|
|
|
| Guest Book (1934 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Guest Book |
|
|
|
On 3/30/2003
G7enn
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
Arab: "Think we shoud have done that in the previous wars we fought in? Had we not, all of Europe could just as well of been called Germany and the UK Hitlerville today."
I love the way that this comes up everywhere europeans and americans talk on the 'net, even when there isn't a war on.
There is a school of thought that says that the only reason the americans finally joined WWII when they did was so they could be there for the march into Berlin. I've even read accounts that describe it as a RACE to Berlin.
Paranoid fantasy of a bunch of ungrateful commies?. Possibly, but it brings to mind one of the more interesting aspects of the current war.
If it's true that the opressed people of Iraq are just waiting to rise up and form a US style democracy as soon as the regime's leaders are removed, why do we need to invade?. Why can't Saddam and his top brass be taken out with a mix of a few traitors, a little inteligence and the aplication of some of that awesome technology?.
The answer of course is that america wants to ensure that what comes next is a mini-me US style system and they need people in there to do that, or maybe the scale of the invasion is because they never actually believed that bollocks about the Iraqi people showering the troops with flowers. I just heard something on the Radio about how similar the situation is to the last time the british went into the region early last century. That campaign also started out as 'liberation' and finished as a rather good illustration of the futility of empire building. Half of the problems in world are due to the remnants of the british empire's influence and yet, according to some analysts, a lot of the real neoconservative Hawks actually believe america is powerful enough to build an empire outpost in the middle east. That if the 'unthinkable' happens and there isn't a spontaneous explosion of democracy spreading from Iraq to it's nieghbours, america is now strong enough to hold the middle east as some kind of empire outpost.
Of course this version couldn't be true could it?, America and it's alies wouldn't have fed their populations with made up stories about a three day war where the soldiers are welcomed with open arms. It's not like they can subtly move the goalposts, claim that the Iraqi people are too scared to rise up while already firing the first few warning shots at Iraq's neighbours ("naghty Syria, giving Iraq night vision goggles so they can see in the dark, stop it or you'll be next") and then ship in more troops. They wouldn't exploit the fact that most people will be resigned to the fact we're now fighting a war and not object.
No, it's all just paranoid delusions of a few commie wimps, I shouldn't be reading it, after all, a week or so ago my thoughts were summed up by "Oh f*ck, we're in now but lets hope it's quick", a far more comfortable outlook than what i'm forced to think now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Mike lets talk at Elsinore?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003 msk
wrote in from
(172.174.nnn.nnn)
"list all of your qualifications as to what lies YOU THINK have been told"
I now have to be "qualified" in order to believe I've been lied to? When did this requirement show up? Or did you actually mean that you wanted a list of what I believe to be lies?
First, and the biggest, was the government's statements that Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks. Bush continually said that we had irrefutable proof. He has since disavowed that statement, and in recent speeches now says Hussein supports "al Qaeda type" organizations, rather than al Qaeda itself. Careful phrasing that doesn't say that Hussein is responsible, but leaves many people with the impression that he is. As a result, recent polls show that anywhere from one third to one half of the people still believe that Hussein was directly responsible...
In September, Bush announced that the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency issued a new report describing the revived nuclear weapons program in Iraq, and that Hussein was 6 months away from developing nuclear weapons. He followed that up by saying that "this is all the proof we need." The only problem with that was the IAEA had not released any new report, and the IAEA has never stated in any report that Iraq was 6 months away from having nuclear weapons. The closest Iraq has ever been to developing nukes was having a nuclear power plant, which Isreal bombed in 1981 so weapons couldn't be developed. Ironically, we strongly criticized Isreal for making a pre-emptive strike...
Colin Powell told the UN Security Council about a "poison factory" linked to al Qaeda in northern Iraq. Inspectors visiting the site found nothing resembling that, and in response an unnamed State Dept official "clarified" that report by saying that "'poison factory' is a term of art"...
Powell has cited a British Intelligence report that detailed Iraq's spying capabilities. This turned out to be a journal article from a graduate student in northern California...
Powell also talked about the threat from a new Iraqi unmanned drone. This "threat" turned out to be made from wood and tape, and had a range of 5 miles...
And again we're told that Iraq is attempting to buy uranium, this time from Niger. Once again, the documents claiming this turn out to be forged...
When the government tells us something, and later either retracts what they've said, or the sources they cite turn out to be non-existent or fraudulent, that's usually a pretty good indication that they're not being honest with us.
As for my qualifications to criticize US foreign policy, I'm a US citizen. My qualifications were granted by Thomas Jefferson over two hundred years ago. The Constitution gives the common citizen the right, AND THE RESPONSIBILITY, to criticize the government's actions.
And anyone who has any intelligence, and is willing to take their blinders off, can follow the trail of problems in the Middle East that our foreign policies have created over the last several decades, and see just how we ended up where we are...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003 Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Cool!!!!!!
I work for Clear Channel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003 Nima
wrote in from
(65.56.nnn.nnn)
OooOOoOOOoooPPppps: Looks like my illustration didn't go well with the moderator :-) So be it, let me try it differently:
Arab:
Talking to you is like talking to a wall.
(hows that Mr./Ms. Moderator?) :-))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Mike-Please list all of your qualifications as to what lies YOU THINK have been told, also all of your qualifications to criticize the Foriegn Policys of the US govt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/28/2003 msk
wrote in from
(172.164.nnn.nnn)
"So Mike I take it you side with Saddam and his govt instead of George Bush and the govt that protects you?"
"Maybe you can be a human shield to protect Saddam and Osama, at that point the US military could careless where your from, apparntly you dont anyways."
"Maybe you could bring an american flag and burn it in protest this weekend at the races, Wear an iraqi flag in support of Saddam!!!!"
Those are some interesting assumptions you've made there. Unfortunately, they happen to be wrong. However, one thing I do not support is the increasingly common "either/or mentality", which is what your line of reasoning seems to be following. Just because I'm critical of one point of view doesn't automatically mean that I'm for the opposite one. And I would think that posting a statement like "Hussein can't be allowed to stay in power" would at least infer that I'm not pro-Iraq.
I'm a strong supporter of the USA, and as such, feel a duty to criticize the government when I don't agree with its policies. The framers of the Constitution felt the same way, and part of the reason for the 1st Amendment was to encourage that criticism.
Many people are questioning what the government has told us regarding this war. There were a few compelling reasons for going to war, but then they were surrounded by other half-truths, and outright lies. When we know that some of the reasons we've been given are lies, many people can't help but be suspicious about the other reasons. And when you take into consideration the connections that some of our current officials have to Iraq, and what some of them stand to gain from going to war, even more questions get raised.
And as I stated in my previous post, we've worked our way into a no-win situation. We helped create a monster, and as a result bear responsibility for what is happening. However, despite what the government has told us as part of the justification for this war, its very unlikely that we will be more secure afterwards. Even if we go as far as nuking Iraq out of existence, there will still be terrorists, some of whom will probably be inspired by our attack. And I still believe that we have more to fear from the next Timothy McVie than we do from nations and groups that we've already identified as terrorists. You keep talking about everyone else missing "the big picture", but even you are only looking at part of it.
Trust me, Arab, you're at least as likely to be flying the Iraqi flag as I am...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Antti S. Brax
wrote in from
(80.186.nnn.nnn)
If I was left in charge, I would follow the letter of the law and bleeding heart US liberals that shout anti BUSH propaganda during war times would be put in jail.
Loks like if you were left in charge the US would have to start a war against you. Just like they now fight against Saddam. Just like they fought against Hitler. How are your friends in the Chinese government doing nowadays?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
To bad Iraqis dont have a first amendment to say as they please. they only have a sedition act, and a army of thugs to murder them if they dont follow it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Nima-Is that an Iraqi flag I see flying outside your front door?
NIMBY?
Our policys are wrong because you say they are wrong?
What qualifys you to make US and International policy, because you subscribe to some leftist commie rag that tells you so!
Our leaders are far more intelligent and qualified to make judgements and policys then some guy on a website spewing his anti US hate!
Cry me a river!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 free speech guy
wrote in from
(12.252.nnn.nnn)
Cases where the Espinonage Act of 1918 was ruled against by the Supreme court...the first ammendement will usually triumph, as it should.
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)
Shaffer v. United States (9th Cir. 1919).
Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten, 244 F. 535 (S.D.N.Y. 1917)
Schenk v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Nima
wrote in from
(12.250.nnn.nnn)
BTW... I think CNN, Fox and others have been guilty of violation of the Sedition Act by having reported many a false reports... :-\
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Nima
wrote in from
(12.250.nnn.nnn)
LOL... Of course 1st Amendment trumps all that. Also, nowhere in what has been posted says that debating the correctness or wrongfulness of our policies comes within the ambit of that statute... Also, you should do research to see how that statutes has been interpreted by the courts.
It is kinda funny to see all these pro-warmongers doing anything they can to shut the voice of decent. Now, if we were in China, I could have understood, but, guess what, this is the United States...
Now, the kid from Hobbart, IN who was shot dead was only 19 years old. f#@!ing 19 years old. It makes me sick to think about it. You warmongers should really think hard when you hear this. 19 years old. He followed orders. He didn't question them. He went there and got himself killed. For what? So that Mr. Bush and Mr. Chaney and their cronies can protect their oil portfolio? So that Halliburton can be awarded a contract to rebuilt Iraq? So that we can have the ultimate reality TV while in the background huge tax cuts are being passed by Congress for the upper 1% while we are going to get stuck with the bill since unlike the GWI others are not sharing in the price tag?
Patriotism is not blindly following what the government says. Patriotism is using your head to think about what you are being fed. Patriotism is to demand convincing evidence if the citizen in chief decides to send 19 year olds to get killed in our name. Now, if the soldier's death was for a good cause, then I say, hey it is the price we pay. But, in this case, I see an illegal war, perpetrated for the wrong reasons, resulting in less to no security for us all... In such a case, the kid from Hobbart, IN died for nothing... and that is a crime and remaining silent in the name of patriotism is a criminal act.
You have to remember that Saddam is not the problem. Dictatorship and tribalism is a regional problem there. It has been the problem since the English took a pencil and arbitrarily carved out countries out of the Ottoman Empire and included various hostile tribes within one country. There are no democracies over there. I don?t think they even understand the word or the concept. For each Saddam we kill, there are half a dozen just like him who are ready to take his place? And now, after all these Iraqi civilians killed they will have an even easier time to recruit martyrs to strap bombs to their body or fly airplanes into buildings. If you think this war is solving any problem, guess again?it is only fueling the fire of hatred. And if you think that will help our economy grow, well brother, really, I do have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 h0dad
wrote in from
(132.181.nnn.nnn)
As Jesse "The Body" Ventura said..."The American Dream still rocks!"
h0dad lived in the US for a while..and observed that it is big country with a fairly natural balance of big cool stuff and big problems. Being big, it's easy for the world to shake a stick at it. h0dad would like to see the USA remain strong. After all, many things like h0dad's occupation is fully dependant on, and owes lots to, the USA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
The Law
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
16 May, 1918
The U.S. Sedition Act
----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
United States, Statutes at Large, Washington, D.C., 1918, Vol. XL, pp 553 ff.
A portion of the amendment to Section 3 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917.
--------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
SECTION 3. Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, . . . or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct . . . the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or . . . shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Bloody heart Lib'ral
wrote in from
(12.252.nnn.nnn)
Please quote this "law" that you are speaking of Arab. In the USA I have the right to call Bush a f*cking piece of sh*t any time...war or peace. If I think that the president is an idiot, it is my place to say so. I will not go to jail. I will not have broken any laws. Maybe in some right wing facist American dream state, but not in my America.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Ross-I support my country and its leaders and its allies. If I was left in charge, I would follow the letter of the law and bleeding heart US liberals that shout anti BUSH propaganda during war times would be put in jail.
The law is the Law!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasnt the Brits and IRA killed more civilians then Bush has in Iraq?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
So Mike I take it you side with Saddam and his govt instead of George Bush and the govt that protects you?
Whats done is done get over it, you can piss moan whine and cry about it all you want, reality sucks doesnt it. s#@! happens, the US f#@!ed up again, Maybe you can be a human shield to protect Saddam and Osama, at that point the US military could careless where your from, apparntly you dont anyways.
So should we continue to let Saddam kill hundreds of thoasands more Iraqi's and Kurds?
Should we let him sale his Weapons of Mass destruction to terrorist to use on you me and every other free country in the world, remember you are an infidal, doesnt matter how much you care for your beloved Saddam, he and any other terrorist would kill you just the same.
Tough Love and Tough s#@!!
Maybe you could bring an american flag and burn it in protest this weekend at the races, Wear an iraqi flag in support of Saddam!!!! Sing kumbiya, do a remake of we are the world, and give peace a chance, well we tried that it didnt work!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Ross
wrote in from
(62.252.nnn.nnn)
Arab, the IRA are no longer a threat, some splinter groups are still causing a few problems but by and large the peace process is very slowly having some effect.
I was going to continue with some long post about Iraq but I think I'll leave it now and go back to redaing posts about skating, after all neither of us is going to change our views are we.
Ross
Taekwon!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
msk
wrote in from
(172.195.nnn.nnn)
"...But then again we could sit back and watch terrorist who are well funded drop an ounce of Biological weapons of mass destruction in the water supplies of Germany, France, Japan, UK, US, and how ever many other countries they want, The worlds economy would DIE along with millions of people, then we would all be a bunch of starving 3rd world countrys..."
Biological and chemical weapons can be developed nearly anywhere in the world. Our greater threat now is not from Iraq, but from Iraqi sympathizers or other groups and nations that have a grudge with the US (and because of our foreign policies, that number keeps growing). And even worse, disenfranchised Americans who feel that they need to take radical action against a government that they feel has betrayed them, or at least no longer represents them. I fear the Timothy McVies and Asan Akbars out there far more than I do the Saddam Husseins and Osama bin Ladens.
"...What about the Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and Gassed Kurds, should we just stand by and let these atrocities happen.."
Not only did we let those atrocities happen, we had a hand in causing them. US businesses sold Hussein the materials needed, and then we stood by and watched as it happened. In fact, Rumsfeld was the envoy sent over to Iraq while the Kurds were being gassed to discuss Iraq receiving more aid from the US. In effect, not only did we not punish Iraq for gassing the Kurds, they were rewarded for it. And that's been the problem with our foreign policies: we don't seem to have a problem with giving dictators weapons that get used on their own people, just as long as they also get used against our enemies. Iraq isn't doing anything it hasn't done for the last few decades, except *not* fighting one of our enemies.
My feeling is that overthrowing the current Iraqi regime is a no-win situation. Hussein can't be allowed to stay in power, but removing him will also perpetuate or aggravate many of the problems that we've had in the Middle East for the last several decades. Limiting our involvement over there, especially when it comes to giving dictators weapons, is probably the only way to avoid situations like this...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Geezer-x
wrote in from
(149.2.nnn.nnn)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003
Arab
wrote in from
(24.24.nnn.nnn)
Ross-What threat of Biological weapons of mass destruction does the IRA have?
Nima,MSK- 2 very good post, but what you have to remember is the face of our enemys changes all the time, we were not always friends with England, Germany, Japan, Russia etc etc etc. When we had our problems with Iran we entrusted Iraq to help us, Now they are our foe, this happens all the time. Remember just 50+ years ago when Germany was hell bent on destroying England and France? Now we are all friends and Allies, well almost, Look at the big picture!. regardless of who sold who what and when s#@! happens, and when it does you take action. Had somebody takin action agaisnt Hitler when they seen the signs of what was about to come, then we wouldnt have had the greatest tragedy in world history, lets hope that doesnt happen again. But then again we could sit back and watch terrorist who are well funded drop an ounce of Biological weapons of mass destruction in the water supplies of Germany, France, Japan, UK, US, and how ever many other countries they want, The worlds economy would DIE along with millions of people, then we would all be a bunch of starving 3rd world countrys.
Yes the US is paying the price for trusting someone. get over the he said she said, he did this, he did that. It is time to take action.
Reality Sucks!
So Does War!
Weapons of Mass Destruction sucks even worse!
for you and me.
What about the Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and Gassed Kurds, should we just stand by and let these atrocities happen, Should we let Saddam sale his weapons of mass destruction to terrorist who will use them to poisan and kill whole citys, countys and states, the 3 Scuds that saddam didnt have and wasnt supposed to have almost hit Kuwait today, the same Scuds that the UN couldnt find, the same scuds that he is not supposed to possess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Nima
wrote in from
(12.250.nnn.nnn)
But seriously Arab:
You really need to be aware of history. You can't be selective about it either.
Remember in 1983 the same Mr. Rumsfeld shaking the hand of the same Saddam?
Remember in the same year President Regan removing Iraq from the list of the rogue States in order to qualify for trade in pesticides and receiving technical help in building pesticide and chemical factories from US engeneering firms?
Remember the financial credit and laon guarantees given to Iraq to acquire his chemical weapons and the means of its delivery?
Remember Iraq using his newly acquired weapons first on the Iranian troops and then on the Kurds using US Intelligence to find them troops?
Remember the US ambassador to Kuweit leading Saddam to beleive it would be OK to invade Kuweit?
Remember the lies by the first Bush administration about the babies and incubators?
Remember 12 years of constent and weekly bombing of Iraq?
Remember the inspectors essentially reporting that progress was being made?
If you think that today as an American you should feel safer because we have invaded Iraq and are about to take out Saddam, my friend, you are living a dream... wake up and smelll the coffee. If at any point in the World History you should feel unsafe, it is now that the International Law has been essentially destroyed thanks to Mr. Bush.
Our foreign policy has been short sighted in the past and it is continuing to be short sighted. We helped the Talibans and then we had to see our cities attacked by the same people my tax dollars helped trained... You want to close your eyes on these facts and put your head into the sand, fine. But they won't go away because you want to ignore them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3/27/2003 Nima
wrote in from
(12.250.nnn.nnn)
Arab:
I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, cheap. You would love it!
|
|
|
|
|
