, 2001 Congressional Resolution giving the President power to decide when, where and how to retaliate against the terrorists.... including the use of military force? That is what Bush is hanging his arguemnet on. And the lawers for Congress have yet to say word one about it. They just bluster at Bush but do not deny the validity of his arguement. On the other hand, we can try and avoid making more enemies all we want by taking no action against anyone, but are we willing to pay for it in civilian lives? There is good evidence that the WTC happened because we took little or ineffective action after the last WTC bombing. I do not have an answer, but I do know that there is a point where we have a choice to be strong, or become the worlds punching bag. Unfortunately, we already have the enemies, lack of action will make them bold, not friendly. (IMHO) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 29 Aug 02 - 09:00 AM The blind Sheik is in prison for that caper. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Teribus Date: 29 Aug 02 - 09:37 AM Just so much Magpie chatter - He won't do it because he can't do it without the willing assistance of Saudi Arabia and Turkey. In the current situation this assistance will not be forthcoming. My bet is that the inspectors will go back in and some face-saving way of backing down will be found. As to the potential nuclear threat and means of delivery, Alanabit and Bobert are thinking of conventional means of delivery, Doug R and Amos have pointed out how it could be done. A device could be assembled bit by bit over a number of years (The investigations into the WTC attack have established that it was three years plus in the planning stage). As a result of that attack, the intelligence, customs and law enforcement services of a great many countries are aware and working to prevent any such attempt - Good luck to them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Kim C Date: 29 Aug 02 - 10:07 AM United States very big. Iraq very small. If Hussein has nothing to hide, why is he hiding it? It is my understanding he has not cooperated with UN weapons inspectors; however, admittedly, I know just enough to be dangerous. Now, on the other hand... this could be nothing but a bluff and an idle threat, to coerce Hussein into cooperating with said weapons inspectors. Because if it were me, and I were going to sucker-punch the other guy, I sure wouldn't let it out into the international news. But if I just wanted to rattle his cage... well, that's another story. I think in teenage circles they call it Trash Talk. It's an intimidation tactic. Y'all know I am one of those dangerous conservative-leaning people, and that I generally don't join in the President-bashing games - mostly because I believe making fun of people when it isn't in good humor makes bad medicine and negative energy. However, I do agree that I am against a military action against Hussein on the mere grounds that he's an asshole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: curmudgeon Date: 29 Aug 02 - 10:25 AM I just spent the last hour listening to a fascinating discussion on the radio on this very topic. I was especially impressed with the thoughts of Illinois law professor, Francis Boyle. For those in or near New hampshire, the program will be rebroadcast at 8:00 PM EDT, 89.1 FM. Otherwise go to www.nhpr.org and click on "The Exchange." It probably is not on the website yet, but do try it later -- Tom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 29 Aug 02 - 12:32 PM Teribus, Iran has invited the inspectors back in several times, with the condition that the inspectors are actual inspectors, and not US spies. Which the US won't agree to. If we wanted genuine inspectors back in, they'd not only be there, they'd have never left. Now will the US allow UN weapons inspectors inside our own country. There's a lot of hypocrasy on this issue. We would need Saudia Arabia for logistical support (food, water, local transportation and facilities), and probably Bahrain or mayube Kuwait as an attack base. In this case, we don't logistically need Turkey -- too far away. Going it alone is a financial nightmare, particularly for the US economy. Cost of Gulf War: (costs above and beyond regular army budget) $61 billion. Cost to US: $7 billion, becuase of debts shared by coalition. For comparision's sake, the cost of the military campaign in Afghanistan is around $10 billion. Interesting article on the potential fiscal effect on a new Iraqi War from the NY Times here: http://www.iht.com/articles/66154.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST Date: 29 Aug 02 - 01:02 PM Nicole, Turkey, also in NATO, is a lot closer than the gulf states. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Venthony Date: 29 Aug 02 - 01:20 PM Well, I'm going to get mashed. But at least one Republican ought to weigh in and represent the party. First things first, if anybody deserves to be on the losing side of a short, nasty war it's Saddam. That said, I'm a bit old fashioned. Any American president who wades into a real war -- as opposed to chasing down thugs and outlaws like bin Laden -- without a formal nod from Congress, and preferably a declaration as called for in the Constitution, is on very dangerous ground. Doing so (the vague and somewhat creepy Tonkin Gulf resolution notwithstanding) cost Lyndon Johnson his presidency. Thirdly, President Bush is a person of more character and talent than a number of you realize. But the urge for any president -- the most powerful state leader on the face of the earth -- to "smite his enemies" often leads the best of them into unfortunate rhetoric. Even liberal icon Harry Truman once quipped that he wanted to "drop an atom bomb on Joe Stalin's head." As for the current situation, you will notice, that after all the saber-rattling, Iraq has offered to accept inspectors again. Maybe -- in the deep game of international realpolitic -- that was the whole point. The president took a PR hit in order to scare Saddam into a moderating posture. It's possible. Finally, and if this a flame, so be it. I think the chief difference, in the U.S. at any rate, between Republican/conservatives and Democrat (not democratic!)/ liberals is the liberal penchant for rant and namecalling. Most Republicans, for example, will admit that even Bill Clinton, who I certainly loathe, was a very competent administrator and one of the few presidents we've ever had who really understood economics. That's why he signed the Welfare Reform bill among other "Republican" fiscal initiatives. Liberals, on the other hand, always seems to prefer rant to reasoned debate. Some of you really ought to pick up a copy of the "National Review" once in a while, if for no other reason than to learn that the other side does indeed have some interesting ideas to bring to the table. With every wish for peace and justice, Tony |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 29 Aug 02 - 01:24 PM I concur with Kim; I think the whole discussion at the top level of the DoD about invasion and war against a second-rate nation is entirely an effort to sound convincingly threatening. The problem with a bluff like that is that it can conceivably be called; but Saddam tried that before with Daddio, mouthing off about the mother of all battles, remember? It turned out not to be the mother of much, after all that toxic rhetoric. If the man is as psycho as he seems to be the last thing that will work is backing down a la "Peace in Our Time" Neville Chamberlain, trying to make Adolf calm down. It pays to remember what has worked and what has not in the past. That said, I can only hope that the current war-mongering noises coming out of Cheney et al are actually rhetorical devices. The purpose of war, Klausewitz advises, is to bring about a more amenable frame of mind on the part of the enemy, and rhetoric surely serves that end. If it tips over the brink into physical engegement on a large scale, we run a serious risk of moral bankruptcy, fiscal drainage and a serious setback to more worthy goals in the world. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Venthony Date: 29 Aug 02 - 01:32 PM Amos, We must have posted at almost the same moment. Two great minds ... etc., etc. LOL Tony |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Kim C Date: 29 Aug 02 - 02:05 PM Maybe we should just challenge him to a game of Risk. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 29 Aug 02 - 02:27 PM General Norman Schwarzkopf, who has had some experience in the Middle East as you may recall, is opposed to going to war with Iraq. So are a great many military experts. In a recent speech, General Anthony Zinni (ret.) listed many reasons to avoid war in Iraq, stressing that the move would only injure U.S. diplomacy with its allies, while causing a fiery chain reaction throughout the Islamic world. General Zinni, who once commanded the entire U.S. military in the Middle East, says he's not the only former general who opposes it. But the Bush administration doesn't want to hear that. Zinni noted that "all the generals see it the same way, but those who have never fired a shot in anger are hell-bent on going to war." Suppose Hussein actually does have a functioning nuke or two and he's sitting there gloating over what he might do with them. I can't think of a better way to guarantee that he would use them than to initiate a war with Iraq. On the other hand, even he can't be so stupid as to realize that, were he to use a nuclear weapon, the whole world would come down on him like a ton of bricks. The first one to use a nuclear weapon opens the door for nuclear weapons to be used in retaliation. Lovely! Armageddon! That'll bring joy to the hearts of the millenialists! The U. S. government has a policy of refusing to talk to people it doesn't like (or can't use). We cut off diplomatic relations, thereby cutting off any possibility of meaningful communication. In the meantime, the disliked person goes his merry way and seems to live a long and fairly productive life not giving diddly-squat whether we like him or not. Castro leaps to mind. And Saddam Hussein looks like another. As a result, other than engendering hostility, we have no chance of exercising any kind of control or influence. This sometimes seems like the policy of a petulant three-year-old. Sure, Hussein's a son-of-bitch and a tin-pot tyrant, but (and I'm sure there are those out there who will say this is painfully naïve of me) other than looming over him and making threats, has anybody actually tried to talk to the man lately? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 29 Aug 02 - 02:39 PM Sorry about the errant HTML code there. I wasn't shouting :) I'm with you in hoping that all the saber-rattling is just that. Even though Saddam was making overtures to the west long before the recent round of threatening, if Bushie can make it look like he's the one that made it happen, it'll be a PR coup. And he's succeeding, because most Americans seem to be swallowing the idea. In my gut, though, I really think that Bush Jr. doesn't take the repercussions of military action in an already inflammatory area very seriously, and he should. I don't think most of his cabinet are taking it very seriously. And that's the truly scary part, not that a war with a little pissant country like Iraq might happen, but that the folks deciding whether or not we go to war aren't really thinking this through. But I hope I get proved wrong. There's something to be said for sending out the champions for single combat to the death, huh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: bradfordian Date: 29 Aug 02 - 06:11 PM 29 Aug: George Bush / Dick Cheney what a pair a of war mongers!!! God help the world. Sure Hussian may well be unstable, but hell, if you try and persecute Joe Public before he has committed a cime, the lawyers would have a field day. Even paedophiles have to be caught doing something wrong first! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 02 - 07:08 PM Well, me and my trusty Wes Ginny slide rule been workin' on that nuclear device thing and no matter how many X's and Y's we use, these are the findings: ***** Our chances of someone building a nuke in a rowboat and floating into the New York harbor increase porportionately with the number of folks we blow up.***** I knew Junior had problems with his figurator and now, in spite of those folks who are comforted having Dick around, I think he might have similar wiring problems! Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 29 Aug 02 - 07:13 PM Dang, BO-Bert, when'd'ja lurn that slippery stick trick?? Ah's so i,pressed Ah almoas' droppt mah Texas Instrument, an' ya KNOW thuh Fair Ladies 'ud neveah forgive ya fer makin' THAYUT happen!! **BOSEG** But even my Texas Instrument tells me yer basic parameters are keereckly estimigiggered to about three deshimayuls, so you-all mus' be doin' somethin' righyat ovuh theyah. ":?>) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 02 - 07:45 PM Man, I though my typin' was bad, Amos. How you play musuc with so little dexlecterity anyway? But, et is good to hear that mountin dire-lect. Bo-bert, no, Bobber, no, danged... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: InOBU Date: 30 Aug 02 - 08:20 AM As to what I have to say in this conversation, American policy has been to keep the rest of the world, especially the raw material prodicing world, simmering but not boiling over, well the result of this attemt is now costing us freedoms at home... so the rest of what I have to say about this is... Scales of Revenge Words Lorcan Otway, Tune Traditional, Willy Of Windsburry from the singing of the great Anne Briggs. Oh America's fired a cruse missile, and it's killed my brother's son Now I must put my hopes aside and learn the way of the gun Oh why and how can they do such things, why bring such grief to me Now I will go and seek revenge for my faith and my dignity
Oh some men from Saudi Arabia, have killed my old school friend He was never a part of any war, why bring him this awful end? Oh why and how can they do such things, why bring this grief to me, Now I will go and seek revenge for my friend and for my country
Oh the helicopters came last night, and we fled into the dark But American bullets flew from above, killing my wife, my love, Oh why and how can they do these things, why bring this grief to me, As generations of Afghans before, I'll defend this poor country My son, my son, he will never return, in a foreign war he lies slain He was fighting for his home and hearth, on some barren Afghani plain Oh why and how can they do these things, why bring such grief to me Send troops send troops, to far Iraq, to stop this insanity And here I sit and I watch the world, as blood is shed for blood And I can only wonder why and how can we stem this flood Oh why oh how can they do such things, on justice's bloody path, And who will be left to say in the end, we've balanced the scales at last
Don't stop, don't stop for our martyred dead, or an inch of blood soaked soil, But stop oh stop for the love of your child, in fields of hope now toil Oh how oh why can't we begin, by putting grief behind We can not ever pay for the dead, by paying another in kind.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: artbrooks Date: 30 Aug 02 - 08:40 AM Larry, the only problem with that song is that the damn thing keeps being timely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: InOBU Date: 30 Aug 02 - 11:13 AM Thanks Art, I hope folks sing it until it isn't. Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Aug 02 - 08:51 PM "Lets see. There's this one country which is stock-piling weapons of mass destruction and hell bent on attacking another country.
And then there is Iraq..." A letter in Friday's Guardian expands on what Bagpuss said up the thread:
There are analogies between the international situation now and in the 1930s (Searching for a new hero: why America has turned to Winston Churchill, August 29). Then, as now, a minority political clique gained control of a great military and economic power, after an ambiguous and manipulated electoral process. Then, as now, they used propaganda to amplify a burning, but unfocused, sense of popular insecurity and grievance. Minorities were scapegoated - then socialists and Jews, now Muslims. Then as now, international agreements and obligations were set aside, as, increasingly, were aspects of the rule of law, while the major supranational organisation was too weak and disunited to act effectively. Threats and grievances were amplified in the public mind to justify aggression. Thus, domestic opinion was carried along in the rush to re-armament and war, the opposition cowed into silence by the fear of appearing unpatriotic.
(For the rest of that letter, by a Dr EC Hulme of St Albans, Herts, click here.)
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 30 Aug 02 - 09:30 PM Just to keep the record clear, those torched and ruined bodies at the bottom of the WTC were not opinions. I see nothing patriotic about Bush's warmongering stance; but I do think we need to remember there is a material beginning to this confrontation. And if you want to talk about setting aside the rule of law, a few of those passengers might have had a few thoughts on the matter before they were slaughtered. I am not trying to fan the flames of blind aggression or blind compliancxe to creeping facism. But let us please keep all the facts on the table. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 30 Aug 02 - 09:40 PM McGrath, thanks for the link to The Guardian. I read the letter, then ran a search for the article it refers to and read it. In fact, I bookmarked the site and I'll be back a lot, because the news services in the States are frequently deficient in giving a global picture of what's really going on (big flamin' surprise!). This I hadn't heard! George W. Bush keeps a bust of Winston Churchill in his office and compares himself to Churchill? Sweet weeping Jesus! We are DOOMED!!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: michaelr Date: 30 Aug 02 - 09:50 PM Don -- we very well may be. As to the news here being deficient, check this out: WorldLink TV. Alternative news AND music! Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: artbrooks Date: 30 Aug 02 - 10:36 PM There are very few people out there who would disagree that Saddam Hussain is a pimple on the face of humanity. However, in the spirit of keeping all of the facts on the table, and not comparing apples to rutabegas, please keep in mind that there is absolutely nothing to link him to the 9/11 attacks. Believe it, if there were we would be hearing nothing else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 30 Aug 02 - 11:48 PM Islam in the Middle East has always been barely tolerated in the US by the status quo, despite it's growing popularity here. When you combine that with the economic dependance we have on the Middle East and the fanaticism that arises anywhere you combine abject poverty with deep religious convictions... well, the boiling cauldron of oil shouldn't be a surprise. In the aftermath of 9/11, it's hard for anyone to maintain perspective about the region when you already have a widespread residual prejudice against people who share the same socio-religious background as a bunch of murders who carefully plan ways to kill anyone they disagree with. So now Iraq has ceased offering anything resembling the olive branch in the wake of the latest grandstanding from Washington. Gee... what a surprise! Since when do petty dictators -- particular fundmendalist Islamic ones, do anything but get stubborn and defiant in the face of Western bullying??? There is nothing that Iraq can do to appease the US, and it's been stated quite clearly that the US wants regime change, not inspectors. Time for a pet peeve -- I hate hearing how Iraq "threw out" the weapons inspectors. The weapons inspectors were withdrawn by the US in 1998 because they said Iraq wasn't cooperating, and we wanted our people out before we bombed them. "Cooperating" in this case meant that the "inspectors" -- US spies -- wanted full access to things like Saddam's private home. Oh yeah, there's a weapons factory in the basement! Then Iraq refused to let the inspectors back in after they were subjected to another round of aerial death. Right or wrong, I'm tired of hearing about how Iraq "kicked out" the inspectors. They did no such thing, it's just propaganda at it's best. Honestly, though, I'm starting to feel a little optimistic about the Iraq situation. Regular people in the US are talking about whether it's right or wrong. Even if Bush goes ahead, as tragic as that will be to the everyday citizens of Iraq who get killed in the process, the fact that a dialogue is taking place is a sign that democracy may be very ill, but it's still alive and it's not going down without a fight. I haven't seen people (other than the usual left or right wing activists) talking seriously about politics in almost a year... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 31 Aug 02 - 02:56 AM I have read all of the posts in this thread very carefully, and have tried to be as fair in my assessment of them as I can. As most of you know, I am a conservative, and to support the current administration. What I deduce from reading the many posts in this thread, though, is you folks really don't trust Bush and Cheney, right? DougR DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: InOBU Date: 31 Aug 02 - 09:14 AM Dear DougR:... Ahhh duh.... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: artbrooks Date: 31 Aug 02 - 10:09 AM Actually, Doug, I do trust them...to do what is absolutely wrong from my personal perspective. Where's Harry Truman when you need him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,sorefingers Date: 31 Aug 02 - 10:15 AM Reading the thread scares me silly! Hey it would not have mattered who was in the White House they would still need to do something! GW is no Einstein but he is no coward, how he gets rid of that monster is not an issue. Saddam is a criminal of the worst kind, like a crooked cop he wallows in official authority as he gasses, tortures etc innocent civilians to death. Left to do his dirt he will become something far far worse than Adolf the ashman or Joe the fertilizerman. For the record - nobody seems to notice or care about the economics of the Oil game. US Oil imports from Saudi = 1 million barrels per day ... US Oil imports from Iraq = 8 hundred thousand barrels per day.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: NicoleC Date: 31 Aug 02 - 11:02 AM Doug, I trust them. To place their personal profit and desires above the good of the country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 31 Aug 02 - 01:03 PM I love you folks, I truly do! Sorefingers, I don't know how you got them and surely sore fingers can cause a lot of discomfort, but I'd suggest in a most friendly way that your fingers in this thread are not what is at risk. You better duck your head! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 31 Aug 02 - 01:19 PM Sense of history, sorefingers. Hitler was a homicidal maniac who had a world view, the backing of most of the powerful people in one of the most powerful countries in Europe, and a massive military machine at his command. Hussein is a petty tyrant in a second-rate country where a lot of people hate him, and his military is a rag-tag, ill-equipped rabble. One of the parallels with Nazi Germany that really bothers me is how they systematically eroded the rights of their own citizens by invoking visions of outside threats, then accused those who questioned this of lack of patriotism. And you just said the magic word. Oil. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 31 Aug 02 - 01:24 PM Energy and water folks -- if we can cure those, the world will reinvent itself in a whole new balance, for better or worse. Being as deeply invested in oil as Bush-head is is kinda like being the king of Buckboard manufacturing in 1902. Y'ever notice how fast buggy whips went out of style? How often do you hear people complain "Why cancha find a really good Conestoga maker when ya need one!!". Mene tekel ipse facto, Georgie boy!! Thy day approacheth. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Peg Date: 31 Aug 02 - 01:37 PM George Bush isn't a coward??? HUH? Why then did he hide his candy ass in planes (or who knows where) for an entire day while Manhattan burned? Small wonder people practically canonized Rudy Giuliani (previously thought a fascist by many New Yorkers) for his leadership at this time; where was our fearless leader? Sorry but I see NO excuse for a president to allow himself to be spirited away while the country is under siege. Where is Jed "I'm not going to the bunker" Bartlet when you need him?
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 31 Aug 02 - 02:25 PM No, sorefingers, it certainly isn't lost upon anyone, especially oil man Junior Bush Laden, that 75% of Iraq'a oil ends up in the tanks of our beat up Toyotas and Fords right here in the US. Do you really think that the big oil companies don't make a profit on imported oil, or what? If you'll revisit your arguement you'll find what a lot of use have been saying all along. Put two rich oilmen in charge and this crap is what you're gonna get. Ain't rocket science. Now throw in the corporate bed buddies of the folks who make war products and you'll plainly see that working class America has and is about to be severly duped in the name of national security... Mark ol' bobert's words here. When the smoke clears from Junior and Dick's self serving administartion, the country will be emersed in deficits from his perchant for blowing folks up and giving away money to his rich friends and the average worker will be worse off then they've been in 25 to 30 years, with less access to health care, working longer and harder with a totally bungled up Social Security system. Impeach these fool while there's any hope for America... They gotta a go... Save our Country... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Aug 02 - 06:18 PM "GW is no Einstein but he is no coward" As he demonsrated during the Vietnam War?
Keeping out of a war because you think it's wrong and you want no part of it is one thing; but Bush supported that war while making damn sure that he kept out of harm's way, while other people, without the connections and the friends in high places, went out there. I wouldn't say that someone who does that "is no coward." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 31 Aug 02 - 06:28 PM Perhaps managing an international bloodbath will help him overcome his fears! A therapeutic experience!! Therapy is costly, sure, but think of the benefits!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 31 Aug 02 - 07:50 PM I am trying to remember, McGrath, if you heaped similar words of praise upon our previous president on his behaviour during the Viet Nam conflict. Bush at least served in the National Guard. Heck, with all the money he made from oil, he could even have immigrated to Canada! Bobert, old buddy, I'm so glad you are breaking your posts into paragraphs now. I read all of 'em now! DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 31 Aug 02 - 09:14 PM Well, danged, Dougie. Makes ol' Bobert all choked up knowin' that you're actaully reading my posts. Really does. Now, I know you're a man of few words. Kinda Kendallish in that way. But Junior is depending on you to do more that crituque mu writing style. You're 'sposed to be defending him. Hmmmmmmm? Maybe ol' Doug has figured out that there us no defense for crappy and mean-spirited policies? Think we got a closet commie here, folks. Come on out, Doug. Come on out... The truth will set ya' free... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war averted? From: GUEST,Taliesn Date: 01 Sep 02 - 05:05 AM Well aparently the collective voice of the Mudcatters has "single-handedly" worked its magic on the White House ( well , it's a nice fantasy anyway ) because Pres. Muppet Dubya's P.R. brigade has apparently taken great effort to "get out that message" that *he* has *no plans* yet. Well gloooooory Be, who'd a thunk it that admitting he was ,indeed , clueless ( the emperor has no plans ) would be considered good P.R. Anybody care to dispute that this all reads like confirmation that he hadn't *Clue One* from the start when he first started to make the "War on Iraq" speeches that were written for him? Should prove interestingppose this glaring "back-peddling" will surface on the Sunday News programs in some form or another. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Sep 02 - 08:37 AM Doug, as I said, it's one thing to evade a war you are opposed to, but getting out of one you are in favour of is something else. And there has never been any hint that Bush at any time opposed the Vietnam War.
Getting a student deferment isn't the bravest way of keeping out of being called up. But on the other hand to go and fight in a war you are opposed to can also be a form of moral cowardice.
But in any case the quote I was commenting on was about Bush, and saying "he is no coward". It wasn't about Clinton, who I'd see as a pretty unsavoury sort of character as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 01 Sep 02 - 01:35 PM Tailesn: you certainly were correct about the Sunday "talk" shows. They even have the governor of Minnesota on CNN to offer his opinion of the situation. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ole' Bobert or Kendall to pop up next. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 02 - 02:43 PM Yeah, Taliesn, in response to a lot of bellicose talk, Bush notes that it isn't going over all that well with the diplomatic corps, with the military, and with the public, so suddenly he has "no plans." I thought someone was supposed to beep when they back up like that. Look for some kind of major policy address on September 11th. It'll be interesting. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Sep 02 - 06:39 PM When a politician says they have no plans to do something that is generally taken to mean that they have every expectation of doing it, but it's not convenient at this time to say so.
For example, if Daddy Bush had said "Watch my lips - I have no plans to raise taxes," he'd have been home clear, because he'd have avoided making any commitment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 01 Sep 02 - 06:49 PM As long as Senior Bush Laden is still breathing you can bet that Junior will do everything he can to nail Saddam. Hey, he's just following orders... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Sep 02 - 07:11 PM Today's Observer has an interesting piece pointing out that at the time Saddam was using poison gas, both against Iranian troops, and Kurdish oppenenys, and killimng thousands of civilians inthe priocess, he was actually having his back protected bythe US. He was seen as the good guy in the war he started against Iran, and a few atrocities like thta weren't seen as too significant:
As Iraq's use of poison gases in war and in peace was public knowledge, the question arises: what did the United States administration do about it then?
Absolutely nothing. Indeed, so powerful was the grip of the pro-Baghdad lobby on the administration of Republican President Ronald Reagan that it got the White House to foil the Senate's attempt to penalise Iraq for its violation of the Geneva Protocol on Chemical Weapons to which it was a signatory.
This made Saddam believe that the US was his firm ally - a deduction that paved the way for his brutal invasion and occupation of Kuwait and the 1991 Gulf war, the outcomes of which have not yet fully played themselves out.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Venthony Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:25 AM The level political discourse on this site is so puerile that it sinks beneath any rational response. All I can say is -- as a proud conservative and member-in-good-standing of the GOP -- that no less than Christopher Hitchens, of "Beat the Devil" fame, is one of my very favorite journalists and authors. He says almost nothing with which I agree, but he is rational and convincing and ethical and brilliant -- and a flawless wordsmith; and he makes me think. On occasion, he even moderates my views. You folks, by contrast, seem able only to name-call and hurl vulgar cliches filched from the commonest of the common press. I know some of you read good books, and that the best of you even know how to think for yourselves. So prove it with something besides cynicism, cheap shots and street-corner rhetoric. Sincere best wishes. Tony |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Venthony Date: 02 Sep 02 - 01:16 AM My last post was rude and ill-considered. Bobbert et al just get under my skin sometimes, which of course they have every right to do. Forgive the insensitive and impolite flame. Best to all, Tony
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 02 - 01:44 AM Well, Tony, we all have bad days once in a while. There's a certain art to biting your otngue at the right moments, and NOT at other times!! Better we should all study it! You are certainly not the first, nor the last, to vent more than you wish you had! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 02 - 10:17 AM Tony, Sorry to have gotten under your skin. Tell ya' what. I'll make you a deal. You come up with book written by a conservative author that you want me to read and I'll read it if you will read Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy". It's not that I don't have knowledge or ideas here. It's just that there are a lot of folks who have studied history and been around for a few decades in the trenches fighting for the working man, who now look at an administration which is Hell bent on repeating behavior expecting different results... This ain't about the definition os "is" or some Whitehouse intern, it's about the blatent assault on the Bill of Rights and a quick trigger finger. Now, do we have a deal, Tony? Don't confuse my poor typing skills, my severe dyxlexia or my hillbilly act for a lack of intellegence. Yeah, I may read slowly, but I remember well. Regards. the Bobert
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Greg F. Date: 02 Sep 02 - 10:59 AM Correction: Baby Bush did manage to get into the National Guard, thru Daddy Bush's influence, to keep him out of the real war by defending Texans from Viet Cong invaders, but he did NOT "serve". As the official service records clearly indicate, he was AWOL for two thirds of his National Guard stint, and was never prosecuted. Imagine that! - a Real Hero- another chickenhawk. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:07 PM What's "conservative" and "liberal" got to do with issues of whether or not it's right to make a particular war in particular circumstances?
There are people to whom either label (and quite a few more - those aren't the only political options, by a long way) on both sides on this issue. Waving labels like that around just serves to divert discussion into matters of less immediate significance.
And the same applies in respect of all kind of other matters where, for some reason, people seem to think that those labels coincide with divisions of opinion, when they just do not. Capital punishment, global warming, fox-hunting, gun control... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: GUEST,Taliesn Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:24 PM (quote) "As the official service records clearly indicate, he was AWOL for two thirds of his National Guard stint, and was never prosecuted. Imagine that! - a Real Hero- another chickenhawk." "Chickenhawk George".... I like that one. Has a certain ring to it. "Let me tell ya 'bout a story of a Chickenhawk George, and with his family's wealth, the personality he'd forge. and then one day he woke a head state, just in time for the 2nd Iraq-gate. It's over Oil that is, unfinished bidness, Texas pride " with apologies to the Clampets..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:27 PM Excellent point, McGrath. The labels tend to be quite misleading and purposely counterproductive. It is the issues that are paramount and not the fraternal squabbling sideshow that tends to push itself into the forefront. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:52 PM Hey, Greg F., where you been? I wondered when you might show up in this thread. I've missed you! I wasn't aware that one's service records was public information. Where did you find it? It would be interesting to look up several people's service records. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 02 Sep 02 - 12:53 PM McGrath, the Sage of Harlow, has a knack for cutting to the heart of the matter. I don't regard myself as either "liberal" or "conservative," and it tends to get up my nose when I venture an opinion or quote a fact and someone given to kneejerk reactions simply dismisses what I say by calling my a name. It allows them to avoid having to a)answer b)think. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 02 - 01:18 PM Welcome to the sorry assed species of Homo Sap, Don -- avoiding thought is what we do best! If you need your thoughts avoided effectively, call on us!! Bias, conclusive ignorance, black screens, shallow diversions, flippant rejections and glumly endless apathetic nothing applied with the very best modern techniques. Blind spots a specialty. You'll never see your unwanted thoughts again! Call today! Regards, A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 02 - 02:10 PM Well, the title of the thread is "Another Bush War" so it does stand to reason that Bush might find himself on the main stage of this thread. I don't think is off limits to question: 1. The links between the Bin Laden and Bush families. 2. Bush's military record. 3. The fact that Iraq recives $6B from the US for it's oil. 4. That Bush and Cheney are oil men and continue to have close ties to the industry. 5. That it can be forcefilly argued that an attack on Iraq increases the chance of one day having a family member of a killed Iraqi float a boat with a nuclear device up the Potomac River. 6. That those corporations which will porfit the most from a hot war in Iraq are arms manufacturers which have close ties to the party the now possesses the White House. 7. That, as a result of a hot war in Iraq, the federal budget will continue to tilt further toward the "defense" department and further away from social programs. 8. That perhaps the dialogue on the internet has brought about some reconsiderations for a war on Iraq. 9. That a war on Saddam need not be a war on Iraq, and 10. That perhaps rather than attacking Iraq, Bush could call for a Middle East Peace Summit, including members of the PLO, with the aim of furthering the basic elements of the Saudi proposals. Okay, now 'ol Bobert has put up enough stuff to keep a few folks busy firing back, but, hey, we might have strayed off course and and the "new and improved" Bobert has not once used the following words: Junior, Senior, Bin Laden or knucklehead. And I've followed Doug's advice with the paragraph thing (kind of...). Peace Or no war... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: kendall Date: 02 Sep 02 - 02:44 PM Actually, Bush and Churchill do have something in common; Being drunks! The shrub didn't serve in the National Guard, that's why he didn't bash Clinton, and, at least, Clinton wasn' t such a hypocrite as to wear a flight jacket! Tony, I as a democrat, do much more than rant, and if I were you I would remember one of the less appealing sides of your party. The Dirty Tricks dept. It's still at work, even here in Maine. A local democrat rep. to the legislature just bought a summer camp on the beach, and his republican rivals want the secretary of state to declare him unqualified because he "moved out of his district"! This is the kind of nit picking, narrow minded, self serving judgemental crap that we have come to expect from your party. Notice, I am attacking some of your members, not you, even though you painted all democrats as "ranters". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 02 - 02:47 PM Dang. Bobert, boy, where'd yew go off to ta learn to talk like that??? You sounds downright coHERent!! Ya gonna give lessons to the Pooka fella? He might be harder to learn cuz of coming from deeper down than y'all but he's right bright!:>) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 02 - 03:03 PM Law of averages must have caught up with my boney Wes Ginny butt there, Amos. Heck, I was overdue... The new and improved hillbilly... And, Kendall, ya' think your guy got nailed, ya' ought to check on that Congresswoman from Georgia, Cynthia, ahh, ahhh, (danged mind is a dangerous thing). Talk about an ambush. That ol' gal had half the Repubs in her district votin' in the Democratic primary! Talk about dirty tricks! Wow... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 02 - 03:16 PM I sympathize, Bobert -- a mind is a terrible waste to think... or somp'n like that... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Don Firth Date: 02 Sep 02 - 03:20 PM Assuming (and this is a big assumption!) that he has no hidden agenda here and that what he says is what he really believes, when the current president wants to go to war against a small nation governed by some blustering tin-pot dictator (but certainly no Hitler) because he considers it a potential threat even when it has no substantial military power—and against the counsels of many of his advisors (including the military) and against the objections of other nations including those we regard as our allies, it seems perfectly reasonable to me to raise questions about the competence of that president. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Sep 02 - 04:28 PM At risk of repeating myself: I know there's a feud between those who support the two halves of the single Democrat/Republican party - but wouldn't it be better to do the partisan head-bashing in a separate thread, and concentrate on war and peace issues here.
So far as I can see, there's no particular reason why Bush couldn't be a Democrat sitting in the White House, and no reason to think his competence would be any more or less, or that his foreign policies would be significantly different.
So the question is whether they make sense or not, regardlesss of the party label. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 02 - 04:49 PM Unless I'm missin' something, I'm not reading a lot of partisanship in this thread. The facts speak for themselves and Bush, the Dem, Repub or Bull Mooser, is scaring the heck out of me with his policies, both domestic and foriegn. In this case as it relates to this perticular thread, it just happens to fall under his foriegn policy. Incidently, word on the street is that Powell has had just about enough, too, so you can bet the farm that he's going to jump as soon as the train slows down. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 02 - 04:53 PM The sad truth is they are all members of the Bureaucrat Party. This makes it hard to expect responsible action from them. If Bush believes that Saddam's threat is great enough to wartrant preemptive initiation of hostilities -- an incredibly risky thing to do -- he bloody well should lay out why he believes it. The fact that he does not means, to me, that he believes himself possessed of some kind of high privelege or, worse, some sort of superiority which goes deeply against my grain when it comes to deciding on momentous issues such as dividing the world by unsubstantiated war-mongering. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: DougR Date: 02 Sep 02 - 05:24 PM Kendall: what the heck is your democratic candidate spending perfectly good money on a camp for himself, when he could use that money for the greater good? I'll bet, even in Maine, there are some poor folks that could benefit from that candidate's largesse. Selfish, I say! Selfish! Spending money for his own pleasure. Indeed! Are you SURE he is a Democrat? :>) Bobert: Did you come up with those ten points all by yourself? I would be interested in hearing your forceful argument that invading Iraq would increase the chances for a terrorist rowing a boat up the Hudson and setting off a nuclear device. You really think they need that as an incentive? Your really think they won't, given the chance, IF we DON'T invade Iraq? And now you call for another conference call. All the conferences, meetings, BBQ's, etc. have really been effective settling the Palestinian/Israeli question haven't they? I think you got that list out of a box of Cornflakes. It is common knowledge that Post cereals is controlled by left-wingers. (I didn't say "democrats" in deference to McGrath) :>) DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Another Bush war? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Sep 02 - 06:05 PM Whatever happened to all that old guff about deterrence? And how possessing weapons of mass destruction was the way to ensure that you weren't attacked by weapons of mass destruction? I remember when people like me in England were arguing that it would be a good idea for the UK to get rid of such weapons that was seen as desperately irresponsible.
Maybe the idea is that "deterrence theory" doesn't apply to suicidal fanatics driven by crazy ideas and crazy ideals. But noone has ever suggested that Saddam Hussein is a suicidal fanatic with any kind of ideals - he's a ruthless dictator, very similar to lots of other ruthless dictators who, like him, have in their time been seen as useful tools, and have been armed and supported by America and other outside governments.
An dthis thread is too long, so I'm starting a part two. This thread is closed because it was getting too long. Please post on part two (click). |