<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fico:<BR><B> And this are the words of John Ashcroft's former pet servant…. I don't hold it against you, it was probably the indie thing to do back then…<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>you are a moron<BR>
Lets all hide in our homes
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B><BR>How do you know the missiles contravene the us sanctions? Iraq says they dont.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>well. . .in today's post, "a team of international weapons inspectors … has concluded that a major Iraqi ballistic missle program is in clear violation of U.N. mandates."
<BR>
<BR>I don't think we'll know the truth (or the extent) of Saddam's reign of terror over the Iraqis until he's gone. Exiles tell a pretty grim story, though.<P>As for those 3,000 in X-Ray, well, I won't even start.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Venerable Bede:<BR><B> well. . .in today's post, "a team of international weapons inspectors … has concluded that a major Iraqi ballistic missle program is in clear violation of U.N. mandates."
</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>and Iraq countered by saying they didnt.<P>Personally I feel there is a better arguement for war when appraoched with your reasoning, rather than the Al quaeda link or anything else, like that.<P>But still infidels taking over the middle east? I would give that a wide body swerve if I were you. How stable is the region going to be with a catholic led QANGO in charge of Iraq?
</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>and Iraq countered by saying they didnt.<P>Personally I feel there is a better arguement for war when appraoched with your reasoning, rather than the Al quaeda link or anything else, like that.<P>But still infidels taking over the middle east? I would give that a wide body swerve if I were you. How stable is the region going to be with a catholic led QANGO in charge of Iraq?<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by not too shabby:<BR><B><BR>As for those 3,000 in X-Ray, well, I won't even start. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>what about what happened at Waco, what about Tianemen square what about Argentina of 15 years ago or again Pol Pot.<P>Wars are not generally fought over how a country mistreats its citizens. <P>Name one example?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B>The video game points out the dangers of nuclear weapons in the hands of unstable nations such as Pakistan. Aren't those weapons also dangerous in the hands of an unstable dictator who has never failed to use every weapon in his arsenal, against both his neighbors and his own people?<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yes they are dangerous, they are dangerous in anyone's power. I am not convinced that throwing Saddam out will get rid of the problem. The problem will reemerge in 10 years.<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> The point of the three threats anecdote is that inaction can have a cost, as it did with bin Laden. Or are you suggesting we should have tried diplomacy with him.<P>We didn't take bin Laden as an immediate threat and we paid a price for that. Do we want to take that chance with Hussein?<P>How long do we keep playing diplomacy with Iraq? What's the end-game? What's the timeline?<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>It still seems as it all came on suddenly to me. If you remember back to when people seriously started talking about war with Iraq, most people were surprised by the suddeness. It did not seem like the timing made any sense and there were no serious attempts and addressing the issue diplomatically before the decision was made to go to war. Iraq was on a nonexistent leash with this Administration.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> Enlighten us. What should we do?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>I don't have the answers GGW, I was more worried about the fact that nobody is looking for the answers. I just know that War is not necessary, it is the god damn truth. I know, I am so very Naive, but, oh well.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by not too shabby:<BR><B>I don't think we'll know the truth (or the extent) of Saddam's reign of terror over the Iraqis until he's gone. Exiles tell a pretty grim story, though.<P>As for those 3,000 in X-Ray, well, I won't even start. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>When will we know the truth about Bush's reign of terror?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sir HC:<BR><B>Ten years of sactions did work. He doesn't have nukes, does he? He has done some little crap as surrepticiously as he can, nothing major. He has started no wars in a decade, isn't that pretty damn good, and contrary to the "middle east culture"?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>We don't know where his weapons program stands. Ten years ago the UN told him to dismantle the program we knew about and show proof that it was dismantled. He has not shown proof, as he known he has to all along. As North Korea has shown, even inspections can't guarantee that there isn't a program.<P>He hasn't done large scale killing of his own people because they are protected by the UN enacted No-Fly zones that we have been patrolling for ten years.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>GGW, give me good reasons why we should go to war against Saddam, everyone I ask gives the same BS:<P>1. He is an evil, evil man. To this I say so what, there are many men who are more evil than him that we have not attacked.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>"Evil" is a judgment call. Let's say he's meglomaniacal and prone to violence. Are there others like that? Sure. Have the others been shown to have a WMD program? Have the others failed to dismantle that program under UN directive? Do the others have a history of using WMD against their neighbors and own people?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>2. He might get weapons on mass destruction. So, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and possibly Iran all have these, so what. He is currently pretty much under wraps, hell it is now known that we have been incessantly spying on the country and if we saw something really heinous we probably would have gone in or just bombed it already.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>There's no boiler-plate for foreign policy. India and Pakistan are absorbed in their own battles and currently ruled by leaders who are more level-headed than Hussein. North Korea is using it's program for leverage not aggression. Iran might be a problem, but at least there is an active opposition movement there and the country hasn't shown a propensity to invade it's neighbors or gas its own people.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>3. Links to Osama. They have tried this one for about a year, and Saddam either has more teflon in his suit than Ronald Reagan or there is nothing here.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I wholeheartedly agree. It's a stupid argument and we should have given it up a long time ago.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>4. He will give these weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. And then we would blow the hell out of his country. He may be an evil dictator, but he is not stupid. Has he done this in the past? No verifiable links have been shown, other than his giving of money to Palistinian "martyrs" families after the fact.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>We don't know what he would do with them. Even if he kept them to himself, would you still want him to have them? He has had ten years to get his nation out of UN sanctions by showing that he destroyed his weapons program. He hasn't. I don't think he really cares about his country outside of his power over it.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>These are the b.s. excuses I have heard so far, so what why should we go to war? All I have heard that makes sense is that Iraq converted to the Euro as their standard for oil sales and this is not what we want. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Gulf War I was all about oil – As Paul O'Neill once said about the Gulf War "If the chief resource of Kuwait was bananas, we wouldn't be there." Nonetheless, this time it's about WMD in the hands of a meglomaniacal, violent dictator with a history of using every weapon in his arsenal to achieve his internal and external goals.
you know, i was just commenting to someone about how this is the 10 year anniversary of waco (not to mention the year of my 10 year high school reunion). time flies.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ikarus:<BR><B> ask israel, heh. for some reason, the us ignores un sanctions for israel's treatment of palestinians, but this iraqi shit is supposed to be important. the hypocrisy leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but the plug needs to be pulled on iraq. the un involvement is just slowing things down.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Amen. I'm not here to say that everything the US does is right – it's not. But specifically talking about Iraq, I don't see any alternatives.<P>After that, I think the single best thing we could do for our position in the world is to start tying the ridiculously huge amount of "assistance" we give to Israel to substantive steps Israel takes in removing its foot from the throats of the people who's land they've been stealing for fifty years. It would build a lot of the goodwill that the US is sorely lacking.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B>Wars are not generally fought over how a country mistreats its citizens. <P>Name one example?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I didn't say that those were reasons to go to war. If that were the basis for war, we would have a lot of war to wage. The reasons for military action are clear, and they are a direct result of Iraq's failure to comply with the UN's demands concerning their weapons program. I hope that the result of war (if it comes to that) will allow the Iraqi people to live without fear of being imprisoned, tortured, gassed, etc. by their own government for the sole purpose of scaring them into submission. <P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> After that, I think the single best thing we could do for our position in the world is to start tying the ridiculously huge amount of "assistance" we give to Israel to substantive steps Israel takes in removing its foot from the throats of the people who's land they've been stealing for fifty years. It would build a lot of the goodwill that the US is sorely lacking.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>we can agree on that, too bad so many people in the US equate this kind of thought with antisemitism
This "war" is about many things… I feel the greatest is protecting the U.S. on the broad scope. The best way to view Hussein and Iraq is comparing them to the mob. Just being Americans is the crime. The opposing side will strike, but this war is all about the future of this country. I can't see peace being an option when governments like the ones in the news believe the only good American is a dead one. As for Germany and France… how quickly we forget. Understandable however, considering specific memory tends to fade over 58 years. No one wants to get on the bad side of this Mob, but the U.S. really has very little choice at this point. Talk is cheap. Peace is very nice and idealistic, but I'm sorry to say, it's not the way the world works and not what made this (U.S.) country what it is today.
You have to admit (or not, I suppose) that the UN targets Israel more than anyone else in this department. Don't think so? Read this, even if you don't agree, it's interesting:<BR> <A HREF="http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/goldstein_feb9.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/goldstein_feb9.html</A>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myuman:<BR><B>This "war" is about many things… I feel the greatest is protecting the U.S. on the broad scope. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>how very nice it must be to see the world as good and evil, and you belong to the side of good.<P>A rather playground kind of attitude isnt it?<P><BR>Do you think the middle east will be more stable when a catholic led QANGO is in charge of Iraq?<P>I dont.<P>It will just generate even more resentment of the US in my opinion.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myuman:<BR><B>Talk is cheap. Peace is very nice and idealistic, but I'm sorry to say, it's not the way the world works and not what made this (U.S.) country what it is today.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>So the way to continue success is to continue what we made you successful. I think you can find many examples that show the opposite. Peace is not the way the world works because people haven't worked that way. And, quite frankly, I have no great desire for the U.S. to remain what it is today, it would be nice if the country used its power for positve change a little more often and a little less selectively.
Like if they legalized weed, that would be the dogs bollox. <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jadetree:<BR><B>it would be nice if the country used its power for positve change a little more often and a little less selectively.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B> how very nice it must be to see the world as good and evil, and you belong to the side of good.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Absolutely… and so do you… next question.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sid vicious:<BR><B>Like if they legalized weed, that would be the dogs bollox. <P> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>would be a hell of a start<P>is that sid viscous?
It'd be fookin' mega.