BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 01:26 AM

As for Iraq, I state again if the UN had done its job this would not have happened, that I know is fact.

Sorry Dave. Not only is that not a fact, it is also wrong. The UN was doing its job. The fact that there were no WMD found in Iraq after the invasion that did not already have the UN inspections team seal on them is proof of that. The US invaded Iraq because it wanted to. That's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 May 05 - 02:18 AM

"The US invaded Iraq because it wanted to. That's all. " Carol C

I think that about covers it. And it seems to me that those who still strive to paint a different face on it would find it a great relief just to repeat that sentence as a mantra. Then we can proceed on to the larger subject as to whether a country has the right to act on such a desire.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,Jo McDromney
Date: 13 May 05 - 02:39 AM

security in the western world changed forever on 9/11.

Jo

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Boab
Date: 13 May 05 - 03:46 AM

If Doug R. --or anyone else--- truly are convinced that the U.S. will have no military presence in Iraq 'when the Irqis can provide their own security", they should refrain from criticising anyone who makes a case for the existence of fairies and goblins.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 13 May 05 - 03:52 AM

Sort of right, Jo, but not quite. Our perception of security changed after 9/11. The facts of security were what they were already - the day before 9/11 the hijackers were getting ready but (some of) the world was blind to the possibilities of terrorism.

And since 9/11 security has escalated again and again. 9/11 is a landmark date for the awakening of the world, not for security getting worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 13 May 05 - 11:16 AM

Tell that to the thousands murdered by Saddam CarolC i'm sure they were comforted by the fact the UN had inspectors there checking for his WMD

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 12:08 PM

Tell that to the thousands murdered by Saddam CarolC i'm sure they were comforted by the fact the UN had inspectors there checking for his WMD

This might be a valid point, Dave, if not for the fact that those murders were not ongoing during the time period in question. Most of the large scale killings that Saddam was responsible for (usually with the help of the US) had stopped years before the US began planning the invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: mg
Date: 13 May 05 - 12:16 PM

well thank heavens at last there is some good news from Oliver North\, who sees a bit of improvement here and there...it is OK to be a little bit hopeful\, despite the travails everyone over there is going through. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ollienorth/on20050513.shtml mg

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 13 May 05 - 12:35 PM

Try again CarolC, he was murdering and so were his two sons who liked to feed people to their pet lions... Nice people eh? pity they were deposed perhaps Saddam should be put in charge of the UN human rights tribunal.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 12:51 PM

Here's what Amnesty International has to say on the subject of waging war on Iraq in the name of human rights. There is a more detailed report from them on this subject somewhere, and I am trying to find it. However, Amnesty International states very clearly that when weighing the costs to Iraqi civilians of the US waging war on Iraq as compared to the cost to them of the US not waging war on Iraq, the negative costs of an invasion and occupation would exceed and outweigh any possible benefits...

USA/Iraq : Not in the name of human rights

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 01:27 PM

And please cite sources for your pet lion story. Keep in mind that those incubator stories that were being sold as truth around the world by the US media about Saddam were proven to be lies.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 May 05 - 01:31 PM

Yep. That Oliver North is one guy whose judgment and ethics I would respect. Not.

Lots about Khalilzad

"George Bush has named the disease: Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

"But rest easy. He has also named the cure: Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad.

"Dr. Khalilzad? Would that be the same Zalmay Khalilzad who oversaw the mobilization, leadership, funding and coordination of, and the media support for, the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who devastated Afghanistan and Bosnia?

"That's the man.

"Dr. Khalilzad is in charge of a large part of Asia and the Middle East for the National Security Council. He has *two* field positions: special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan *and* special U.S. envoy to the Iraqi opposition. [1]

"Why those two? Afghanistan and Iraq aren't even in the same region. They are separated by 1424 miles, Baghdad to Kabul. [2]

"Those miles have a name. It's Iran. Could that be a clue?"

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 01:55 PM

More from Amnesty International (this is not the more comprehensive report, but it is relevant nevertheless)...

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE140112002?open&of=ENG-IRQ

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: akenaton
Date: 13 May 05 - 02:20 PM

Carol.... How can you keep your cool with these fucking numbskulls.

I think you deserve an endurance medal...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 May 05 - 02:40 PM

Hey dave,..
they US already knew that Saddam and his sons werent nice people back in the 80's when they supplied him with weapons, (including anthrax), satellite reconnaisance and fully backed him in his (8year) war against Iran. (Im sure youve seen the nice clip of Rummy vigourously shaking hands with Saddam back when he was 'their bastard') Of course they also illegally supplied Iran with arms as well.

they didnt go to war to topple Saddam, because his sons fed people to the lions, but because of the threat of WMDs, remember Condi Rice Mushroom Cloud?, and an alleged link to Al Qaeda.
none of which materialized.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 May 05 - 04:54 PM

Thanks, akenaton. But I don't think Dave (tam) is a numbskull. I think he is a good (and intelligent) person who wants to do what is right. I have a lot of respect for him as a human being.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 13 May 05 - 05:18 PM

"And since 9/11 security has escalated again and again. 9/11 is a landmark date for the awakening of the world, not for security getting worse."

EG, I find usually that your posts are much more considered than this one.

Terrorism has existed in Europe for decades; in the middle east for decades; in the US for a few also. BUT, something happened in the US on 9/11 and all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat to the world. HUH?

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 13 May 05 - 05:26 PM

9/11 has turned into a bullshit excuse for the US to have a shot at world domination. Interpreting it any other way is dangerous. The US is trillions of dollars in debt. I figure they must think they have no choice. So, this is the Neocon 'big' play.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: robomatic
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:00 PM

It's not over yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:08 PM

IMO, the next big "terrorist" attack on the US will occur just in time for Bush and the crew to declare martial law--about two to two and one half years.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:11 PM

bang on brucie, and in so few words too.

the only problem is that in the long term economics trumps all.
and the US is sliding deeper into debt and losing its economic base
(the neocons know,or expect, since the US is the largest economy and everyone would be hurt with a US$ collapse the rest of the world would not allow it to happen) and they may be right.

But remember when the Pound Sterling was the currency of choice?
and that position that Britain enjoyed at the turn of the century.

theres bound to be some big economic changes over the next 30years.
ie. big growth in China and India. Eventually the demographics of North America will make the current white majority into a visible minority.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:42 PM

There is no argument from me about Bush using the wrong reasons to do the right thing, and that is to despose Saddam. I said it when the war was first fought my exact words at the time were " We shall have to go back ten years from now and do it all again" You can sum up the stupidity of the UN/USA by reading Theodore Roosevelts words.

"My disagreement with the peace-at-any-price men, the ultrapacifists, is not in the least because they favor peace. I object to them, first, because they have proved themselves futile and impotent in working for peace, and second, because they commit what is not merely the capital error but the crime against morality of failing to uphold righteousness as the all-important end toward which we should strive ... I have as little sympathy for them as they have for the men who deify mere brutal force, who insist that power justifies wrongdoing, and who declare that there is no such thing as international morality. But the ultra-pacifists really play into the hands of these men. To condemn equally might which backs right and might which overthrows right is to render positive service to wrong-doers ... To denounce the nation that wages war in self-defense, or from a generous desire to relieve the oppressed, in the same terms in which we denounce war waged in a spirit of greed or wanton folly stands on a par with denouncing equally a murderer and the policeman who, at peril of his life and by force of arms, arrests the murderer. In each case the denunciation denotes not loftiness of soul but weakness both of mind and morals." -- Theodore Roosevelt

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:44 PM

Sorry the last guest was me sans cookie

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:45 PM

I am with you on that, petr, very much so.

And who would be the new head of the World Bank? Geeze, I wonder . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: dianavan
Date: 13 May 05 - 09:53 PM

So Dave, if the Iraqis earned their freedom on the day they voted, why has the state of emergency decree been issued for ANOTHER month?

From the Boston Globe:

"The emergency decree, which has been renewed monthly since first being imposed Nov. 7, includes a nighttime curfew and gives the government extra powers to make arrests without warrants and launch police and military operations when it deems necessary."

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 13 May 05 - 10:22 PM

Dianavan, That question requires a very complex answer. To put it in simple terms: The battlefield known as Iraq has become several wars in one. Outside extremist groups, (including Al Queida) who hate America, are now using it to attack the USA directly, with the advantage of operating in "friendly territory" no pun intended.

Iraqi tribal groups want to disrupt and gain control of the country, or are scared they will lose any share of financial control of assets without greater power. Have to throw in a mention of one National group; the poor bloody Kurds who get shafted by two Bush administrations as well as the Turks.

Criminals who see that it is still possible to encite local gang warfare in order to divert attention from their own agenda's.
Of course there are the religious motivated leaders who want absolute power over the country but they can be included in the tribal section if you prefer.

Then there are the mercenary countries who benefit from America failing to stabilize Iraq and its oil rich markets. They simply support any and all assholes who will get violent and cause mayhem.

Details of why the laws are in place can be obtained, by talking to any security or military experts. Who will gladly flesh out the complex problems facing the new Iraq, and its attempt at forming an elected federal, provincial and municipal form of virgin democratic administration with all this going on. For a price of course ;-)

Yours, Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: mg
Date: 13 May 05 - 11:58 PM

They should have had martial law from the very beginning, and they should have retained and retrained and closely monitored the military that was there already with some great purges at the top. They have to have martial law because it is needed there obviously. It will be for a while. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 14 May 05 - 12:04 AM

I suspect that someday Canada will also be treated to US martial law.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 14 May 05 - 12:11 AM

It didn't have to happen that way, Dave. Had the US really had as its goal the liberation of the Iraqi people and the nurturing of democracy in the Middle East, it was very much within the power of the US government and military to prosecute the war in a way that wouldn't produce the results we see now. The fact that this was not done could be due to incompetence and stupidity on the part of the US government, or it could be because the US government wants it this way. I tend to suspect the latter.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 14 May 05 - 01:22 AM

Well CarolC I suspect you are correct in that they may have wanted a battlefield away from home, they have accomplished that one.
I disagree with your judgement that they had the power to prosecute the war in a different way. Their intelligence agents failed miserably with human intel gathering; and the over reliance on high tech stuff was in many ways an arrogance born of stupidity. I still think Bush was fed a diet of bad information; and I have to say I saw nothing in his planning that wasnt born of genuine shock and revulsion to 911.

Nuturing democracy in the Middle East brings to mind the old prose by Kipling..."A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East." I doubt if it is possible in our lifetime to change the way these countries exist. Several hundred years of induced ignorance, poverty and resistance to change will not be easily wiped out. There is always hope that education and the desire to live a better life will encourage the Middle East to adopt democracy. Opening the door to education and equality for women would be a good start. But like Kipling said:-
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear: "A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East."

there will be a lot more tombstones before we see the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 14 May 05 - 01:32 AM

They could (and should) have kept the Iraqi military infrastructure intact, instead of completely disbanding it. They could have weeded out the Saddam loyalists and kept the people who could be of use. They could have done a much better job of winning the peace. Much of the problems with insurgents stems from the way Iraqi civilians have been treated (very badly) by the US military. Many things could have been done to show respect for the people of Iraq that were not, such as securing the places where Iraq's national treasures and historic artifacts were kept, instead of allowing them to be completely ransacked. There are just so many ways in which the US government and the Pentagon in particular have shown absolute and utter contempt for and to the Iraqi people.

These things are just as much, if not more responsible for the state of affairs in Iraq as anything else. And combine that with the fact that the US government is not delivering on the reconstruction money it promised and the fact that people aren't getting their basic needs met, and you couldn't have a better recipe for the kind of problems that we face in Iraq right now.

No, this was done on purpose so that the US would have an excuse to keep its military in Iraq indefinitely.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 14 May 05 - 01:51 AM

Trying to control a country and a military that fell appart so quickly would be beyond any capability of the US Army. As for treating the Iraqis better, lets just say the military are not social workers and policemen. It is very difficult to weed out the decent from the bad when everyone is yelling in a language you dont understand,and waving and shooting guns. As for protecting sites of national importance, they did take out explosives from shell casings using solid shot to disable the guns so as not to destroy the Mosques that Iraqi tanks and artillery were placed in and around.

Yes there are things that could have been handled better, but if given a choice I would rather surrender too, or be captured by a US soldier than a terrorist.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST
Date: 14 May 05 - 02:34 AM

"Trying to control a country and a military that fell appart so quickly would be beyond any capability of the US Army."

more rubbish from dave. do you recall that gen. shinseki (head of the army at the time) testified before congress and said that we would need at least 300,000 troops on the ground to handle the postwar responsibilities (this before the war began). he was marched off to a quick retirement with a push from rumsfeld who is responsible for the undermanning and wretched performance of our forces.

"As for treating the Iraqis better, lets just say the military are not social workers and policemen. It is very difficult to weed out the decent from the bad when everyone is yelling in a language you dont understand,and waving and shooting guns."

when you invade someone's country there will be waving and shooting of guns. if we had planned properly to secure the country the UN would be operating the peacekeeping forces a job they are designed for. we, unfortunately, abused the UN and the WMD inspectors to promote the bush admin. agenda and have failed to provide enough security to allow them to operate.

"I still think Bush was fed a diet of bad information; and I have to say I saw nothing in his planning that wasnt born of genuine shock and revulsion to 911."

absolute rubbish here. have you read the downing street memo? google it up. it is the official minutes of a meeting in britain several months before the war outlining to blair and his people how the US was fixing the intelligence to fit the scenario they wanted. an attitude of pure cynicism and evil carried out in our names. bush is a war criminal.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,Amos
Date: 14 May 05 - 10:16 AM

The Downing Street memo can be found here.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,CarolC
Date: 14 May 05 - 12:32 PM

This part right here is the part to notice, Dave:

There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

To not discuss, thoroughly and in great detail, the aftermath of the invasion, and to neglect to plan for it, you would have to be either very, very stupid and incompetent, or it would have to be your intention to not win the peace. One or the other.

Everything is going exactly according to plan. The oil is secure, US military bases are being constructed, and everything else is in chaos. That's exactly the way the US government wants it.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,Amos
Date: 14 May 05 - 12:51 PM

Carol:

You may be giving them too much credit. Bush is a stupid sonofabitch, even though he tries hard to be clever. Very stupid people can be crafty and artful in their colossal stupidity, just as some very intelligent people can be inept at social manipulation, because their deceit index is too low. Bush's index of deceit -- the amount he can tolerate generating without suffering qualms or psychosomatic illness -- is very high; he is not only stupid, he is a hidebound stupid sonofa bitch, a snake in the grass with body armor.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 14 May 05 - 03:02 PM

Just found this:

QUOTATION OF THE DAY

"We wanted to reflect the real atmosphere of life in Iraq. You could get kidnapped here any time. Or a bomb could kill you. This is our life."
JAMAL ABED JASSIM, director and chief writer of "Love and War," a black comedy filmed in Iraq.


clint

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: GUEST
Date: 14 May 05 - 04:45 PM

"Bush is a stupid sonofabitch"

I agree. However, it also doesn't matter since he does what he's told to do by Neocons.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 15 May 05 - 02:24 AM

I agree with Amos, the whole thing was very poorly planned and executed from the begining. When you analyse the UN inspectors track record you will find that they were:-

1: Restricted from visiting any sites that might have housed military hardware on a random basis.
2: Allowed controlled access to certain sites, but on a time table dictated by Saddam.
3: Prevented from interviewing alone anyone connected with military programs who might have had information on WMD's.
4: Sent out of the country and refused access until threats of direct action were made.
5: Allowed to return only when it suited Saddam to prevent any direct action being instigated.
6: Were not allowed transport without certain restrictions on movements within Iraq.

All in all a very unsatisfactory program that did not delay the removal and disposal of evidence. My comments on the inability of the US army to control Iraq and its military after the initial invasion stand. If the Guest who contends that what I have said is rubbish is here. I suggest you take some lessons on military history and tactics. Then come back with a name and debate with me in person; otherwise your comments are just cheap sniping remarks with no substance to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 15 May 05 - 02:44 AM

Sorry, I forgot to mention. The US forces have done, and continue to do an outstanding job in an impossible situation. Even if they had put 500,000 troops into Iraq they would still be hard pressed to try and control the country. There are a lot of foreign mercenary interests who are determined to see the USA fail in Iraq; that is one major factor that makes it a no win situation. I reiterate that it should have been accomplished the first time, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. The only way the US army will be able to establish control is if Iraq can establish reasonable government, and reform its military and police. Since this is unlikely to happen quickly, they must plan for a long term stay.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Boab
Date: 15 May 05 - 04:06 AM

Dave, it seems from the reading of your views on Iraq that you are all alone in the [sane] world in your continuing belief in the originally-stated reason for attacking that country---the existence of weapons of mass destruction. When do you reckon they'll be discovered?
   And a long-term stay is already planned, no matter what government is elected, freely or otherwise, in Iraq. I see two scenarios which can achieve a decisive end to the cruel chaos in the Mid-East; 1) the rejection by the American people of the unholy gang which is now trying --and unfortunately succeeding---to spread its acquisitive tentacles across Asia, and 2) a realisation that the cost in U.S. lives and wellbeing will be ever-present and possibly increasing if the present course is maintained. It will be a blessing if the former scenario prevails. I think [and I hope] that the glory-seeking lapdog who is Premier in the UK will be among the first to notice his clay feet crumbling. Mr Bush should surely follow---for if the incumbents in the White House keep on keeping on, there could well be some very serious rumblings among the very high [and getting higher] proportion of Americans who abhor the lies and warmongering which have been the hallmark of this administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 05 - 09:16 AM

Also (joining the discussion late) re: criticism of the UN's role:


As I've said several times on other threads (starting in spring 2004), the UN pulled Bush's chestnuts out of the fire in Iraq, by acting as honest broker between the various factions, thus making possible an Iraqi face on the opposition to the insurgents.

Without the UN, there's a good chance the many predictions, by Mudcatters, of Vietnam Part Two, would have come true.

As many other posters have already noted, Bush and the more fervent Bushites on this forum have wonderful chutzpah in claiming the violation of UN resolutions as justification for invading Iraq.

As has been pointed out ad nauseam by many others, the UN never authorized the invasion.

Re:   oil for food----under Cheney, Halliburton had absolutely no moral or ethical problem with evading sanctions.

For Bushites to try to claim the moral high ground now smacks of more than a little hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: robomatic
Date: 15 May 05 - 09:37 AM

I can't improve on the posts of Dave (TAM). Especially the quote from President Theodore Roosevelt, which puts in a nutshell the perceived weakness of the Democrats in the US, and the reason I think they lost the election.

I think we (the US and GB and 'coalition') are 'trying' to do the right thing against some very nasty bastards. I think we are in an era where we need a very with-it and savvy President, an above average President. President Bush is NOT stupid, but he is, unfortunately, too close to average. I think he may be doing the best he can.

The only other major thing (besides a more connected Administration) that would improve things is getting the world to assist. I think NATO or UN peacekeepers would have a more 'world-bearing-down' influence on the insurgents, but how much is anyone's guess, given their propensity for blowing up their own people in large numbers.

I here re-iterate a comment that I've made several times in various forum venues: that France, Germany, and Russia did themselves no favor and Europe no ultimate good by countering American involvement in Iraq. I think they left 'W' feeling lilke Gary Cooper in "High Noon" (whereas he is really Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny").

I am continually impressed by Tony Blair's eloquence and political dexterity. I'm wondering if we'd fare better if he was boss of the show.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Amos
Date: 15 May 05 - 11:16 AM

Let me point out that Captain Queeg was starkers and psycho. I think the analogy is apt. It my be Bush himself, and it may be the trolls and warts he takes on for an entourage, but it is still his responsibility; he has unleashed murder and chaos on the strength of an empire-mad whim. The counter-forces being marshaled against him are no better, but both sides have left body parts and dead parents and wounded orphans all across the Mesopotamian sands, and it is a disgusting demonstration of human failure, greed, and destructiveness at its very worst. The fact that he can parade around posing as a political leader with this chaos on his hands, lying and butchering the English language as badly as his war-dogs have butchered the lives of so many people across the sea just redoubles his despicability rating. And his disrespect for the REAL construction of the American experiment, including his frivolous attitude and manipulative undermining of the constitution, simply demonstrates he is just as psychotic domestically as he has been internationally.

What he does do well is ruthless power games. But so does any two-bit dictator.
Don't tell me he isn't stupid. His solutions have lead to a morass of death and struggle. How smart is that? He has the brains of an iguana, and the personality of a horned toad. If you are fooled by his artificial twang and his posturing, shame on you. He's a lousy snake, and a lousy leader, and an incompetent President.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 May 05 - 11:24 AM

I recall saying to my wife early on, "ya know, if they never find any WMD, I expect that he will be impeached." Alas for my misplaced faith in our elected representatives.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 15 May 05 - 12:28 PM

Amos, he is all of that. However, the only part on which we differ substantially is this: he is not the leader, he is just the figurehead. He's too stupid to be a leader in anything but name. He's been easier to lead than a calf with a ring in its nose, and there is no doubt in my mind that he IS being led. When he will best serve the Neocon purpose by being out of the picture, that's what will happen.

The US has little choice but to impose martial law on its citizenry before the next election. The next election can not be allowed to happen in the US, and I think it won't. Look at recent times and connect the dots: the US is in massive debt (six TRILLION for a figure--about $17,000 for every man, woman and child in the country) and it's currently spending about a billion a day on a war where its stated purpose is to bring democracy/stability to Iraq. True, much of that money is being kept in the American economy by soldiers and companies paid with American tax dollars, but the war allows for troops to be available 24/7 in both Iraq AND the US.

Oil is getting scarce. Call that one the way you want--and yes I have read the various studies that show it will become scarcer and scarcer until in 2050 (the most optimistic estimate) when it just isn't available to the average guy anymore.

The world itself is on the brink of a totally new economic 'system', and that has been coming for at least 200 years now. The gold-based and silver-based dollar is a myth. The US doesn't have enough of either metal to back its currency. Enter a new leader of the World Bank who also helped write the US blueprint for the 21st century. Indeed, the times they are a-changin'.

I think that 9/11 was engineered. However, whether or not it was an intentional or simply convenient event, it did allow the passage of bills (laws) that have fundamentally changed America. I have wondered since 9/11 why the Twin Towers and the Pentagon were targeted. (I don't know what the fourth target was supposed to be.) A larger loss of life could have been accomplished by hitting a nuclear reactor; larger economic loss could have been achieved by hitting oil refinery complexes in New Jersey (just a few minutes away). So I'm left with the conclusion that the attacks were meant to stun, shock and awe the American people. Whether or not that was the purpose, the events DID stun, shock and awe the American people, enough so that the people have allowed the passage of bills that trade their freedom for a perceived security--and on paper it looks good. But the question that remains is this: Why were the attacks 'symbolic'?

Some questions that have plagued me since 9/11: Where did the debris of the Twin Towers end up? Why were there no independent chemicla tests done on the debris to determine precisely why the buildings collapsed as neatly as they did? Why do we hear nothing about building 7? It too came down perfectly, and on purpose. However, the decision to take it down was made one minute and the next, boom, and down it came. I do NOT believe that the charges to drop that building were installed in six or seven hours.

Scenario as I see it: About two years from now there will have to be another 'major event' in the US. I think two factions are fighting in Washington to control the future of the country and indeed the world. One is the Neocon faction, and the other is deeper, darker and more entrenched than that. I do think that Bush is part of the Neocon group. They are simply immoral money people. It's the other group that is scary. Mostly because they are so elusive.

Some of this stuff plays out like a Tom Clancy novel. That is interesting. A scenario that Clancy portrayed in one of his books has a nuclear weapon misfire in Colorado. Another scenario has the Congressional buildings hit by a plane heavily loaded with fuel. OK, so that's fiction, as was the release of an aerosol Ebola strain. But what isn't fiction are the repercussions. The Ebola scenario allowed the shutdown of interstate travel and the imposition of martial law. The people accepted it willingly for the most part because it was for their protection. In two years, what will the US people be willing to accept?

Wheteher the camps that were discussed on another thread are for the internment of Americans or not, what fascinated me was this: NO ONE disputed that the camps are there. People only disputed the end-purpose of the camps. Interesting.

In the words of some guy in a movie, "Add it all up and I don't know what the hell ya got." However, no matter how ya add it up, the US government is going to TELL you what the bottom line is.

I think your country is facing a 'coup d'etat'. And I think the American people are going to allow it to happen.

BM

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 15 May 05 - 12:35 PM

Boab, I am not alone in my thoughts on the WMD issue. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam held, and had in his possesion reserves of poison gas; with the ability to construct and deliver biologcal and chemical weapons. The UN gave him adequate time to dispose of them; in fact there is some evidence (Israeli Intel) that stuff was transfered to Syria and buried. Complicity is something that you have ruled out completely in your arguments, there are many countries (bordering on Iraq) that support anti USA groups. Such activity is not only likely, it would be in Saddams best interests to support such groups; and therefore very likely he had willing contact with them.

yours, Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: dianavan
Date: 15 May 05 - 12:54 PM

Dave -

We can think anything that we want to think. Without proof or evidence its only imagination.

I think the U.S. administration continues to develop WMD's. Does that give Canada and its allies, the right to invade? I also think that the U.S. imprisons too many non-white people. Does that justify invasion? I also think the U.S. continues to manipulate freedom of speech. Should we invade?

Going to war without proof, evidence or support; is foolish in the extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: Peace
Date: 15 May 05 - 12:58 PM

Not having had weapons of mass destruction and not having found weapons of mass destruction are two different things. However, go with this scenario: it is a good reason to tuck away for the future to invade yet another country. Follow the bouncing ball, if you will.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq Conditions GREAT- the Damning Truth
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 May 05 - 01:09 PM

Brucie, you may want to go back and revisit the "camps" thread. Several people, myself among them, disputed the existance of individual camps, based upon our own personal knowledge.