|
17 Feb 03 - 01:04 PM (#892176) Subject: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: *#1 PEASANT* Millions march to make Saddam Happy! Nothing like appeasing and entertaining a mass murderer and dictator! Where were these idle masses when he was gassing the Kurds? Millions are saying: "We would rather be gassed than have an evil war" Moronic! Conrad |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:10 PM (#892182) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Amos Oh, Conrad, go piss up a rope. Your understanding is exceeded only by the inverse of your manners and style, and your charges of moronicism are blatant projections. A |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:11 PM (#892183) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Well said, Amos . . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:33 PM (#892204) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy To all of the people that are against the war are playing into Sadam's hands. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:36 PM (#892207) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Tell us something, Old Guy, have you ever been to war . . . ? |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:51 PM (#892225) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Kaleb So Conrad, it's ok to ignore Turkey's human rights abuses against its own Kurdish population as long as they let us use southern Turkey as a staging area for G.W.'s war? -Kaleb |
|
17 Feb 03 - 01:52 PM (#892226) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth Well said Conrad. Gareth |
|
17 Feb 03 - 02:02 PM (#892249) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Ebbie Where were these idle masses when he was gassing the Kurds? We were cheering him on- don't you remember? He was our ally and we looked the other way. One president's myopic brainlessness can not justify another's criminal brainlessness. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 02:08 PM (#892253) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Oh, God, Ebbie, don't go there! Then we'd have to discuss Boy George's equally brainless dad, and his dad's tenure as an understudy with the Iranian-hating Gipper . . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 02:18 PM (#892263) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Member trolls are still trolls though, aren't they? Isn't it obvious from the thread title? |
|
17 Feb 03 - 02:22 PM (#892264) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: catspaw49 Hey Conrad.....Before you take Amos' advice and go piss up a slack rope, where the hell was my Groundhog Day card? After that great hullaballoo you put up post-Christmas I was sure that I'd be getting a Groundhog card, but no....not a damn thing....and I watched the mail real carefully!! Oh well......... And the day you just admit you're a bigoted piece of shit, I'll take some notice of your opinion on world events and relations. And your car sucks big ones too. Spaw |
|
17 Feb 03 - 02:54 PM (#892287) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Jeri Polly want a pretzel...Polly want a pretzel...if your aren't with us, your agin' us...Polly want a... |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:03 PM (#892293) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth I fail to see what is bigoted about saying the obvious. Saddam welcomes support. Gareth |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:05 PM (#892296) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Gojira: No. I have never been to war. Have you ever lived under Saddam Hussein's rule? Ever had your wife raped and your kids tortured in front of you? Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:29 PM (#892317) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Then since you've never been to war, Old Guy, and you're so damn eager to send other people off to kill and be killed, I think you should pick up a gun, and go over yourself. Good riddance. . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:40 PM (#892328) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth Has anyone noticed a simillarity between the spoutings of Gojira, and the rehetoric of Saddam Hussain - could it be that Gojira is the non de internet of Saddam Hussain ??? I think we should be told. Gareth |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:40 PM (#892329) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Gojira: You asked a question of me. I answered it. Now answer my question. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:42 PM (#892330) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Old Guy, apparently you aren't one of the Americans who were victimized by the US military's nuclear "testing" on them as human subjects in Nevada: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Site National Association of Atomic Veterans Apparently you aren't one of the Americans who were gassed with chemical biological weapons by the US military: Department of Defense News The war against Iraq is not a war of liberation, it is a war of colonization for oil and political control of the Middle East. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:47 PM (#892335) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: DougR My, it's nice to see such a civil thread on the old Mudcat for a change. DougR |
|
17 Feb 03 - 03:49 PM (#892337) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx If you listen to Old Guy long enough, it becomes obvious that he was exposed to ionizing radiation . . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:13 PM (#892365) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,oldguy Guest: No, I am not one of the Americans who were victimized by the US military's nuclear "testing" on them as human subjects in Nevada. Are you? No, I am not one of the Americans who were gassed with chemical biological weapons by the US military. Are you? The war to liberate Kuwait was the perfect opportunity to colonize a Middle East country and gain political control. It did not happen then, it did not happen in Afghanistan and it will not happen now. The war on Kuwait by Saddam Hussein was a war of colonization for oil and political control of the Middle East. The American led alliance defeated the army Saddam Hussein, liberated Kuwait and did not try to rettain any control of that country or its oil. People hurl out insults and villiansing statements here but they cannot give any answers or offer anything constructive. I say let's get on with this war of liberation. I think it is constructive. I think it can't be any worse than the suffering of the people of Iraq and hopefully it will not be bad at all if people pull together. Gojira: I don't know what Ionizing radiation is. Can you tell me what it is? Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:19 PM (#892371) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Actually you are wrong again, Old Guy. This "war of liberation" as you call it, is also to be a military occupation, set to last (by the Bush administration's own most optimistic predictions) a minimum of two years. That is quite a bit longer than the liberation of Kuwait, even if we discount the on-going occupation of Iraq by British and US forces in the northern and southern "no fly zones" since the first Gulf War. This administration has every intention of NOT doing things the way that Bush I did them. This administration has every intention of invading and occupying Iraq, just as we are still militarily occupying Afghanistan. This is the end game for oil, and as we have seen in recent weeks, many people around the globe realize it. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:22 PM (#892379) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Gladly, Old Guy. It is the radiation that occurs when there is a nuclear reaction, e.g., an atomic explosion. The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki continued to suffer from the effects of the nuclear explosions that devastated their cities, long after those urban centers were rebuilt. Ionizing radiation is a leading cause of cell mutation, leading to pathologies such as skin cancer, bone cancer, leukemia . . . The point being made is that the United States has no room to talk about weapons of mass destruction, when this government has exposed hunfreds of thousands to the effects of nuclear weapons . . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:29 PM (#892389) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Richie Remember, Old Guy is not in a minority in the US. Let's be reasonable and and consider the other 50 millions opinions too. -Richie |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:30 PM (#892391) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Relax Amos and spaw. It's only old Conrad Jay Bladey up to his tricks again. I'm suprised anyone bothers taking notice of him these days. Jon |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:46 PM (#892406) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Old Guy Guest: As I said before, where is the precedent? In Kuwait or Afghanistan? In Kosovo? Where is the indication that "Bush" is after the "oil"? It is only rumors spread by people that see a plot in everything. The Liberation of Iraq will likely take longer than the liberation of Kuwait. I may stand to be corrected but I think the no-fly zones were defined in a UN resolution; the US and the UK are enforcing them. Otherwise there would have been a UN resolution for the US and UK to stop. Are there any complaints from the people in Northern Iraq? Do they want us to leave? It is my impression that Northern Iraq is a sort of no mans land that was part of Kurdistan. Turkey took part of it and Iraq took part of it but the people there don't want anything to do with Iraq or Turkey. It sounds like a region that could easily turn into another Afghanistan ruled by al-Qaida and the Taliban if there was no American or British presence there. Is any one haulig oil or other riches out of northern Iraq? If not, we must not be there for the money. There is an extremist group there that bombs the beauty parlors and throws acid in the faces of women that do not have their faces covered. Maybe we should turn our back on these people too. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:49 PM (#892410) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST It sounds to me Old Guy, like you prefer military solutions to almost anything. It also sounds to me like you aren't very well informed of the history of that part of the world. The difference between liberators and occupiers/colonizers, is liberators leave. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:53 PM (#892416) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Ebbie Back to the proper question: What does invading Iraq have to do with combatting terrorism against this country? And I don't mean, fomenting terrorism. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 04:59 PM (#892419) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Richie Since Saddam has chemical weapons and bio weapons and an obvious hatred for the US, he would like nothing bettter than to give (sell) his hidden weapons for use against the US or Britain. Any terrorist group could secretly get the weapons from Saddam. I thought this was common knowledge. -Richie |
|
17 Feb 03 - 05:12 PM (#892436) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST No one Richie, not the US, not the British, not the UN, has provided any credible proof of Iraq's "intention" to sell WMD to terrorists. That is just another lame lie of the Bush administration spinmeisters. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 05:18 PM (#892445) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST GUEST: Like the US left Kuwait? Ritchie: You are correct. North Korea sells their weapons and so did the Red Chinese. Fortunately the Red Chinese found out it is better to sell tractors and such because no one can launch a tractor at you. Gorija: I have not been near a nuclear blast so I don't think I am suffering from Ionic Radiation. Are you? When are you going to say something constructive? Are you an anarchist? All I hear from you are negative statements and accusations. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 05:19 PM (#892446) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Ebbie It might behoove us to take a critical look at Saudi Arabia and a few other countries on the 'right' side of the equation to discover just who is willing to sell/provide both ordnance and personnel. Even the US of A has been known to provide arms and money to both sides of a conflict in which it itself was engaged. All in the name of free enterprise, don't you know. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 05:25 PM (#892452) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Richie Ebbie, I agree the US has given Saddam and other countries supplies in the past and often foolishly invents in different foreign regimes. The question is should we allow rulers like Saddam who do not value human life to be able to keep them. Saddam has the weapons and he continues to hide them. -Richie |
|
17 Feb 03 - 05:37 PM (#892463) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Ebbie Bet you can't find the gun hidden in my house either! Might have to take my house apart even, and maybe hustle me down to the local police station to question me vigorously. You willl never believe me when I say I don't have one. (But I do understand what you are saying, Richie. It's just that with so many bad guys in the world we can't take them all out, even sequentially- we'd be at war ALL the time and at risk of terrorism ALL the time and there will always be new baddies coming up through the ranks to replace them- there is no end to it. It seems much more logical and productive for nations in alliance to proceed with a clear agenda as to objectives, causes, and projected results and to pursue the evildoers who are responsible for each act.) |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:03 PM (#892479) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Richie Ebbie, I agree that we can't take them all out. We have to deal with situations one at a time. First it was Afganistan and now it's Iraq. In the future it will be some other country and unless you live in isolation- which we should not do- there are going to be problems. That doesn't mean we should get rid of any opposing countries. The world needs to work together to be a better place for all to live. There should not be human rights violations within countries nor terroism. There needs to be rules and international laws. We need to work together...that's the danger of Bush's position. That's the outrage- that every country is not being considered in this new world order. -Richie |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:17 PM (#892491) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Ebbie: You are absolutely correct and we are on course to deal with the bad guys. I think the Government knows how to deal with these things better than we do. I think we should let them do their job. We steer the government through elections. Yes we are so called friends of Saudi Arabia but they could / probably will turn into another Iraq if we don't do something to democratize the area. Liberating Iraq would plant a seed of democracy that hopefully will spread to neighboring countries. We may someday regret our support of the Saudi government if things continue as they are. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:30 PM (#892503) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Bobert Yo Richie: You speak as if Afganistan is a "done deal". It isn't. Warlords, many of them sypathetic to the Taliban, control 85% of the country. Hmmmm? (What went wrong, Bobert?) Ahhhh, like Bush ain't into the second phase of war, just the war part... Oh! Now we look and see that the terrorists who hit the WTC and the Pentagon were *home boys*... ahhh, kinda. Unhappy Saudis who were razzed at the US for using Saudi Arabi for staging attacks against against Iraq in the Persian Gulf War... So now Bush figures that killing thousands of Iraqis will make the world safer? Hmmmmmm? Would someone please expalin the logic behind this... BObert |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:39 PM (#892512) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST yeah Bobert, Old Guy and Richie are gonna explain it to us, Dr. strangelove style. Why I learned to quit worrying about what my government was doing, and love our ability to bomb folks we don't like back to the stone age. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:42 PM (#892514) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Bobert: You speak as if the killing of thousands of Iraqis is a done deal. Where did you get this information? Is the percentage of Afghanistan not under control by hostile warlords increasing or decreasing? Which part would you prefer to live in? Should the US move in and occupy? Should we pull out and abandon them? Again, negative comments and nothing constructive. Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 06:44 PM (#892516) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: harvey andrews Amos, I've heard some insults in my time bit "go piss up a rope" is a new one to me. What on earth does it mean and what's its derivation? (Sorry to go off thread folks, but language fascinates me!) |
|
17 Feb 03 - 07:00 PM (#892532) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Jeri Harvey, it's common in the US. (I've heard it anyway.) Imagine what would happen to someone who tried it. Not only would it be an excercise in futility, but it would be a rather damp one. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 07:02 PM (#892533) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: harvey andrews Okay, thanks Jeri, it still sounds a bit of a "wet" insult to me! |
|
17 Feb 03 - 07:03 PM (#892535) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: KarlMarx Yes, Guest . . . I just happen to be an anarchist. By the way, it's "ionizing" radiation, not "ionic." Try that for being constructive . . . |
|
17 Feb 03 - 08:52 PM (#892598) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Richie Yo Bobert, Still sore from shoveling snow! One thing that will make the world safer is getting rid of Saddam. I don't think the Taliban is too organized at this point, maybe they will regroup, that's none of our business. As long as they don't allign themselves with or harbor terrorists it's their (Afganistan's)decision. Hopefully the US will get out of Afganistan soon. Getting rid of terrorists is a difficult task but since they have declared war on us, it will have to be done. But there is a possibility that if Saddam is gone the whole region might stabilize and the terroists would have less room to operate. This could be a benefit for the world and the whole region. -Richie |
|
17 Feb 03 - 09:14 PM (#892611) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker Terrorists have not declared war on us, Richie. That's a convenient fiction used by Bush to justify restrictions of freedom. Al Qaeda is the one terrorist organization which has conducted attacks against the U.S., and we think we've pretty much dispersed them. Also, Saddam's regime, however brutal, is sufficiently totalitarian to restrict the freedom of terrorist groups within it. The likely result of a U.S. invasion is either warlordism or a corrupt and ineffectual puppet government, both of which provide much better breeding grounds for terrorism. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 09:38 PM (#892620) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Gojira: Thanks for the correction. I am learning things here. For my information what does an anarchist do after all forms of government do not exist anymore? Would that make a good environment for dictators, warlords and gangs to rule? Somebody has to rule and I think we have it pretty good here. At least the illegal immigrants. Cubans risking their life to get here and plenty of people form the middle east prefer it here. Don't you think we are much better off than the people of Iraq? Old Guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 09:38 PM (#892621) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Not to mention destabilization of the entire region by introducing more troops and weapons on our side than it would take to wipe out every man, woman, child, and donkey to boot. Just how is it that this unprecedented military build-up will lead to a demilitarization of the region and to an elimination of weapons of mass destruction? How many weapons of mass destruction do you suppose the Brits and the Yanks have handy in the region right now? |
|
17 Feb 03 - 09:43 PM (#892623) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: catspaw49 Harvey, it's an oldie and often with the variant I posted. Basically, go piss on yourself....as it's impossible to piss up a rope and do otherwise. Many add like I do, a "slack rope" to be absolutely sure. Similar to things used instead of saying "Shove it up your ass." Such as, "Put it where the sun don't shine" or "Make it all brown." Just variations on a theme. Spaw |
|
17 Feb 03 - 10:32 PM (#892656) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: *#1 PEASANT* The europeans have failed miserably to save themselves over the past hundred years and now again they are protesting salvation once again. This time however we are not going to let them appease another dictator long enough to make liberation difficult. Lets get on with it! The europeans love to piss on each other, watch tanks run into their streets and then call americal to save the day once they have sobered up to find out that their welfare states are threatened. Conrad |
|
17 Feb 03 - 10:41 PM (#892664) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Ebbie Old Guy: Perhaps I didn't put it well which made you misunderstand me. You say: I think the Government knows how to deal with these things better than we do. I think we should let them do their job. We steer the government through elections. Yes we are so called friends of Saudi Arabia but they could / probably will turn into another Iraq if we don't do something to democratize the area. Liberating Iraq would plant a seed of democracy that hopefully will spread to neighboring countries. See, I don't believe we have the right to 'democratize' the world. That was my belief long before the Iron Curtain fell, i.e. I felt that if capitalism is better than communism, they'll find out in due time. Containment is different as is an outright attack on their neighbors or on our allies, which is where a United Nations comes in. We need to police 'actions' not others' philosophies. Our own philosophy needs to be well thought out and publicized, and that should spell out that war is ALWAYS the last resort. Diplomacy always and sanctions when needed have to be the way of coexistence. Richie, you say: I don't think the Taliban is too organized at this point, maybe they will regroup, that's none of our business. As long as they don't allign themselves with or harbor terrorists it's their (Afganistan's)decision. Hopefully the US will get out of Afganistan soon. Getting rid of terrorists is a difficult task but since they have declared war on us, it will have to be done. But there is a possibility that if Saddam is gone the whole region might stabilize and the terroists would have less room to operate. Your position seems to me a hard one to defend. If Saddam is gone, the region might stabilize? Have you looked at the various factions that have a vested interest in the area? (That isn't even including us!) For that matter, remember what happened in Iran when the US-backed Shah had to flee? One could say Iran's situation stabilized, but definitely not in the US's favor. You could use the analogy that when you pull down the strongest pillar, the small ones will collapse, allowing in the floods and debris. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 10:49 PM (#892673) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker Wow. Congratulations, Conrad. I have never seen history so brutally distorted in so few lines. The Europeans are not threatened by Saddam, and have the brains to realize it. The Bush administration is apparently not so perceptive. A war is the thing most likely of all possible actions to inflict massive harm to America, Europe, or (heaven forfend that we consider them) the inhabitants of the Middle East. Think about what you're saying next time before you make a spectacular ass of yourself. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 10:59 PM (#892678) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Guest: The one thing that ensures success is to overpower the opposition. Should we send a small force to make it fair to Saddam? The more forces we have the better we can minimize civilian casualties. Part of the plan is the slim chance that he will run away to Libya, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. If he does that he will still torch the oil fields demolition the dams bridges power plants water facilities and possibly let loose his bio and chemical WMDs upon his departure. No one is certain that he has any nuclear WMDs but there is a tiny possibility that he does. The alliance has no WMDs handy. Only defenses against the WMDs that Saddam says he does not have. Note that Saddam has ordered a million doses of atropine which is an antidote for nerve agents. Old guy |
|
17 Feb 03 - 11:29 PM (#892686) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker I wonder if the alliance thought to bring any atropine. I suppose that if they did, their official stance is that it's in case Saddam uses nerve agents. The Iraqis can make the same case, especially given that Bush has explicitly not ruled out the use of any weapons, including the VX nerve gas that we still stock, against Saddam. |
|
17 Feb 03 - 11:42 PM (#892689) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy Forum Lurker: So you are saying the alliance has nerve gas that they plan to use on the Iraqis and that is the reason they would have atropine? And like wise the Iraqis are buying atropine to protect themselves for the nerve gas the alliance is planning to use on them? I would tend to believe the alliance before I would believe the Iraqi government. For background I would check back aways in history to see the last time either side has used gas. I think it was The Iraqi Army. Therefore I would think they are the ones ready and willing to use nerve gas. Where did you get the information that nerve gas is still stocked? Old Guy |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:42 AM (#892704) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Cluin I notice the fellow who started this thread never bothered posting in it again. Stirred up his little bit of shit and moved on. Should retitle the thread "Making Conrad Smile" |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:43 AM (#892705) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Cluin Oh, he did! Sort of... |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:59 AM (#892706) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Joe Offer I'm still wondering about pissing up a rope. Has anybody ever experimented to see what happens? -Joe Offer- |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:00 AM (#892708) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker No, Oldguy, I am choosing not to draw ANY conclusions, when the evidence suggests a number of potential reasons. As to the readiness and willingness of either side to use WMD's, Saddam denies he has any, while Dubya has stated that their use has been, and will continue to be, considered. What does that tell you? |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:07 AM (#892713) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Cluin Joe, It drips back down on you. Not that I've tried it... I saw someone else do it once... yeah, that's right... someone else... yeah... |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:14 AM (#892715) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST I am under the impression that American chemo and bio weapons were destroyed or scheduled to be destroyed. I could be wrong and I am open to enlightenment. Somebody please start a pissing up a rope thread. I think we need a "Do anarchists or terrorists post here thread." I wish this board was the type that records the IP number of the poster so they can be traced to where they are posting from. If the webmaster is watching, can you please turn it on? Old Guy |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:42 AM (#892719) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Teribus Forum Lurker; You stated somewhere above: "I wonder if the alliance thought to bring any atropine. I suppose that if they did, their official stance is that it's in case Saddam uses nerve agents. The Iraqis can make the same case, especially given that Bush has explicitly not ruled out the use of any weapons, including the VX nerve gas that we still stock, against Saddam." The answer to the question you pose in your first sentence is Yes. You also provide the correct reason for it being issued - It has been standard issue to ALL NATO troops to my certain knowledge since the 1960's, available at all times and carried at all times on exercises. The Iraqi's tried to obtain one million ampules of the stuff from Germany last December - you know shortly after they declared that they had no CB WMD - Iraq knows that neither the US or UK have CB weapons or munitions - so whose CB, WMD does he have to protect himself from other than his own? The US has no CB weapons or munitions - you obviously think that they do - Old Guy asked you a specific question related to this contention of yours - What is your answer? Where are your facts that support your contention? As to US occupation - neither Germany or Japan suffered too much under such administration - Afghanistan is not under occupation, but things are steadily improving there, it just takes time - lots of it. The US and EU countries are there in support of the Afghan Government for as long as they (the Afghan Government) are needed - That is what they were promised, that promise is being upheld. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:10 PM (#892778) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: TIA The US DOES indeed stockpile nerve gas. I've seen it. I've worked around it. I'll be there again later this week. I will not tell you where, because there are clearly terrorists monitoring and posting to this thread. I'm serious about the gas though...although it has been "scheduled for destruction" for years, it damn sure DOES exist. I seriously doubt it will be used by the US if/when we invade Iraq. Now, back to the original point of this thread - it was been claimed that if you don't support the Bush invasion plan you are a Saddam supporter. If this logic is sound, that means that all the nincompoops who ran around screaming "Wag the Dog" when Clinton sent Tomahawks into Afghanistan after Al-Qaida bombed the Cole are Osama supporters. I now retire from this thread, because Ebbie has said everything so well already. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:30 PM (#892798) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: DougR TIA: what you mean, I think, is Ebbie has expressed a viewpoint that coincides with yours, right? That viewpoint is not shared by a "few" of us. In regard to Afghanstan: we were strongly criticized (by many on this forum) because we did not do more to help after Russian troops withdrew from that country. We cannot withdraw form Afghanstan this time until their government is stable, and as Teribus said, that is going to take a very long time. I heard Senator John McCain on a local talk show this morning and he reminded folks that we are not doing the job alone in that country. Germany has troops there too helping our effort. DougR |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:37 PM (#892805) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: TIA I said what I mean, thank you. And I believe, as do nearly all who marched last weekend, that you are perfectly welcome to have a differing viewpoint. Should the fact that yours differs deter me from stating mine? |
|
18 Feb 03 - 12:50 PM (#892810) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,oldguy I don't fully understand the post about Wag the Dog but I did not run around screaming Wag the Dog so I am not a nincompoop for doing that. If you protest the war and oppose the current alliance and the US administration you are unwittingly giving Saddam more confidence that he can win the war. Therefore he is less likely to withdraw and avoid a war. If every nation and every citizen would show solidarity against Saddam he might possibly run away somewhere. At one time I heard he had paid Libya $3 billion for an exile deal. That would have built quite a few water treatment plants and bought enough medicine to last a while. I have heard mention of exile negotiations with Saudi Arabia and Egypt too. I thought there were some nerve agents left over. Thanks for clarifying that. They should be destroyed ASAP. Likewise the nerve agents and bio weapons that surely exist in Iraq should be destroyed ASAP. Old Guy |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:18 PM (#892835) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Willie-O Talking about the impending "liberation" of Iraq is errant Orwellian nonsense. The Pentagon has already announced that they're planning on firing THREE THOUSAND Cruise Missiles at Baghdad, just to start liberating them. The people that live there aren't looking forward one bit to being liberated. Another piece of oft-repeated nonsense is that the alternative is to "do nothing". "Nothing" in this context involves a very complex international program of naval blockades, airspace containment, frequently firing a few missiles in the "no fly zone", and of course a very intensive weapons inspection program. Whether or not this is the right strategy to contain a regional despot, it ain't "nothing". Saddam can't ship a carton of peashooters out of Iraq without it getting intercepted. Anyone shopping for nasty weapons is far more likely to go somewhere that the entire intelligence and military apparatus of the U.S., and other U.N. members, isn't surrounding. And you warmonger types that are calling everyone who doesn't want the U.S. to launch 3,000 Cruise missiles into Iraq, followed by a full-scale ground invasion, a "Saddam-lover", are showing the inadequacy of your argument by twisting both reality and the motivations of those who don't agree with you. The only thing that's more frightening is how many people have been convinced that this is going to help the "war on terror", which is the most obvious nonsense of all. Willie-O |
|
18 Feb 03 - 01:30 PM (#892843) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST "I am under the impression that American chemo and bio weapons were destroyed or scheduled to be destroyed. I could be wrong and I am open to enlightenment." I sincerely doubt you are open to enlightenment. I sincerely believe you will never change your mind, regardless of the facts and information presented to you. FYI, the US still possesses a stockpile of approximately 31,000 tons of chemical agents, and is believed to be in material breach of the BWC treaty, signed in 1972, and ratified in 1975. It is currently working on destroying its stockpiles of mustard, sarin, VX, and blister agent under the CWC Treaty, signed in 1993 and ratified in 1997. The US claims to have unilaterally ended it's biological weapons program in 1969 (although because it did so unilaterally, it has not had to account for any of it's biological weapons). There is widespread belief among international arms control experts that the US is in material breach of the BWC treaty, because of it's current research under the US Biodefense Program. Another little known fact: many countries have not signed either the CWC Treaty or the BWC Treaty. For instance, Iraq has not signed the CWC Treaty, but has signed the BWC Treaty. Israel has not signed the BWC Treaty, but has signed the CWC Treaty, even though it is widely believed by international arms control experts that Israel has a secret chemical weapons program, and is likely involved in a biological weapons research program as well. International arms control experts also widely agree that the vast majority of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs were dismantled in the early 1990s under the UN weapons inspections in the post-Gulf War I era. It is also well known in international arms control circles that, despite Iraq's likely possession of some chemical weapons, and likely attempts to rebuild some of it's pre-Gulf War I chemical weapons infrastructure since inspectors left in 1998, that it would be impossible for Iraq to have actually rebuilt that infrastructure and started production of chemical weapons without foreign assistance, which they know has not happened. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 02:11 PM (#892878) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth 3 points - The first one taken from that well known right wing imperial rag the Gaurdian (London 18 Feb 03) Click 'Ere - Presumably the Kurds are under no illusions about the likelyhood of chemical attacks from Saddam Hussain. Secondly - America is an open society - I find it inconceivable that the US of A has any significant stocks, or the current means of production. Thirdly - Wether you like it or not, these "Peace Demonstrations" do give aid and succour to Saddam Hussain - And in bolstering this you make the likelyhood of a war more probable. Gareth |
|
18 Feb 03 - 02:18 PM (#892885) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker The U.S. is hardly so open a society that we make our current military stockpiles public information. Official statements have been made that NBC weapons of all varieties have been produced. No such statements have been made that we have detroyed all stockpiles. And peace demonstrations do not give succor to Hussein in any way. Their intent is to convince Bush and Blair not to get their own troops killed as much as it is to protect innocent Iraqis. Only if our leaders are as contrarian as three year olds (a distinct possibility) will such protests increase their desire to go to war. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 02:38 PM (#892904) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: TIA To Gareths 3 points: 1) You are correct about the Kurds - they have been attacked by chemical weapons before. We know this because we (the US) helped Saddam build them. 2) The USA certainly does have stockpiles of mustard and nerve gases. You don't know me from sh-t, but you should trust me - I have seen them, clearly labelled, with my own eyes. 3) Bullshit. Aid and succour to the Iraqi people? Yes. Pretend you're an Iraqi parent. Do you want your children to live under a vicious (and mortal) tyrant while the world community works to contain him, or do you want your children "liberated" (maimed or killed) by a cruise missile? |
|
18 Feb 03 - 02:45 PM (#892908) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Here are my information sources Gareth: The Arms Control Association: http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif.asp The Federation of American Scientists: http://www.fas.org/index.html The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Non-proliferation Program: http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/npp_home.ASP And the source of information to back up your opinions, Gareth, are...? |
|
18 Feb 03 - 02:47 PM (#892909) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: catspaw49 Ah Conrad......You're such a grea troll. Look at this thread!!! Ya' done yourself proud! Now folks, Conrad Bladey, #1 Super Pissant, has a long history here and other places as being the troll he is....and an asshole to boot!!! For those of you who think he frustrates me or I am seriously mad, I'm not. But since the incredible dickhead gets his jollies trolling, why can't I get mine flaming his Pissant ass??? BTW, Conrad's bigotry that ne never admits is well known as well. On the Irish issue he claims neutrality, but just last month the Florida Orange Grower's Association selected him as the color choice for matching their best oranges. So Conrad, pucker up Buttercup and plant a big one in my coat vent. And don't forget that Groundhog Day card.....I'm still waiting. Your little car is a piece of shit too....As a matter of fact, when you drive it no one can tell the difference between you and the car......just looks like a pile of turds on wheels. Spaw |
|
18 Feb 03 - 03:15 PM (#892933) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth I think those quoted articles proove the point Anon Guest. Interesting to see that you use them selectively, if they are accurate then Saddam Hussain has biochemical weapons and the means of distribution. The difference is the US of A has no means of production, and is actively destroying its stockpile Now Picture yourself as an Iraqui parent. Do you want to see your child grow up malnurished, conscripted and killed, where medical assistance and full education is restricted to the elite, and you live in an atmosphere of terror and torture, under Saddam and his children, or do you wish to see this regime removed. ? Answers on a postcard please ! Gareth |
|
18 Feb 03 - 03:33 PM (#892946) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Gareth, when faced with the rational, you go for emotional hysteria. I'm done talking to you too. If the lot of you war mongerers can't come up with some facts to back up your emotional hysteria, there is no reason to listen to you, much less attempt to converse with you about the issues. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 03:41 PM (#892954) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Hey Willie O: I sure wouldn't want to dissagree with you and get on your bad side. You sound voilent. Make up a chant for all of us. We can sit and rock back and forth like the students in the Madras schools while we chant this chant of hatred for the USA. Old Guy |
|
18 Feb 03 - 03:44 PM (#892957) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Gareth Anon Guest - Nothing emotional - I just used your own arguements against you. Goodby. Gareth |
|
18 Feb 03 - 04:08 PM (#892986) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: NicoleC Gareth, you know better than to make fictitious statements about the conditions inside Iraq. Yes, the Iraqi people are impoverished and hungry. One might ask how sanctions against medical equipment and water treatment chemicals is supposed to help depose Saddam, but that's the specified intent of the sanctions. By starving the populace that might otherwise rebel against him? This is not a case of "Saddam bad," it's a case of "Saddam bad, US/UK helping make it worse." Humanitarian organizations report that in the past decade Iraq has formed an impressive and efficient infrastructure to distribute food aid to almost all of Iraq, particularly considering that the bombing in 1991 destroyed or crippled most major roads, bridges, land transportation and power generation. Unfortunately the food that can survive lengthy transport are seeds and grains, which are not enough to provide adequate nutrition alone. The UN reports the average food basket has a caloric ration of 2200 calories per day -- you won't starve on that, but you might still be malnurished. Without electricity and therefore refrigeration, it is impossible to bring what advanced medical care is still available anywhere except in the largest cities where power is available. On their education system, their schools system is far from being a priviledge of the elite. Until 1991, Iraq had built one of the finest and most advanced public education systems in the middle east, and were once the envy of the Arab world. Assessments by US educators that visited Iraq in 1999 show that under sanctions, the education system is still widely used despite teacher and sudents leavin schools to pursue work and food, but students lack books and desks and writing utensils, there's no power or sanitation in the schools, and school construction is halted for lack of funds so the overcrowding is intense. The Oil for Food program has been a great success in minimizing the worst of the civilian damage, but in the US it's greatly misunderstood. There's always rumor mongering about how Iraq is spending the money on weapons/palaces/etc. instead. Here's the basics: Iraq exports oil. The buyers of the oil pay the UN Office of Iraq Program (OIP) a price specified by the UN into a trust account in NYC. The UN takes 25% as a transaction fee. Iraq submits a request to the OIP for supplies (which are not limited to food.) The Security Council reviews/approves the request. If approved, OIP pays the supplier and the supplier ships goods to Iraq. Iraq never touches the money. The terms are extreme and hardly fair, which is why Iraq balked so long, but keeping the money out of Iraq'a treasury is a smart idea. It prevents the kinds of abuses that Iraq is being blamed for. No need to take my word for it: UN Office of Iraq Programme Is Iraq busy on the blackmarket? Maybe. Probably at least some. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 04:25 PM (#893004) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Good for you Gareth - you at least confine your retorts to the facts. While the weeny butt peace GUEST can't seen to figure out what it is it says. And does so quite emotionally!! HA HA HA - - |
|
18 Feb 03 - 04:30 PM (#893009) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Nicole, reason and facts won't sway these guys one iota. They are just trolling for responses from those who are opposed to the war, because they have been intimidated by the millions of anti-war demonstrators last weekend. You might notice they've been coming out of the woodwork since then. The more widespread and strong the opposition to the war becomes, the more these types of people will harrass anyone discussing the progessive side of the issues, anyone who provides facts to back up their positions, etc. It is very predictable. Ignore them, and I bet they go away. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 04:44 PM (#893023) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: DougR So then, Nicole, the charges that Saddam has skimmed the oil for food money in order to build up his weapons program is not true? I assume it would be impossible for him to do so if things are as you describe them. If so, then perhaps Saddam is telling the truth! Perhaps he does NOT have any WMDs! DougR |
|
18 Feb 03 - 04:49 PM (#893029) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST There is much better evidence that Saddam skimmed the oil for food money to build and remodel his palaces, extort people, pay his bodyguards, etc. than rebuilt his chemical weapons production infrastructure, Doug. No one in the international arms control community believes Saddam has weapons. They do believe he has material with which the weapons can be made, however. So it is more a question of finding the material, than finding any WMD. Now North Korea, we know they have WMD already, and aren't afraid to use them. But ignore that man behind the curtain...the great and powerful Oz has spoken! |
|
18 Feb 03 - 05:06 PM (#893048) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: NicoleC Doug, we've had this conversation before. I assume that you didn't read resolution 986 this time either, or bother to independantly verify the way the program works. Where do you think we get all this info about what he buys? His credit card statement? Let's say Saddam submits a request for an allowed item like wood or cloth. Yeah, he could be building himself new furniture or hanging new drapes instead of repairing a building and distributing clothes. But any verboten items like weapons grade uranium, let's say, are not going to get through the Security Council. He'd have to buy them on the black market. It's certainly possible (I'd say probable), but there's a limit to how much trade he can do while under 24/7/365 survellience from the US and UK. He can't be pumping out millions of barrels of crude. It would cause obvious fluctations in the oil market, not to mention the unliklihood none of those shipments would be noticed. This isn't Star Trek and you can't teleport your supplies in and out or go to the replicator and *poof!* it's on the slab. The idea that Saddam has the secret resources and technology to have a massive chemical, biological or nuclear weapons program defies logic. If the inspectors were sure they had 96% of his capacity destroyed in 1996, how much can he have done since them? The point is, the inspections work. They worked before and they can work again. Nor has Saddam made any threats toward the US; the only threats being made are coming from the Bush administration (and the Koreans and bin Laden... none of which are in Iraq). He might get away with an infraction here and there, but testing a long range missile, for example, can hardly go unnoticed. Chemical factories and biological labs take huge amounts of power and resources -- he can't just hide 'em in a hut in the desert. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 05:40 PM (#893081) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: TIA Gareth, I'd love to send you a postcard, but NicoleC is way more knowledgeable and eloquent than me, so I'm shuttin' up a listening. Old Guy, the mental image of a madrasa is PERFECT! Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Savage, Reagan, Hannity, and you rocking back and forth repeating Ari Fleischer's last release. By the way, I marched last weekend carrying one end of a big-ass American flag because I love the USA. Me and my daughters never let it touch the ground, and folded it the proper way when we were done. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 07:29 PM (#893161) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy TIA: I saw the footage of the students rocking back and forth from a news cast, not a talk show. I forgot which one. It was taken in Pakistan. The purpose was to show how The Islamic extremists have the hate the USA burned into their brain. It shows how the Mullahs want everybody to have one opinion, theirs. They don't want anyone capable of studying the facts and forming independent opinions. My opinions differ from the antiwar protestors. When I present my opinions I am told that I have been influenced by other people. Maybe so but I look at both sides of the story and I develop my own opinion. I don't say the anti war protestors are stupid or anything. I don't give the stereotypes like peacemongers. If they were stupid they would not be interested. What I am trying to say is that in my opinion, they do not think about what in the hearts and minds of the people living under a brutal dictatorship. They think that avoiding a war is best for these people. They make exaggerated, unfounded claims of how many will die. They claim that the proponents of the war have secret agendas and sinister purposes for a war. Rather than believe their own elected leaders they believe the propaganda spread by the dictators. Anybody that disagrees is a lap dog of the administration. Is an antiwar protestor that agrees with someone else a lap dog of that person? I try to tell the antiwar protestors "Wait a minute. Have you thought about this and put your self in the position of the people under the dictatorship?" I describe graphically what these people are subjected to. In my opinion it is far worse than war. The anti war protestors do not want to face these things. If these atrocities I present are fabricated say so. Call me an idiot if you like but to call me an idiot and not dispute the facts I present tell me that you do not want to consider the facts and form an independent opinion because it might affect the antiwar protest. Carrying a flag around does not make ones actions justified any more than carrying around a copy of the Qur'an makes ones actions justified. Old Guy |
|
18 Feb 03 - 07:59 PM (#893181) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: TIA My opinion is entirely thought-out, has been developed by me alone, considers all of the facts, and respects the rights of others to differing opinions. But I get really pissed when people put words in my mouth and motives in my heart, and accuse me of being against my country when I excercise my constitutional rights. Read Senator Byrd's speech. Goodbye. |
|
18 Feb 03 - 08:09 PM (#893190) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: McGrath of Harlow Terrorists don't actually need much room to operate. Good communications and speedy means of getting around, and access to basic tools, that's what matters. So the sensible thing would be to base themselves in the countries where the preferred targets are to be found. What's the point of being thousands of miles away out in the sticks where you stick out like a sore thumb and there aren't any DIY or electrical stores? |
|
19 Feb 03 - 04:03 AM (#893314) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Teribus NicoleC, Re Saddam and sanctions and the effectiveness of sanctions - 382 rocket engines - imported illegaly by Iraq. His ministers/Members of the Revolutionary Command Council pay ten times the price for whatever they have to run through the UN blockade - and apparently have no problem in doing so. Money - yes he's got money - just look what he choses to spend it on. |
|
19 Feb 03 - 10:24 AM (#893392) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST TIA: I was told in another tread by an antiwar protestor "Don't dare to lecture us about" something or other. Quite disrespectful of my rights guaranteed under the constitution. These rights were won in a war. People died. A famous quotation from that era by Patrick Henry was "Give me liberty or give me death." You can exercise your rights as much as you want. I can't stop you. I don't have the right to stop you. Post a thousand times if you want but be prepared for opposing viewpoints. The very fact that antiwar protestors get pissed when some one asks them if something is just makes me not want to go along with their ideas. The very fact that they march tells me they want to change the opinions of others. They don't want to accept the world as it is. Senator Byrd's previous membership in the KKK, a terrorist organization, and his recent use of the N word lowers my opinion of his credibility to the point where I am not interested in hearing his speech. Old Guy |
|
19 Feb 03 - 10:36 AM (#893397) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST Conrad is right. Sorry but this fellow is not a nice boy. He is a killer, he hates women (sure at one time or another every nice boy has taken that stance, but only after he was dumped an hour before the prom cause she thought his car was ugly) he kills children, he has no reguard for human rights, he shoots guns outside AND inside, he drives an SUV, he watches the TODAY SHOW, he kills his family (again, after certain Thanksgiving Dinners I can almost agree with this)he hates Christians, he hates Jews, he hates Baptists (this only includes the Southern Baptists, the Eastern and Northern are OK cause they never go on TV and ask for money) he hates The Kingston Trio, he is ugly to animals, he burns oil fields AND guess what..HIS SON IS JUST LIKE HIM! SO, we best just go on and get the job done. Love you all, Denver |
|
19 Feb 03 - 10:56 AM (#893411) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy New developments seen and heard on national TV: There is an Iraqi scientist in the Philippines stating that there are Chemo weapons in a ring around Baghdad. Saddam plans to blow them and kill every person there in case of an attack. After analysis, if I think this to be true and not just another scare tactic by Saddam, I would want to shift my opinion to getting the necessary inspectors in there to find these things while Saddam is still allowing inspections. There are trucks outfitted with underground sonar that can detect thing underground. They are used to explore for natural gas and oil deposits that could help. From Kuwait comes the news that Saddam has placed his minister of defense under house arrest because he suspects a coup is being planned. This could be a good sign if it is true. From Iran comes the news that Saddam is discussing exile in Iran Russia and other countries. This could be a good sign if it is true but several people have said he would destroy everything of value in Iraq plus all of the citizens of Baghdad as he is leaving. Old Guy |
|
19 Feb 03 - 11:57 AM (#893486) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker Oldguy, that's exactly the reason that inspections should continue. Saddam is much less likely to use weapons with inspectors in the country than he is with tens of thousands of American troops in it. While i agree with you that I would not want to live under Saddam, i still maintain that a way can and must be found to eliminate him without the massive loss of life and regional stability a war will cause. |
|
19 Feb 03 - 12:38 PM (#893535) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: DougR Nicole and McGrath: I simply do not understand how you two can come to the conclusion that inspections are "working." Blix did not say that in his report McGrath. I listened to his presentation. He simply said the Iraqis were cooperating a bit better, but that's not the point. They are supposed to cooperate FULLY! Do you use as proof that the inspections are "working" the fact that they have not yet found any WMDs? If so, I fail to see how that makes any sense at all. DougR |
|
19 Feb 03 - 12:47 PM (#893543) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Frankham Old Guy you say, "Are there any complaints from the people in Northern Iraq? Do they want us to leave?" There are those who want to be liberated but Iraqi people have gone on record to say that they don't want to be invaded by an "imperial" America and they decry the idea of bombing. This is not to say they are happy with Saddam, however. The inspectors and the UN are addressing the issue. If Bush could control his quest for power as "Commander-in-chief" and allow the process, we could find unanimity with other countries such as France and Germany in stopping Saddam. But as long as the Bush Adminstration continues it's bullying tactics, it destroys any chance for multinational action. To say that the protesters have no constructive counterview to the Bush Administration is not correct. Their view is quite simply "let the inspections work." They have and they can continue to do so. Frank Hamilton |
|
20 Feb 03 - 02:01 AM (#894089) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: DougR Uh, Frank, how are they working? And incidentially, GWB IS Commander in Chief. DougR |
|
20 Feb 03 - 03:02 AM (#894105) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: Troll The inspections have done bloody damn all and will continue to do bloody damn all. We knew after the Gulf War that Saddam had tons of anthrax. Where is it? Where is the proof that it was destroyed? Where is the VX and Mustard gas that was found AFTER the Gulf War? Where is the proof that it was destroyed? What good is finding unanimity with France and Germany and how is that going to help stop Saddam? If you mean that they'll find a way that won't involve force, I'll bet they won't. The Inspectors won't find anything because Saddam has had years to hide it and hide it well. Lurker, I must disagree. If Saddam decides that the Inspectors are getting too close to something he wants to keep hidden, they'll be gone in a heartbeat and if he has to kill a few of his own people in the process...? Bye. troll |
|
20 Feb 03 - 02:04 PM (#894458) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Forum Lurker What are you "stopping" Saddam from doing? He hasn't threatened war, or the use of WMD's, in over a decade. He's not a threat to anyone outside his own country. If you want to oust him to help the Iraqis, then say that that's the reason. If you think the war is self-defense, proof is necessary that he's a threat to us before it's justified. |
|
20 Feb 03 - 08:40 PM (#894764) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: mg he drives a SUV? Oh my goodness..that is the first I heard of that...show him no mercy. mg |
|
22 Feb 03 - 08:33 PM (#896233) Subject: RE: BS: Making Saddam Smile! From: GUEST,Oldguy On ABC news tonight: Iraq refuses to destroy al-Samoud missles. Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei say Iraq is not cooperating. The say they might convince them to destroy the weapons in a few weeks. Is it the inspectors job to pursuade the Iraqis? This is better than I expected. Now Saddam, embolded by the anti-war demonstrations is openly defying the UN so surely they will pass a resolution to atack the Iraqi regime. Peace marchers keep it up it IS working. Other news headlines: Revealed: 17 British firms armed Saddam with his weapons UK Labour to field anti-peace teams Old Guy |