What if No weapons and No terrorist atacks from Iraq? [Archive]

MercurE1

March 24th, 2003, 12:05 PM

Ok if it was about the OIL then ---- we would take the southern fields and then the northern then negotiate with sadam and the kurds. If we did not care about anything more we would have leveled the towns with artilery. We are there for one purpose to find the chem weapons which we know are there and free the iraqi people. Does anyone remember WWII or say 9-11? I mean come on... dear lord open your eyes, this is a guy who has used chemical weapons on HIS OWN PEOPLE as well as IRAN. He did this to punish the people who surrendered in 91. Places he found where soldiers had left their units to surrender came home to find families murdered. He has special troops now working with regular units to ensure no one leaves or doesn't fight. People can not leave baghdad because on the corners people with machine guns are waiting to kill anyone trying to leave.

This is the same thing that happened with Hitler. i could post more similarities but it is pointless. If you think that he is such a nice guy, go over there and tell him, and see what happens. Oh and don't tell him you won't work for him, cause he tortured his own scientists who told him they would not work on a nuke (but he only tortured them for like 11 years, so whats the big deal right?)

Some people boggle my mind.

Merc

dssdog

March 24th, 2003, 12:13 PM

ATTENTION WAL-MART SHOPPERS…
China has been doing this for years, yet they have favorite trade status.

pimp101

March 24th, 2003, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by dssdog
ATTENTION WAL-MART SHOPPERS…
China has been doing this for years, yet they have favorite trade status.

ATTENTION K-MART SHOPPERS…
China dosent fund terrorists and encourage their people to come over here and KILL us!!!!

tony12963

March 24th, 2003, 12:35 PM

quote

ATTENTION K-MART SHOPPERS…
China dosent fund terrorists and encourage their people to come over here and KILL us!!!!

AMEN BROTHER,AMEN

medikated

March 24th, 2003, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by newmex
no, dont answer yet, lets wait and see, hope no weapons to be planted by the usgovt.
dont tell me youll really be surprised?!!

So let me get this straight newmex, you're basically paranoid and completely married to your opinion, and there's no way to sway you from your belief because you already assume that the US govt is lying to you. (oh, I guess by the way Uncle Sam's done a lot of international evidence planting in the last 5 administrations, right?) So why even bother arguing the point?

Fact is, the FREE PRESS which we have would just LOVE to crucify Bush (any president for that matter - think of the ratings!) on something that big. If not our media, how about France's or alJazeera. Oh wait, you must think they're getting paid off?!?

OK Oliver Stone, I guess you're right :R

After living in this country for a few years, a Russian dissident remarked at how amazing it was that in a land where people are so free, all they want to do is fantasize about complicated conspiracies that if true would make them less free. I guess he was talking about you.

KT

dssdog

March 24th, 2003, 01:11 PM

Sorry, I was addressing the atrocities against his people reason. I thought the administration gave up on the 9-11 link before they started the weapons of mass destruction, but after the we aren’t going in for oil argument.

tony12963

March 24th, 2003, 04:21 PM

:mad:

newmex

March 24th, 2003, 05:25 PM

1. I really hope i´m wrong, and mass des weapons to be found in iraq, so: this attack to be legal and lost lives to be worth it.
2. I´ll rather live in the US than somewhere else.
3. I try to make my own conclusions not based on the media, since its well known that all the media is censored, but in common sense.
4. I respect the us army and american patriotism.
but...
1. Having the balls and the capability to do something doenst give you the Legal Right to do it.
2. After so many years of trying to get the nations united, this just make nations get apart.
3. All the nations have the legal right to have weapons to defend themself, just like you prob have a gun at home.
4. Trying to discuss something and get different opinions is the important thing in this post (not if newmex is wrong or not)
5. Took too much to get our freedom, so exersicing it, shoulnd´t be a problem, using the brains to see if we are missing something is not a sin.

sparker

March 25th, 2003, 04:29 PM

what were the 3000 gas suits they just found for

MercurE1

March 25th, 2003, 07:55 PM

In case the angry invaders found their VX stores and used them on the iraqis, lol

NotHome

March 26th, 2003, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by newmex
1. I really hope i´m wrong, and mass des weapons to be found in iraq, so: this attack to be legal and lost lives to be worth it.
2. I´ll rather live in the US than somewhere else.
3. I try to make my own conclusions not based on the media, since its well known that all the media is censored, but in common sense.
4. I respect the us army and american patriotism.
but...
1. Having the balls and the capability to do something doenst give you the Legal Right to do it.
2. After so many years of trying to get the nations united, this just make nations get apart.
3. All the nations have the legal right to have weapons to defend themself, just like you prob have a gun at home.
4. Trying to discuss something and get different opinions is the important thing in this post (not if newmex is wrong or not)
5. Took too much to get our freedom, so exersicing it, shoulnd´t be a problem, using the brains to see if we are missing something is not a sin.

1: We have already found weapons that Iraq was not supposed to have. Just the scuds give the US legal precidence to go in acccording to the cease-fire agreements.

2: Same here

3: agreed

4: Respect and support are two differnt things. Do you support our troops or only respect them?

On the second set:
1:The US has the moral obligation to remove Sadam as we are the only ones capable of both removing him and restoring order to the country. We do have the legal right under the LEGAL CONTRACT of the cease-fire aggreements.

2: The United Nations has changed to a US hating forum. It needs to be disbanded as it is not performing it's duties. Just look at the number of resolutions against Isreal and Iraq, both should have had actions taken years ago.

3: I do have guns at home but they are defensive weapons. I do not have explosives which would be an offensive weapon. Same thing holds true for weapons of mass destruction.

4: It is your freedom to express your ideas and opinions. It my right to disagree.

5: No cost is too great to preserve the constitution. The lives of our soldiers are of great importance but we cannot allow ourselves to live in fear.

NotHome

skootch

March 26th, 2003, 07:23 AM

I think you chicken hawks ought to quit talking big and sign up. Our boys could certainly use the help.

Just think you could actually do something besides telling everybody your a patriot.

You couldn't keep a real American from joining the US Army or better yet the US Marines.

While you in Iraq we'll miss your big talk. Maybe you will find WMD. You'll actually be a hero.

Next we could send your blowhard a$$ to France to fight them.

God bless our GI's. Let's get our kids home.

NotHome

March 26th, 2003, 07:43 AM

Skootch

I agree, that's why I joined a long time ago. Can't go now because of age and my job function.

NotHome

panchero

March 26th, 2003, 02:08 PM

I hear a lot about how Saddam killed his people and how he used weapons on them and that’s bad….
Us did the same with the Tuskanigie experiment in which black solders were infected with syphilis and not given a cure and left to die.
Not to mention the nuclear experiments in Alaska.
So we are no better in that aspect, mom always said don’t toss rock if you lve in a glass house.
Saddam is a dictator who rig election, and was in fact not elected the pres of Iraq, But neither was Bush, he wan the election in court.
Saddam was not, and has not been linked to 9/11
Scuds were disclosed with that “disclosure “ Iraq had to turn in.
Re: Russian supply Iraq with war stuff, Paybacks are a bitch, remember the afghan war, when US supplied and trained Bin Ladin with weapons and supplies to battle Russia
Bush would never be able to broker a deal with Sadam for oil, while France and Germany already have a deal and are just waiting for the sanctions to lift.
The report that Colin gave with the nice pictures and recordings proved to find nothing after inspectors hit those spots.
Now the US cries war crime cause of the Geneva convention and the showing of US troops on TV. I think US should Iraq’s surrendering on TV first.
And isn’t it also a violation to hit non-military target (ie TV station)
So far we went from disbarment, to weapons of mass destruction , to potential treat to terror connection, back to weapons, then to preemptive strike (like the scuds can reach us) and now we are on liberating.
Oh and since we are on the freedom fries and such, lets return the statue of liberty, let not forget that if it were not for them, we all would be speaking the queens English and paying tea tax by now.
And if oil is no concern, why is there more interest in protecting the wells, then getting the humanitarian aid in.
No one is backing Saddom and saying that he is good or right, but the US has no valid justification to “invade” or ‘Attack” a foreign country.
Why not go after N.Koria, cause they can put a hurtin.
Saddom is weak from 12 years of sanctions, and from all the inspections.
Lets not blame the French, for our countries mistakes
I do support the troops and families, its not their fault they are there.
“you can not justify any action that the whole world is crying against”
Canada, and Mexico are against it, are we going to start calling them names.
Better yet Tacos will be freedom dogs, and Canadian Bacon will just be Ham.

panchero

March 26th, 2003, 02:13 PM

75 billion for another month of fighting, but we have no social security to look forward to, go figure

dssdog

March 26th, 2003, 02:40 PM

You said it panchero.

:cool:

crownvic

March 26th, 2003, 04:05 PM

Geez this thread is full of opionated history facts..LOL

I'm grinding my teeth but I promised that I would not get personal,so that being said.
Shussssh Crownvic.:gg

NotHome

March 26th, 2003, 06:06 PM

I give up - The US is bad, spank us and put us to bed without dinner.

I won't even justify these posts with a responce.

NotHome

phoztech

March 26th, 2003, 06:14 PM

I like discussing politcs and peoples short term focused minds.

here is something people need to think about... when you save money and try and build wealth are you doing it for yourself or are you doing it for your children and grand children. the answer is what seperates the rich and the poor. this can be applied to alot of things not just wealth.

AK47

March 26th, 2003, 07:04 PM

I am sick of all these people saying this war is about oil. What the hell did you guys drive to work your no better than George W's oil buddies. I am proud to say I am a G.W. oil buddy. I dont want to hear about electric or hydrogen cars either because you gotta burn coal to get electricity or seperate Hydrogen from oxygen. Just my 2 cents.

newmex

March 26th, 2003, 08:57 PM

This war is Illegal as today.Iit´s been more than week and no chemical weapons been used, nor biological or nuclear, yes to: scuds and other weapons. scud by themself are not in this category.
today the open meet at UN was not transmited, only 1 tv station CNBC,
why not fox or cnn? You should had a look at it, The world is angry, not for trying to get sadam, but because its unilateral, NOT multilateral.
I am not mad at any us military, call it navy or army, but i´m dissapointed by Bush, yes, just the president, cause its clear he broke the law, the international law, the war law and the U.N.statutes, history will judge him and the coalition leaders.
Today millions around the world are asking why havent sadam used his mass des weapons?,why no plane has crashed in L.A. or Las Vegas? Who gave Bush the right to brake the law? And the most important one:
Why can americans support a war, that is really an invasion of a sovereing country and kill civilians, such illegal actions and crimes of war like destroying tv station and market, as residental areas?

Unfortunately, hating for U.S. is uprising, the face of young people at australia, france, germany, arabs all over the world, malasya, and the most important, at home!!!
This is a big world we are living, everybody has family, a dad, a son or a daughter there, so that´s why all want to win this war, and family to come back safe, thats is ok, but in the first place why are they there? why not in north korea where there is proven nuclear weapons, or in cuba where people have no democracy, or better yet in
the street of new york removing drugs from the street? dont tell me YOU are personally mad cause sadam killed some fellows iraquis? come on, you...just dont care! so there is only one thing left...OIL.
Stop the war, give peace a chance!

AK47

March 27th, 2003, 12:53 AM

All the people you see protesting the war are Red Diaper Doper Babies. These people which I witnessed firsthand blocking traffic in San Francisco are out protesting the war because they have no jobs and are commies and organized by communiest groups as well as funded by them. They are out protesting the war and trashing the streets and oh lets not forget about the Molotov cocktails which were found in a backpack in an alley in S.F. Yes I do agree that we should have gone to North Korea instead of Iraq but I still support our troops and the president. Do you know anyone with a real job that told their boss I am taking the day off to protest the war? These protester do not represent the majorities opinion. I mean take a look at these protesters hippies taking off their clothes in middle of the street trashing news vans but if our military blows up a news van lets crucify them. Lets not mention the U.S. pows that were tortured and broadcast on Iraqi T.V. Why do you anti war guys keep forgetting about the chemical plant they found also in Iraq oh I forgot Uncle Sam built it real fast before the journalist showed up.

MrCrowley

March 27th, 2003, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by newmex
This war is Illegal as today.Iit´s been more than week and no chemical weapons been used, nor biological or nuclear, yes to: scuds and other weapons. scud by themself are not in this category.
today the open meet at UN was not transmited, only 1 tv station CNBC,
why not fox or cnn? You should had a look at it, The world is angry, not for trying to get sadam, but because its unilateral, NOT multilateral.
I am not mad at any us military, call it navy or army, but i´m dissapointed by Bush, yes, just the president, cause its clear he broke the law, the international law, the war law and the U.N.statutes, history will judge him and the coalition leaders.
Today millions around the world are asking why havent sadam used his mass des weapons?,why no plane has crashed in L.A. or Las Vegas? Who gave Bush the right to brake the law? And the most important one:
Why can americans support a war, that is really an invasion of a sovereing country and kill civilians, such illegal actions and crimes of war like destroying tv station and market, as residental areas?

Unfortunately, hating for U.S. is uprising, the face of young people at australia, france, germany, arabs all over the world, malasya, and the most important, at home!!!
This is a big world we are living, everybody has family, a dad, a son or a daughter there, so that´s why all want to win this war, and family to come back safe, thats is ok, but in the first place why are they there? why not in north korea where there is proven nuclear weapons, or in cuba where people have no democracy, or better yet in
the street of new york removing drugs from the street? dont tell me YOU are personally mad cause sadam killed some fellows iraquis? come on, you...just dont care! so there is only one thing left...OIL.
Stop the war, give peace a chance!

You are obviously a French Immigrant. I hope you do not live in Canada. If you do go the hell back to France where you belong. You can not even type a proper sentence.40 some odd countries back this war.It is not for oil. You will eat those words soon. I do believe that the US should pump enough oil from Iraq to pay for this 75 billion dollar debt that the tax payers are going to have to pay for. Not because of their own doing but because Saddam would not comply with UN Disarmament for 12 GOD DAMN Years. THE UNITED NATIONS IS NOW A IRRELEVANT ENTITY. THEY BLEW IT THIS TIME.It is about time we freedom loving people need to stand up to these cowards who use women and children as human shields.That is UNBELIEVABLE that someone would do this to innocent people. Not to mention fighting in civilian clothes and storing weapons in schools and hospitals and wearing US and UK uniforms to get close to troops and pretending to surender and then pulling out a gun to kill them and cutting off the water and electricity to your own people (IN UMM QARS)and firing chemical or biological weapons at your own people(THE KURDS).Tried to take over Kuwait. Need I go on.You obviously listen to only what you want to believe and that is that the US, Britian,Australia and 37 other countries are totally wrong for getting rid of SADDAM(this is how to spell it by the way). Your solution to the problem is to sit back and not do anything. COWARD.You need to watch real news and not SADDAMTV.You are MISINFORMED. AND TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT NORTH KOREA WILL BE NEXT IF THEY DON'T BACK DOWN.I think while they are there they should go into Iran and Syria also to show the world we are not f-cking around no more.Clean up the Middle East.Its about damn time!They had their chance. 12 YEARS!

Sorry Mods for the irrate post but this is crazy!

dssdog

March 27th, 2003, 03:23 AM

Originally posted by AK47
I am sick of all these people saying this war is about oil. What the hell did you guys drive to work your no better than George W's oil buddies. I am proud to say I am a G.W. oil buddy. I dont want to hear about electric or hydrogen cars either because you gotta burn coal to get electricity or seperate Hydrogen from oxygen. Just my 2 cents.
Following that line of reasoning…
That would mean that if you own anything that is not US made and US assembled, you have contributed to the decline in our economy and you are responsible for lost US jobs. That’s called deductive reasoning.
All the people you see protesting the war are Red Diaper Doper Babies. Keep in mind, Rush is an entertainer. No different then Martin Sheen. You should use quotes when using his lines.

dssdog

March 27th, 2003, 03:30 AM

Originally posted by MrCrowley
You are obviously a French Immigrant. I hope you do not live in Canada. If you do go the hell back to France where you belong. You can not even type a proper sentence.40 some odd countries back this war.It is not for oil. You will eat those words soon. I do believe that the US should pump enough oil from Iraq to pay for this 75 billion dollar debt that the tax payers are going to have to pay for. Not because of their own doing but because Saddam would not comply with UN Disarmament for 12 GOD DAMN Years. THE UNITED NATIONS IS NOW A IRRELEVANT ENTITY. THEY BLEW IT THIS TIME.It is about time we freedom loving people need to stand up to these cowards who use women and children as human shields.That is UNBELIEVABLE that someone would do this to innocent people. Not to mention fighting in civilian clothes and storing weapons in schools and hospitals and wearing US and UK uniforms to get close to troops and pretending to surender and then pulling out a gun to kill them and cutting off the water and electricity to your own people (IN UMM QARS)and firing chemical or biological weapons at your own people(THE KURDS).Tried to take over Kuwait. Need I go on.You obviously listen to only what you want to believe and that is that the US, Britian,Australia and 37 other countries are totally wrong for getting rid of SADDAM(this is how to spell it by the way). Your solution to the problem is to sit back and not do anything. COWARD.You need to watch real news and not SADDAMTV.You are MISINFORMED. AND TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT NORTH KOREA WILL BE NEXT IF THEY DON'T BACK DOWN.I think while they are there they should go into Iran and Syria also to show the world we are not f-cking around no more.Clean up the Middle East.Its about damn time!They had their chance. 12 YEARS!

Sorry Mods for the irrate post but this is crazy!

With all of your spelling and grammatical errors, you probably shouldn’t be making fun of anyone’s postings.
:R

AK47

March 27th, 2003, 05:30 AM

dssdog

March 27th, 2003, 06:05 AM

By the way I am not quoting Rush when I use the term Red Diaper Doper Baby. That term was used in the 1950's to refer to kids who were raised by communist parents. The talk show host Mike Savage added the doper part to it. I consider myself an independant not a Republican. I cant stand people like Rush or Sean Hannity that always stand behind the republicans whatever they do. I disagree alot with the Republicans especially with their social politics.
Well at least your not listening to Rush. We do however have to work on your listening to Savage. Do your homework on him and you’ll find out what a fraud he is.:)
What do you mean about this only buying U.S. products. I buy whatever I want not just U.S. products all I am saying is people say this war is about oil and what the heck are they putting in their cars.
I was using this as a simplistic comparison to your oil comment. Things are a little more complicated then that. You do realize that the US will never see direct money from Iraq’s oil. The UN and the Arab countries will never let that happen. Face it, the good old American tax dollar will be paying for this war.
I know you anti-war people are going to be the first to complain about high gas prices and then you don't want us to drill in a barren tundra in Alaska because of some stupid caribou mating habits.
I for one will never complain about the price of gas. The company I work for pays for all of my fuel.
In the big picture, you never know when caribou will hold the key curing a disease. It’s not that I want to cuddle a caribou, but once you drive a plant or an animal into extinction you will never find its full potential.

NotHome

March 27th, 2003, 06:34 AM

As far as the economic situation, look at a long term graph of the DOW. Draw a best fit line from the begining untill today. You will find that we really are not that far off statistically. You can also do the same for the 1980 to present time frame.

The 1990's were a bubble, caused by the unchecked growth of the 'dot.com' market and the ease of investing through 401k programs. We are now seeing the backlash of this bubble.

NotHome

dssdog

March 27th, 2003, 06:59 AM

Originally posted by NotHome
I give up - The US is bad, spank us and put us to bed without dinner.

I won't even justify these posts with a responce.

NotHome
Glad you changed your mind!:)

crownvic

March 27th, 2003, 11:47 AM

You really have to understand and follow this situation to understand WHY the IRAQI TV station was a target. I'm not even gonna try to expalin if you don't know.
Yes there will be innocent civilians loose their lives and that's sad but darn what can you expect when the IRAQI soldiers are dressing up as civilians and ambushing OUR troops... For that you can blame SADA$$..
If SADA$$ was such a great Leader you would think that he would have spent hell of a lot more on the IRAQI airforce instead of weapons of mass destruction.LOL.
And to the comments about BUSH making an illegal move.... I gotta say to them folks is you must think that SADA$$ got legal permission to move into KUWAIT 12 years ago..LMAO.
This is an EVIL man and must be taken care of..End of story.

:)
Oh one other thing concerning these posts,lets not get into putting down other members for spelling and grammar otherwise I will edit and or close the freakin thread.
Braindamage who'd I do on my spelling??:gg

Bone Daddy

March 27th, 2003, 11:57 AM

loks fin 2 mee...And where in heck is my spellcheck????Everytime I use it , it freaks out and highlights names, abbv, takes forever..And what kind of piece of junk would give you an alternate spellings for words I know I spelled right???:Z

mouse01

March 27th, 2003, 01:24 PM

What if No weapons and No terrorist atacks from Iraq?
That would make our job of taking Saddam and his goons out of power a lot easier.:)

fancy pants

March 27th, 2003, 02:26 PM

For all of you liberals living in Fantasy Land, please get a grip on reality and read Con Coughlin's book Saddam: King of Terror. The following is from the Book jacket:

An unprecedented biography, drawn from the author's exclusive access to high-ranking defectors, intelligence officials, and even Saddam's own relatives -- fully illustrated with photos from his early life to the present

Two weeks before September 11, 2001, Saddam Hussein placed his troops on their highest military alert since the Gulf War. As al-Qaeda terrorists set their attacks on America in motion, the Iraqi dictator was prepared to go to war for a second time with the United States. How did an illegitimate child from Tikrit become the West's greatest adversary, and one of the most dangerous and murderous dictators of modem times?

Saddam: King of Terror is the most insightful and illuminating portrait of the Iraqi president to date-and a fascinating study of the making of a tyrant. Con Coughlin, executive editor of London's award-winning Sunday Telegraph, has covered the Middle East for decades -- on the front lines, narrowly escaping kidnapping and violence. He has cultivated exclusive contacts among the Western intelligence community and numerous defectors from Saddam's inner circles -- including former generals, political associates, and bodyguards as well as childhood friends. Coughlin knew immediately that American and British declarations of war against terrorism after the September 11th attacks would sooner rather than later encompass Saddam Hussein as well as Osama bin Laden. Coughlin shows that any operation against terrorism will be incomplete as long as Saddam remains in power -- that international policies will have to change from cautious tolerance to active intervention, a change that is already becoming a reality.

Coughlin also provides the first complete portrait of Saddam's childhood ever published, compiled from the author's interviews with Saddam's contemporaries and relatives who have never before spoken publicly about him According to Coughlin, Saddam has a younger sister no one knew about, and he idolizes his mother, although his childhood was deeply marred by his shame about being fatherless. From his earliest years, he looked to his mother's brother as a father figure, and Coughlin tells how it was this uncle who first introduced Saddam to a life of crime and political rebellion. Saddam: King of Terror meticulously traces Saddam's bloody rise to power, from Saddam's first murder and his time in prison, to an eyewitness account of Saddam storming Iraq's presidential palace in a tank, to his almost feral ruthlessness in disposing of his opponents, even close friends and relatives, to create his regime -- a complex mechanism in which family and tribe are central, held together by Saddam's carefully orchestrated reign of fear.

In Saddam: King of Terror, we see both the bizarre, almost pathological behavior of an international pariah and the unshakable power of a tyrant who has defied the world's censure and holds a nation in his grasp.

newmex

March 27th, 2003, 05:49 PM

messages comes in envelopes, you open the envelope and trow it away, i´m the envelope, hope most of you readers got the message!

I´m not from france neither canada, i respect everyone opinions, and expect all to do the same, even if we dont agree. thats what i expect to listen from america of : france, germany, and many other countries, respect.!
¨In the people, like in the countries, the respect to others rights, is the peace!¨ Benito juarez
I have a list of more than a dozen countries (Iraq included) that have no democracy, that will be happy that the world together will help, but, how can democracy be exhalted, when bush didnt listened to the majority, in the UN, and now in the world.
More wars are now in the minds of americans, like korea, iran, libia, congo, are you ready to pay for it? this can collapse the economic order, you could loose your car, house, job, SON.
Peace,tolerance and legal rights in society should prevail.!

mouse01

March 27th, 2003, 06:44 PM

Bush did have a majority of the UN backing us. The reason we gave up on going through the UN is because France was going to veto it and thus making it a lot harder to proceed. France is the reason the UN looks like a waist of time and money today. The UN will get going good again but for the next couple of years their meaning will be deminished.

crownvic

March 27th, 2003, 07:33 PM

Oh I was gonna mention also that there would be NO France only for the Americans and the Brits after SADA@@'s Grandaddy in WW2.. but how soon The French forget this.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,I think this thread is not going bad at all seems like it's getting a little more factual..
Thanks for them pics BRAIN of you in the Ice skating competition,you sure look different with your hair in a pony tail..
I have only e mailed them to a few members BRAIN so not much to worry about.. Where they taken before the OPERA/BALLET pictures??:)

Mel

March 27th, 2003, 07:55 PM

I think as far as a humanitarian body the UN is: good
But the Security Counsel: means nothing

You can not have international LAW if nobody is willing to INFORCE the LAW.

It’s called Anarchy.

chevy

March 27th, 2003, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by newmex
US claims that the main reason to attack Iraq is to free iraq people from Sadam, Why didnt went to cuba first, is closer and cheaper,
OOOPs , not enough oil, guess not worthy yet?

Come on open your eyes, at least show some reality, this is all about the bens, its ok to go to war when its the only way, but why such a hurry? as someone in a reply said, no news about mass destruction (that chem fact could be seen from atlanta) weapons so dont lose the point, what if no mass des weapons found, then this is illegal, what if north korea suddenly wants to help iraq, and iran and the more arabs... did bush had the Legal right to start this? no, dont answer yet, lets wait and see, hope no weapons to be planted by the usgovt.
dont tell me youll really be surprised?!!

chevy

March 27th, 2003, 08:27 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by newmex
US claims that the main reason to attack Iraq is to free iraq people from Sadam, Why didnt went to cuba first, is closer and cheaper,
OOOPs , not enough oil, guess not worthy yet?

Come on open your eyes, at least show some reality, this is all about the bens, its ok to go to war when its the only way, but why such a hurry? as someone in a reply said, no news about mass destruction (that chem fact could be seen from atlanta) weapons so dont lose the point, what if no mass des weapons found, then this is illegal, what if north korea suddenly wants to help iraq, and iran and the more arabs... did bush had the Legal right to start this? no, dont answer yet, lets wait and see, hope no weapons to be planted by the usgovt.
dont tell me youll really be surprised?!! [/QUOTE

Lets talk about brains. Everybody has one , right. No , not right. You are certainly one of a kind. You were born with NO brain. If this was all about oil why are we not invading Saudia Arabia , Kuwait , or any other oil rich country? Why didn't we take all the oil we wanted after the first gulf war? Do YOU feel responsible for all those people who died on 911? I hope you do because people like you are the reason it happened. What you need to do is volunteer your services as a human shield for those poor Iraqi officials. I think it would be very funny if someone had to notify your family that you had an unfortunate accident while in Iraq. Someone had to notify the families of those innocent people on 911. That's all I want to say! I hope I wasn't too forward.

NotHome

March 28th, 2003, 04:54 AM

newmex

North Korea is a problem, but a new one created by the former president. Diplomacy will be used to take care of that situation. We have many diplomatic tools at our disposal when dealing with North Korea. China has quite a lot of influence and we hold sway over thier economy. Look what a disorganised effort has done to the French wine industry (the stuff made from grapes not the sound coming from thier gaping cake holes).

I have no problem paying for this war. I believe it is just and neccessary. As far as my loosing possesions, they are less than nothing when considering the security of my two children.

And this will help the economy long term from the increased stability in energy supply, both oil and natural gas. Did I mention natural gas, no one seems to want to say anything about that, maybe becasue Bush doesn't really have any ties to natural gas so it can't be used as propaganda against him.

NotHome

fancy pants

March 28th, 2003, 07:51 AM

All of these protesters with nothing better to do should help clean up the body parts and talk to the victims families after the next terrorist attack. Think they might feel a little differently about our proactive approach then?

vinapi

March 28th, 2003, 09:10 AM

heres is a video of the IRAQI REPUBLICAN GUARD........
what a shame:(

Sorry no URL's,that link was to a bunch of other stuff that broke the rules here at the den.

vinapi

March 28th, 2003, 09:14 AM

all the people that are against the war answer this, would you want to be in that line up? i didn't think so.......we have every right to be there!

panchero

March 28th, 2003, 10:57 AM

Crownic, the reason the TV station was targeted, was because the US could not control it.
And before you say, “it was being used as a propaganda tool” I ask you this.
Why then was it not hit before?
And What the difference from their “support your country, support your nation, support your troop” then our TV telling us the same?

Chevy,
To answer your question about why we don’t go after the others who have oil. Well my friend, US already controls it they have deals with us, they are willing to deal, trade, or sell oil. Iraq told the US “no dice chino, you aint getting none of my oil, I don’t care what you pay” and its NOT just about getting the OIL, its about Controlling the oil. Controlling who gets it and who does not.
The reason 911 happened was not cause of people like you, me or anyone else, the reason it happed was because of our foreign policies.
No one here is DEFENDING Saddom, what most folks are saying is the US was wrong for invading. For Invading IRAQ, or for INVADING any other country.
And IRAQ was not responsible for 9/11. If you believe it was, then tell me why we bombed Afghanistan.

Mouse:,
Bush never did get the votes he needed from the UN, I believe he had something like 9 of twelve or something like that. This is the reason it was taking so long to bring out the new resolution, Then they just gave up, CAUSE france or germany was going to veto it even if they did get the votes. So they didn’t have the votes to begin with, and then if they would have got them, they would have got the big “rejection”
US gov is great in putting spin on things, and this is why they blamed france for not seeking another resolution. Ask yourself, why didn’t they even try?

First off, I want to thank everyone on this site and this forum. Up until now, I had no place to vent.
I was tired of talking with people who didn’t know all the facts, or only know what was convenient to them.
Lets face it, OUR government (US) only tells us what they want us to know. And they keep the bad hidden from us.
Case and point. Sunday Iraq announced that it had POW. All that morning US denied it…
It was not until Iraq TV showed proof positive on TV that they did have POW that the US acknowledged it. As a matter of fact,US put a spin on it and denounced Iraq for airing it, and said it was a war crime. MORE was made of the Geneva convention, then the fact that there was some POW. Further more, they did not want the networks to show the video.
I saw the war crime accusation as a smoke screen, as a attempt to deter the US public from the fact that things were going bad.. “Instead of addressing the issue of POW, lets focus on the issue of war crimes” Maybe the public will forget that we too showed Iraq POW on TV.

On another note: Iraq has been under sanction for 13 yrs. However resolution 1441 was not established until November of last year. So to say Iraq had 12 years to disarm is inaccurate, its more like they had about 4 months to declare and disarm, that’s just a few weeks longer then the government gives us to file our taxes. Grant it there were other resolutions before that, but none were worded as 1441 was.

One more point I would like to make. According to BUSH, we are there to liberate the people of Iraq, so dis-arming, and 1441 are a non-issue. If you are to support BUSH and his actions, then you must stay relevant, his current reason for “invasion” is to free people, not to disarm people.

UN met wednesday (I think it was wednesday) to debate this whole Iraq thing and nothing was shown on TV about this. I saw nothing on CNN, or the other networks, no mention of it was made, Only BBC news mentioned it. I understand the debate was hot and heavy, (all against) and it was set to continue. (about 70 countries signed up to debate)
Powell walked out of the debate…..

Sure the Gov,. will TELL you (what they want you to hear) tell you that they have like 20 something countries supporting them. But what they don’t tell you is who those countries are: Places like Morocco, Kuwait, Nigeria, etc…. Little countries that were either bribed, blackmailed, or strong armed into supporting the cause.
Look what happened with Turkey. First they tried to pay them off, then they tried to strike a deal. Basically what I’m saying is that US would not even look to these countries on a normal day.

And since we are on the subject, If I remember correctly, the reason for attack on Afghanistan was because we were going after the “mastermind” of the 9/11 attack.
(Bin-Ladin) what ever happened with that? Nothing but the destruction of a country that was in bad shape to begin with.
So a few moths ago, we capture this one guy who is “the mastermind” of the sep 11 attacks.
What happened there, I thought Bin Laudin was that mastermind? If now this guy is the “mastermind” then why did we go after Bin Laudin and Afghanistan.

Let me tell you something else, when the first FBI most wanted list came out, this guy barely made the cut (I think he was #21) once they caught him, all of a sudden he’s the mastermind and became #3 or #4 on the list. (that’s looks great for the Fed)

And what happened to Afghanistan, weren’t we going to put in a democratic government there too, weren’t we liberating the people there too? What the status there?
2 years latter, nothing.. We as Americans only tend to see what we want. And what effects us, forget the rest. Oh yea, Afghanistan is also one of the supporting countries.

Whoa……… I’m getting way of the topic/subject here.
US has not presented any justifiable reason to Invade Iraq.

US is doing to Iraq, what Iraq did to Kuwait 13 yrs ago. (It was wrong then, But now that we do it now, and it’s all good)….

Freedom Fighters are terrorist when they do not fit our agenda, but Terrorist are Freedom Fighters when they do fit our political agenda.

And remember. BUSH was NOT elected president, he won the title in court

NotHome

March 28th, 2003, 11:37 AM

The reason the TV station was not taken out earlier was it was useful for info. When the info ran out, it was taken out.

The attack on 9/11 did not happen because of our foriegn policy. It happened because of our culture, the fundementalist Islamics hate us for our culture. They would have attacked us even if we did not support Isreal, or have troops stationed on "Islamic holy land" during the gulf war.

The invasion of Iraq is not retaliation for 9/11 like Afganistan was. It is a measure to prevent another 9/11 type attack.

As far as France goes, why should we seek another resolution when France insists on vetoing ANY resolution. Why waste our time.

Our showing of POW's from Afganistan does not break any laws or conventions that I know of. I have yet to see any POW corpses and no POWs were questioned on camera for public display.

Iraq did have 12 years to disarm. They were ordered to disarm as part of the cease-fire aggreements. UN 1441 was just a reiteration of those demands. When I tell my children to put their toys away I do not threaten punishment at the first request. If they do not obey my requests, they get an ultimatum before being punished. UN 1441 was the ultimatum, Sadam ignored it at his own peril.

The disarming is part of the UN resolution. Once a stable government is in power, those weapon might not be as great of a concern. But they are offensive weapons, so why would a peacefull nation need them? I know we still have nukes - but they are part of MAD and therefore a defensive weapon.

As far as the master mind behind 9/11, an operation that large takes a lot of logistics. Someone has to plan,execute and finance the attack. Each of these rolls can be done by different people and they are all just as guilty. If you pay someone to kill a third party, you still are the 'mastermind' even though you didnot planor execute the actual killing.

Freedom fighters attack military and politcal targets not civilians. Anyone who sets out to kill civilians is a terrorist, period. And the US is not above a terror attack (Japan), we just did it to try to end a war not start one.

Bush was elected president so get over it. Ever hear of the electoral college? I don't agree with it but that is the way our president is elected. Look at how ALL of the candidates campain. They use the electoral votes to their advantage. I don't like the electoral system at all, but until the constitution is ammended to change it, that's the way it is.

NotHome

Bone Daddy

March 28th, 2003, 11:46 AM

LMAO OK panchero you base all this on the fact that the gov't tells you only what it wants you to know??? So anything it says is wrong..That's your whole basis?? There was a cool TV show for folks like you called X-Files, it was quite popular alittle while ago..Please discuss facts here ...
They bombed the TV station because it was also used for troop instruction..
As far as controlling the countrites that produce oil, we already do...All oil is priced on the New York Stock exchange..Fully +80% of all oil produced travels into the US anyway...Whether piered at one of our ports or used directly by us...
nd nothome says it all no need to say more..
BTW I was there in the gulf and i believe my own eyes as to what I saw..Or did the gov't brainwash me?!?!?! The truth is out there

panchero

March 28th, 2003, 12:28 PM

So the question, for me at leaste, is what is the justification we have to go in and attack this country IRAQ?

And if the US is just in its cause why is there so much worldly outcry over these actions?

What is "MAD"?
What is "BTW"?

NotHome

March 28th, 2003, 12:41 PM

The justification is Sadam's regeme was financing terrorism and not disarming per the cease fire agreement.

The outcry is mainly from countries who have something to hide.

MAD: mutually assured destruction
BTW: by the way

NotHome

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by NotHome
The justification is Sadam's regeme was financing terrorism and not disarming per the cease fire agreement.

The outcry is mainly from countries who have something to hide.

MAD: mutually assured destruction
BTW: by the way

NotHome

That include Canada?;)

crownvic

March 28th, 2003, 03:01 PM

Panchero YES I feel like the IRAQI people have a right to be informed of whats going on.
NOW seeing that they can't recieve TV from the free world and only TV what the Government controls then they are only getting the truth according to SADA$$ and his band of THUGS.
Eventually WE will take out anything that this Murderer controls that will give him the upper hand,the TV station was just the start.:)
Weapons found in schools and hospital are totally unacceptable,he is using his own people as Human sheilds.

gandalf_thegrey

March 28th, 2003, 03:06 PM

The sad thing is that no matter what you say or show people like these three you will never get them to admit that they are wrong. We could have 1000 or more men die in bagdad with chemical or biological weapons and they will say it is our fault for going there. You are fighting a losing battle just like Saddam is.
It looks to me like a couple of the people executed in that video were women. What did they do, wave at an American just like the one they hung yesterday for waving at the troops?

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 03:23 PM

Could anyone send me a link with the REASON for this execution?

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by gandalf_thegrey
The sad thing is that no matter what you say or show people like these three you will never get them to admit that they are wrong. We could have 1000 or more men die in bagdad with chemical or biological weapons and they will say it is our fault for going there. You are fighting a losing battle just like Saddam is.
It looks to me like a couple of the people executed in that video were women. What did they do, wave at an American just like the one they hung yesterday for waving at the troops?
Anytime you want to start debating with FACT AND ONLY FACT, let me know I’ll be glad to play. My posts are based in things that I can back up.:R

Bone Daddy

March 28th, 2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by dssdog
Well at least your not listening to Rush. We do however have to work on your listening to Savage. Do your homework on him and you’ll find out what a fraud he is.:)

I was using this as a simplistic comparison to your oil comment. Things are a little more complicated then that. You do realize that the US will never see direct money from Iraq’s oil. The UN and the Arab countries will never let that happen. Face it, the good old American tax dollar will be paying for this war.

I for one will never complain about the price of gas. The company I work for pays for all of my fuel.
In the big picture, you never know when caribou will hold the key curing a disease. It’s not that I want to cuddle a caribou, but once you drive a plant or an animal into extinction you will never find its full potential.

I see all this conjecture backed up by fact???

crownvic

March 28th, 2003, 04:11 PM

Well the Fact is that Saddam is trying to defend himself by shooting missiles at public targets.
Shopping mall in Kuwait City,it won't be long Folks before all these countries that have abstained from this War will be along side the rest of the coalition.
The last couple of days have really shown this Murderers true colors,which we already knew of course.

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by Bone Daddy
I see all this conjecture backed up by fact???
You’re a smart guy, go to the top of your browser and click the “search” icon. Next put in the name Michael Weiner, (that’s Savages real name). After that, click that icon again and put in the BBC, now it’s going to get tricky, you’ll have to search that site and find the UN policy regarding IRAQ. After that, click that search icon again and put in “Iraq spending request” look around and you’ll see how much the commander and thief is asking for. As for my employer, you’ll have to take my word for it, (they also pay for my car). If any of this gets confusing let me know!
Almost forgot, you also have to read, (that’s were you find the facts).:o

vinapi

March 28th, 2003, 04:58 PM

crownvic sorry about the link, i never looked at the website, i only
watched the video. (sorry).....!

i couldn't tell if there was a woman there or not, it just makes me sick to know that this is happening in the world! i'm just thankful to god that i was born here and not some cruel place where if you say the wrong remark or opinion you'll be tortured or excuted by your government! honestly, i hope the usa goes beyond iraq when their finished!

gandalf_thegrey

March 28th, 2003, 04:58 PM

you also have to read, (that’s were you find the facts).

I guess that depends on where you read your facts.
Funny how the BBC's own field reporter is complaining about them not reporting what he is sending them.

Bone Daddy

March 28th, 2003, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by dssdog
You’re a smart guy, go to the top of your browser and click the “search” icon. Next put in the name Michael Weiner, (that’s Savages real name). After that, click that icon again and put in the BBC, now it’s going to get tricky, you’ll have to search that site and find the UN policy regarding IRAQ. After that, click that search icon again and put in “Iraq spending request” look around and you’ll see how much the commander and thief is asking for. As for my employer, you’ll have to take my word for it, (they also pay for my car). If any of this gets confusing let me know!
Almost forgot, you also have to read, (that’s were you find the facts).:o

OK you said alot but didn't answer my reply...Try being less smug and read what you post...You drew 2 outrageous analogies and when called on it acted like a child...Caribou ring a bell?:eek:

chevy

March 28th, 2003, 06:59 PM

Everyone knew Osama and his followers were a threat to the U.S. years ago. He pulled some nasty stunts when Clinton was president. If good old Bill went after Osama in Afghanastan a few years ago people would have said why are we going to war with a country over 1 man. After 911 everyone thought it was ok to go to war with a country over that 1 man. It would have been a good Idea to remove that threat sooner than we are doing it. Now everyone ( everyone with common sense ) knows Iraq is funding these hate groups that want to hurt innocent people. How many people have to die before we do something. If we know it's coming we can try to prevent it.

crownvic

March 28th, 2003, 07:10 PM

vinapi...
That's ok,
I edited it out because of some of it's content,i'm sure it was an honest mistake.

dssdog you have your opinion on this matter and that is perfectly fine for you to voice it,however please try to refrain from personal insults. People may see things differently than you so that does not make you smarter than the other person. I am kinda enjoying reading the mixed opinions and don't want to close this thread but I don't really want it to get personal.

gunner99

March 28th, 2003, 07:22 PM

The world couldn't take the chance of letting him stay in power any longer. Even if there were no weapons of mass destruction at this time. The entire world could not afford to take the chance and wait for a smoking gun. Anyone protesting this war make me sick. I can understand protesting the war before it started. That's their right. But now we have troops over there. Mostly young kids who probably signed up to pay for college. They're scaired, and doing their best to represent their country and free Iraqis. We should stand behind these troops no matter what the outcome.

crownvic

March 28th, 2003, 07:35 PM

NotHome

March 28th, 2003, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by dssdog
That include Canada?;)

What part of mainly is unclear?
And if you want to go there, yes Canada does have a financial stake in this war. The US gets a large amount of oil and natural gas from Canada at prices inflated by the instability of the middle east. A stable supply of cheap oil/natural gas from Iraq could cause some money problems for Canada.

Do I believe that Canada is against the war for these reasons - Hell No!. You will not believe any of this either way, so it doesn't matter if it is based in truth or speculation

NotHome

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 08:13 PM

You guys are right, I have seen the light!

dssdog

March 28th, 2003, 08:15 PM

ozzy67

March 28th, 2003, 08:27 PM

Dssdog, is your real name "Tom Daschle"?:K

NotHome

March 28th, 2003, 08:28 PM

Originally posted by dssdog
You guys are right, I have seen the light!

No rebuttal - I expected some idea on your position.
Do you agree that Canada actually does have good reason (money) to be against this war?

If that is not the reason they are against the war it should be one of the reasons, you do have to look out for number one. Canada does not have it's 'hand in the cookie jar' as far as I know, so if it wants to keep profits up that's just the way it goes.

NotHome

stuffy

March 29th, 2003, 09:09 AM

Just like in the states, those of us in Canada disagree with the way that Chretien - the PM - stated the cause. He should have said that we will not be able to send any of our troops there because they are still in Afghanistan and our ships are currently in foreign waters. We do have some military men/women who are currently "embedded" with the US/UK/... troops that are in Iraq. Besides, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH OF A MILITARY DEFENSE.

Instead, Creton just came out and said "Canada will not be involved with the war in Iraq". He has about as much diplomacy as a slug. For that I apologize to the US and all the people over there that are working together to accomplish the goal of securing peace in an area that has never known peace. OUR wonderful "leader" seems to be directing our country to become a part of the European Union, rather than be a friend to the US.

Why is this - I don't know for sure. Creaton is french - maybe that explains it. You in the states probably don't know that Creaton has also decided to spend millions on making EVERYONE in Canada become bilingual - speaking FRENCH as a second language. Can you imagine if after electing BUSH he decided to force you guys to all speak Spanish as a second language!!! It just would not happen in the states, but sadly it has happened here....

READ MY LIPS USA - MOST OF CANADA IS WITH YOU - BESIDE YOU - AND SUPPORTING YOU IN WHATEVER WAY WE CAN!!!

Of course, just like in the US, we have those who oppose just about anything and everything, but they are in the minority. Usually they are unable to listen to all sides of the situation and then make a decision about whatever the issue is. Instead they talk things to death in committee after committee spending millions of dollars senselessly never accomplishing anything.

US = doers
CANADA = Let's create a committee.... :confused:

ozzy67

March 29th, 2003, 03:49 PM

Us Americans still love you Canadians, after all, yall did give us the PIRATEDEN.

:cool:

MercurE1

March 29th, 2003, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by ozzy67
Dssdog, is your real name "Tom Daschle"?:K

Not sure if anyone had seen this but i thought it was freaking hilarious.

Merc

Overclocked

March 30th, 2003, 01:06 AM

The picture about sums it up. Just a quick question - How many nations in the past have asked the UN for permission to act militarily? I thought the only reason the UN was approached was to ask that it enforce its resolutions. Now, as for me (and I suspect the majority of us) this letter captures my feelings as an American in this liberal hell:

Bad American (http://www.mikeonline.com/events/badamerican.html)

L8r-
Overclock

NotHome

March 31st, 2003, 10:46 AM

Overclocked

I guess I'm a bad american also.

NotHome

newmex

March 31st, 2003, 09:45 PM

Sometimes things are clearer when told by someone else, so i´ll quote some people that have no post here, but are important:

"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." A.Lincoln
"Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed." Abraham Lincoln
"Property is the fruit of labor...property is desirable...is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built." Abraham Lincoln

"More than an end to war, we want an end to the beginnings of all wars" Franklin D. Roosevelt.

"Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both."
- Eleanor Roosevelt

"All human situations have their inconveniences. We feel those of the present but neither see nor feel those of the future; and hence we often make troublesome changes without amendment, and frequently for the worse" Benjamin Franklin

"The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times" U S. Grant

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." Jhon Adams

"Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings" JFK
"But peace does not rest in the charters and covenants alone. It lies in the hearts and minds of all people. So let us not rest all our hopes on parchment and on paper, let us strive to build peace, a desire for peace, a willingness to work for peace in the hearts and minds of all of our people. I believe that we can. I believe the problems of human destiny are not beyond the reach of human beings." JFK
"Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind" JFK
"Those who make peaceful revolutions impossible will make violent revolutions inevitable" JFK
"When written in Chinese, the word 'crisis' is composed of two characters - one represents danger, and the other represents opportunity" JFK

"When I was coming up, it was a dangerous world, and we knew exactly who the "they" were. 'It was us versus them. And it was clear who "them" was.... Today, we're not so sure who the "they"are,' he continued, pausing as giggles began emanating from the crowd. 'But we know they're there.'"
George W. bush

And the most interesting one of all:

[B]If Jack's in love, he's no judge of Jill's beauty Benjamin Franklin

MercurE1

March 31st, 2003, 10:27 PM

Here's one from Dennis Miller
Its a forward going around thought you would get a kick out of it

TRYING TO HELP - BY DENNIS MILLER

ALL THE RHETORIC ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD GO TO WAR AGAINST IRAQ HAS GOT
MY INSANE LITTLE BRAIN SPINNING LIKE A ROULETTE WHEEL. I ENJOY READING
OPINIONS FROM BOTH SIDES BUT I HAVE DETECTED A HINT OF CONFUSION FROM SOME
OF YOU.

AS I WAS READING THE PAPER RECENTLY, I WAS REMINDED OF THE BEST ADVICE
SOMEONE EVER GAVE ME. HE TOLD ME ABOUT THE KISS METHOD ("KEEP IT SIMPLE,
STUPID!) SO, WITH THIS AS A THEME, I'D LIKE TO APPLY THIS THEORY FOR THOSE
WHO DON'T QUITE GET IT. MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN SIMPLIFY THINGS A BIT AND
RECOGNIZE A FEW IMPORTANT FACTS.

HERE ARE 10 THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN VOICING AN OPINION ON THIS IMPORTANT
ISSUE:

1) OUT OF PRESIDENT BUSH AND SADDAM HUSSEIN ... HUSSEIN IS THE BAD GUY.

2) IF YOU HAVE FAITH IN THE UNITED NATIONS TO DO THE RIGHT THING KEEP THIS
IN MIND, THEY HAVE LIBYA HEADING THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND IRAQ
HEADING THE GLOBAL DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE. DO YOUR OWN MATH HERE.

3) IF YOU USE GOOGLE SEARCH AND TYPE IN "FRENCH MILITARY VICTORIES,"YOUR
REPLY WILL BE "DID YOU MEAN FRENCH MILITARY DEFEATS?"

4) IF YOUR ONLY ANTIWAR SLOGAN IS "NO WAR FOR OIL," SUE YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT
FOR ALLOWING YOU TO SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS AND ROBBING YOU OF THE EDUCATION
YOU DESERVE.

5) SADDAM AND BIN LADEN WILL NOT SEEK UNITED NATIONS APPROVAL BEFORE THEY
TRY TO KILL US.

6) DESPITE COMMON BELIEF, MARTIN SHEEN IS NOT THE PRESIDENT. HE PLAYS ONE
ON TV

7) EVEN IF YOU ARE ANTIWAR, YOU ARE STILL AN "INFIDEL!" AND BIN LADEN WANTS
YOU DEAD, TOO!

8) IF YOU BELIEVE IN A "VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY" BUT NOT IN THE DANGER
THAT HUSSEIN POSES, QUIT HANGING OUT WITH THE DELL COMPUTER DUDE.

9) WE ARE NOT TRYING TO LIBERATE THEM.

10) WHETHER YOU ARE FOR MILITARY ACTION OR AGAINST IT, OUR YOUNG MEN AND
WOMEN OVERSEAS ARE FIGHTING FOR US TO DEFEND OUR RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT. WE ALL
NEED TO SUPPORT THEM WITHOUT RESERVATION.

I HOPE THIS HELPS.

ozzy67

April 1st, 2003, 07:44 AM

What I am already seeing as day by day we see more justification for this war against Sadaam is that unfortunately(for the anti-war stance) the point of view against this war will not stand up to the test of time.
History will record this war as a war for the good of the Iraqi people and that is the bottom line.
No one in the future will say"Oh I wish they had never have taken down Sadaam!" JMO

God bless the Marines and their dangerous mission on the ground in Iraq

slush

April 1st, 2003, 11:47 PM

ive been following this thread for a few days and finally had to say somthing.
first off im a american,i support my elected president bush,and our brave soldiers in iraq.buts lets face it the only reason france and germany oppose this war is oil,they have agreements with sadas$ for it.but if not for france we would be speaking the queens english,so helping them with germany twice settles the score for me now its even time to start anew.however saying they never win a war is false while napoline may not of won all of his battles he did win a few of them agianst greater odds.
but our govt does only let us know what they want us to hear,in the 50s we put radioactive matiral in california airconditioning vents just to see what would happen with the way it dispersed thru the air putting kids a risk of cancer later on.it wasent until the 90s that we found out what they did to us.there is no telling what other experements they did to us or to other countrys.
im not a conspireciy buff im just saying what is fact about our country.
the reason for 911 was bin lardas$ was pissed off becuase after helping them win with russia we turned our backs on them and left them to fend for themselves when they wernt ready for it after we promised them help forming a new govt.
thats how the usa does things when we get what we want f*** you.
you may agree with me or not this is just my opion on things.

NotHome

April 2nd, 2003, 06:08 AM

Slush

France played a small part in the American Revolution, we would not be speaking the Queens English even if France did not help. A battle won is still not a war, but Frances military might is not in question here, it is only a joke to blow off steam over the real issue. France was putting money above world security and pointing the finger (middle above all) at us for looking out for our security. France and Germany don't want to loose their cheap oil source and then blame the US for going into this for oil.

Our Government is made up of people, just like ever other, and being so is imperfect. We have done terrible things in the past but nothing on the scale of what Sadam is doing. Yes, we do some stuff just for ourselves, but doesn't every other country? Maybe we should pull all of our foriegn aid and see what happens. Hell, we were taking flack when we threatened to pull aid in order to get support, and this was from our own media. It's our money so if you don't help us you get nothing - what's wrong with that.

As far as 9/11, if you can say with a straight face that even one of the victims deserved to die you are in serious need of help. Attacking a purely civilian target is terrorism. The attacks on the USS Cole and the Embassies could be classified as an act of war because of the nature of the target. The attack on the Pentagon would have been an act of war if a civilian filled aircraft had not been used.
We were attacked simply because we are not Muslim and support Isreal. This is a war not only on terrorism but a war for our basic constitutional rights.

NotHome

phoztech

April 2nd, 2003, 06:19 AM

one thing that amazes me is that people against this war think that a majority of the world is against it... where they get this idea i dont know. I guess its cause they see protestors on tv.

granted the same thing could be said for those for the war except less press coverage. cause lets face it someone not causeing a stir/disruption is not really news.

I would like to see a national(usa only vote) vote done .. not a poll but a real vote. then i would like to see a world vote also. i think it would be interesting to see were other ountries really stood and not just what the media tells us.

Bone Daddy

April 2nd, 2003, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by ozzy67
What I am already seeing as day by day we see more justification for this war against Sadaam is that unfortunately(for the anti-war stance) the point of view against this war will not stand up to the test of time.
History will record this war as a war for the good of the Iraqi people and that is the bottom line.
No one in the future will say"Oh I wish they had never have taken down Sadaam!" JMO

God bless the Marines and their dangerous mission on the ground in Iraq

I wish your view would come true...but alas these folks will probably say history is written by the winner and find some excuse to hang onto their fantasy...The US built those chemical factories just to bomb them themselves...They put mind controlling drugs in the MRE's(meals ready to eat) to make the soldiers believe they didn't see them missles, or torture chambers...Or the satellite photos of those terrorist factions camping out in Iraq??

newmex

April 6th, 2003, 11:04 PM

no weapons of mass destruction been used, or sadam is good in tolerance or he doesnt have them.
funny how threads develope, not many people answered the main question, its a moral question, hope you all noticed that, nobody in 100 replies think its posible that bush is wrong, or doing what many usa presidents in the past have done, lie to their people, today things are different the world is much more connected and the truth will prevail, history will tell. thanks all for the replies this has been really interesting.

ozzy67

April 6th, 2003, 11:13 PM

On the contrary, the main question was "have the Iraqi people been tortured and killed and raped and starved by a cruel regime?"
As we speak the coalition has won this war and the Iraqi people can now live like their neighbors in Kuwait and have some dignity, YESS!! COURTESY OF THE AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION.
Tell me this and this phase of this debate will come to a close.
Are not starvation, rape, torture killings, beating, and everything else Saddam did to his own people be considered weapons of mass destruction???

mouse01

April 7th, 2003, 08:36 AM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. forces near Baghdad found a weapons cache of around 20 medium-range missiles equipped with potent chemical weapons, the U.S. news station National Public Radio reported on Monday.

NPR, which attributed the report to a top official with the 1st Marine Division, said the rockets, BM-21 missiles, were equipped with sarin and mustard gas and were "ready to fire." It quoted the source as saying new U.S. intelligence data showed the chemicals were "not just trace elements."

It said the cache was discovered by Marines with the 101st Airborne Division, which was following up behind the Army after it seized Baghdad's international airport.

U.S. Central Command headquarters in Qatar had no immediate comment.

The United States and Britain launched the war against Iraq (news - web sites) to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction. Iraq denies having such weapons.

NotHome

April 7th, 2003, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by newmex
no weapons of mass destruction been used, or sadam is good in tolerance or he doesnt have them.
funny how threads develope, not many people answered the main question, its a moral question, hope you all noticed that, nobody in 100 replies think its posible that bush is wrong, or doing what many usa presidents in the past have done, lie to their people, today things are different the world is much more connected and the truth will prevail, history will tell. thanks all for the replies this has been really interesting.

Yes, Sadam has not used any weapons of mass destruction, but who says he didn't want to use them. If it is true that he was killed or injured at the beginning of hostilities, then he may not have been in the position to order them used.
If you look around the world, every country's leaders have at one time lied to their people. The US doesn't have a monopoly on this. And if you think the Iraqi information ministry is telling the truth, God,I want some of what your smoking.

Yes, the truth will prevail as will the USA

NotHome

MercurE1

April 7th, 2003, 12:10 PM

News reporting site finds substances that test positive for chemical weapons in initial testing.

newmex

April 12th, 2003, 09:05 PM

|Up°|
No wmd found yet!

xsforce

April 13th, 2003, 08:21 AM

News reporting site finds substances that test positive for chemical weapons in initial testing.
No Merc. Bush said the reason for this war is to disarm Iraq. Where are all of these WMD Bush was talking about? That huge cache of arms (rifles, grenades etc.) was not WMD! Nice try though.

ozzy67

April 13th, 2003, 10:29 AM

One word there Xsforce. SYRIA.

cleancards

April 13th, 2003, 03:40 PM

ozzy67 I would have to disagree with you and I would have to say two words......
Syria
Iran

LOL !

ozzy67

April 13th, 2003, 06:17 PM

Syria will be complicated.
Syria will not fold as easily as Iraq, they have the most militant terrorists on the face of the earth.
No one knows including me just how evil this regime in Syria is.
These people are 75% of the problem in the West Bank and historical writings(politically correct for BIBLE) indicate that there will be a great conflict in this region.
If and when we go into Syria, it will be a take no prisoners stance and we sure as hell will not be liberaters.
Syria will be something none of us are prepared for and it will be PLENTY SCARY!!!
The people that hated the Iraqi war cant even fathom what Syria is going to look like and I am not looking forward to it either for our troops but the future of peace in the Middle East might require this incursion.

For all the peace protesters, before you crack your nuckles and start firing at me , STUDY YOUR HIGH SCHOOL HISTORY.

xsforce

April 13th, 2003, 06:44 PM

So you guys think that Bush will go into Syria?

ozzy67

April 13th, 2003, 07:03 PM

Xsforce, greetings from the Carolinas.
The answer to your question is yes im afraid.
The man that runs Syria is a HARDCORE terrorist and has a blatant disregard for peace in every sense of the word.
I know that sometomes I make very blunt statements, but I sware I would not intentionally lie to you.
My family has always watched the news from the Middle East and Israel since I can remember and Syria has all down through History
been a bloodthirsty bunch.
A TWIST COMES WITH SYRIA.
Russia will automatically support us(probably in secret though) in our effort against the terrorist nation that is Syria.
Russia wants us to do their dirty work in Syria so they can gain influence in the West Bank.(have I blown your mind yet)
Russia has a GREAT INTEREST in Israel and will use us to weaken Syria's terorrist hold on the West Bank(remember, Russia always thinks ahead about five to ten years).
Pay attention in the coming months and years because some interesting things are going to happen around the West Bank.

NotHome

April 14th, 2003, 05:36 AM

I agree about Syria, the place really needs to be erased as there is no real infrastucture of peace to work with. Syria is just a warren of terrorist support so if you topple the current government, who replaces it? Just more of the same. Iraq is not the place that will bring terrorism home, Syria is. If we attack them, we will see Isreal brought home.

Ozzy,
Not only the Bible but much of the earlier writings speak about both Syria and Iraq. The area has always been trouble and will remain that way until the end days. I never really did study this stuff much but too much is said about those regions to ignore.

NotHome

scavenger

April 14th, 2003, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by NotHome
I agree about Syria, the place really needs to be erased as there is no real infrastucture of peace to work with. Syria is just a warren of terrorist support so if you topple the current government, who replaces it? Just more of the same. Iraq is not the place that will bring terrorism home, Syria is. If we attack them, we will see Isreal brought home.

Ozzy,
Not only the Bible but much of the earlier writings speak about both Syria and Iraq. The area has always been trouble and will remain that way until the end days. I never really did study this stuff much but too much is said about those regions to ignore.

NotHome

"Now" very well could be the beginnings of the end days NotHome....There are prophecies in the Kuran in regards to Jihad...Islamic religion believes it is God's will so why would the followers not welcome this unholy war.... ( the teachings of the bible are the true enemy of the kuran's religion) this hatred has been going on ever since Esau(the father of Islam) sold his birthright to his younger brother Jacob(who is now called Israel)

The Islamic religion breeds more fanatical terrorism than any other religion and that is where the root of the problem remains and always will....And anyone taking a religiously politically correct attitude is not addressing the problem.
This was brushed aside in the early days of the war when that Muslim US soldier (Ansar) I beleive his name was tossed a grenade into the tents of his sleeping fellow troops (killing 2)...They News tried to cover it over calling him a disgruntled soldier and making up other excuses for his actions...I say bull..call it like it is ..He tossed that grenade for one reason only... Because of his Muslim faith.
Troubled times are ahead and It certainly looks as though the world will soon welcome any solution to all the troubles in the middle east and everywhere for that matter. The bible has prophecy about the rise of a new world leader offering a remedy of peace for the situation the world is in.. And If you thought Hitler and Saddam were evil..well this guy will have a lot more blood on his hands than anyone we've ever seen before...he will be a great deceiver.

xsforce

April 14th, 2003, 10:22 AM

I'm sure if no WMD is found, some will be planted!!!!!!!! Bush cannot afford to not find some! He talked tooooooo much about disarming Saddam of WMD! If they can't find any he would be persecuted by every nation on the planet! It wouldn't be the first time the US pulled a con to justify their BS!!!

scavenger

April 14th, 2003, 10:50 AM

that is why Bush should have just said in the first place....

Saddam you are an evil man who is abusing the power you have towards the Iraqi people,and you are a threat to the safety of the US and the rest of the world.. So your going down dude...

But everyone is sooo concerned about being politically correct it has confused the real issue..

gandalf_thegrey

April 14th, 2003, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by xsforce
I'm sure if no WMD is found, some will be planted!!!!!!!! Bush cannot afford to not find some! He talked tooooooo much about disarming Saddam of WMD! If they can't find any he would be persecuted by every nation on the planet! It wouldn't be the first time the US pulled a con to justify their BS!!!

Do you seriously think in todays world of global information that Bush has the power to do this? Sorry man but that is a little too paranoid. He has every country in the world looking for him to do that and there is no way possible he could.

ozzy67

April 14th, 2003, 02:56 PM

Xsforce evidentally does not believe that Saddam was a threat to anyone.
His speculations place any weight of responsibility on President Bush.
Xsforce underestimates Saddam in his ability to Take his wmd's to Syria, and other countries.
Have patience with Xsforce, he will see the truth and the truth will set him free OR when they find these weapons it will be Bush that planted them and we should give Saddam the benefit of the doubt.
Sooner or later Xsforce will have to realize that Saddam was evil and Bush, however naive as some believe did what was good for the free world.
A man cant beat a dead horse forever, and the wmd issue no longer is an issue to the Iraqi people.

Bush was successful no matter how you slice it, that is the facts.

NotHome

April 14th, 2003, 07:16 PM

When you ask how long a liberal can beat a dead horse you need to ask a few questions.
1) Is there a social program to train people to beat a dead horse properly? If not we need to create one.

2) Who is tracking the affirmative action programs for the BADH program? We would not want to effect the minority horses in a demeaning manner by not beating them first. Create an oversight commitee.

3) After beating the dead horse, is it a productive member of society? No, a dead horse worker retraining program must be immediately implimented.

4) Is there any tax money left over after all the programs? Yes, we haven't done enough so create a commitee to find new ways to beat the horse. If there is no more money, blame the conservatives for being tight-wad racists for not being in tune with the needs of dead horses across America.

God help our wallets if they find gay-lesbian, hispanic, cross-dressing illegal alien dead horses.

NotHome

ozzy67

April 14th, 2003, 09:44 PM

In the words of President Bush "hei, hei, hei, hei!!!

xsforce

April 16th, 2003, 03:35 PM

No WMDs yet? "Hmmmm........ I wonder where I left those darned things!!!"

ozzy67

April 16th, 2003, 03:40 PM

Ive already answered that question Xsforce SYRIA.
Have patience dude, you will get what you wish for.

newmex

April 16th, 2003, 10:36 PM

atacking syria is complicated cause iran will get involved helping syria, the US is urged to start pumping oil from iraq since reserves are running low, so it´s probably a not good idea to do so (atack syria)soon, first iraq need to be controlled and Up and running, maybe a special forces select attack to retrieve sadamm, but this point is too hot right now, so my guess is that he is more likely in russia or somewhere else.
the WMD are syrian and been there for a long time. by the way more WMD can be found in israel.

ozzy67

April 17th, 2003, 06:09 AM

Newmex, Israel is a PEACEFULL nation and in order to exist must keep nuclear weapons(wmd).
Im not going to get going on this point, but realize that Israel is confronted on all sides by blood thirsty regimes who worship "Mohammed" not Jesus the Prince of Peace.
Im not going to follow up on this and this is just my beliefs and mine alone, but remember this coming Sunday we will not be celebrating "Mohammed" risen again.
The only thing Mohammed ever celebrated was violence in my opinion.
OK, Ive said to much.

newmex

April 18th, 2003, 06:33 PM

, but realize that Israel is confronted on all sides by blood thirsty regimes
i agree on that, what could happen if not all, but a small part of those weapons get in the wrong hands, after all everybody knows where they are and that they DO really exist!!
If everybody dissarms in the region, after that occurs, and i guess at the end, Israel should do the same, so this be a truly WMD free area! for me that is a fair plan, dont ask me what you wont do!

ozzy67

April 18th, 2003, 07:15 PM

Newmex, Israel has a TIGHT security apparatus that is almost unpenetrable.
If Israel's military security could somehow be breached, trust me, the terrorists that they are surrounded by would have found a way to get to their weapons.
The only reason that Israel is still in tact is because they are a smart bunch.
I will give you an example.
Israel teaches our FBI and CIA how to manage security in America.
Their airlines are also a good example of just how meticulous they are at security.
The suicide bombers know that the only way to strike Israel is by vehicle.
Have you heard about their missle defense(whichPresident Bush was given by Israel)? It has an accuracy 100% better than ours.
Im not saying that it couldnt be breached, but it would be very hard if not literally impossible.
As far as Israel destroying their wmd's, they would be attacked from all sides.
I dont understand it myself, but Israel does not have many friends in the world and is considered even by Russia(yes, Russia) to be one of the most sought after pieces of real estate in the Middle East.

EDIT: Let me add this: Israel's missle defense system (CODENAME "ARROW") is only two years old.
That is why Saddam was able to get Scud missles into Israeli airspace in the first gulf war.

scavenger

April 18th, 2003, 08:21 PM

Ozzy here is something to consider why Israel may be so sought after...This is not my interpretation but take it whatever way you like...it makes some sense though I think

http://www.nessenergy.com/

ozzy67

April 18th, 2003, 08:53 PM

I have read some concerning the possibility of oil in Israel.
I would venture to guess that there are vast reserves of oil in Israel.
TheRed Sea is also full of untold riches and the country also is home to some of the smartest people on the face of the earth.
Israel is a giant in the field of electronics and they are big in the high tech industry.
Everything they do is twice the quality and precision of most countries.
They are a big reason for our success in the world because they share their knowledge with us because we are their chief ally and I say we should always defend them as if they were our own, they would always stand ready to do that for us.

newmex

April 20th, 2003, 04:48 PM

_-Update-_
Not Even Sniff Of WMDs Found In Iraq: Independent
20.04.2003 [22:24]

Four weeks have already passed since the U.S. and U.K. waged their illegal war on Iraq to disarm Iraqi president Saddam Hussein from alleged weapons of mass destruction, the menace to the entire world. So where are they? Asked a respected British newspaper Sunday, April 20.

As the world is being distracted by the scenes of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, children maimed at play, looting of time-honored museums and unprecedented anarchy, The Independent is keen on placing the proclaimed purpose of this war on center stage.

“But, Mr. Blair, where are they? A month has passed since American and British troops entered Iraq, more than a week since the fall of Baghdad. But thus far not even a sniff. Not a drum of VX or mustard gas, not a phial of anthrax, not a shred of evidence that Iraq was assembling a nuclear weapons program,” the daily wrote.

The mass-circulation paper said that U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell presentation before the U.N. Security Council two months ago was nothing but a charade.

“The charts, the grainy intelligence satellite pictures, the crackly tapes of the intercepted phone conversations among Iraqi officials? How plausible it all sounded, especially when propounded by the most plausible figure in the Bush administration.

“And what about those other claims, wheeled out on various occasions by Messrs Bush, Blair, Cheney and Rumsfeld? The Iraqi drones that were supposed to be able to attack the U.S. east coast, the imports of aluminum tubes allegedly intended for centrifuges to enrich uranium, the unaccounted-for lethal nerve and germ agents,” it said.

“All, it seems, egregious products of the imagination of the intelligence services – one commodity whose existence need never be doubted.”

Never Trust Your Leaders Again

The Independent said the British people and the American have been fooled by their leaders and believed that the U.S.-led troops would “liberate Iraq.”

It said that U.S. and U.K. officials give their fabricated reasons “from behind their comfortable screen of anonymity,” noting that were pretty sure that “their reasonable and trusting people, mostly accepted the word of their rulers.”

“Oh yes, we know a lot more, but if we told you, we would be showing our hand to Saddam and endangering precious intelligence sources.

“Just believe us, old boy, the Government told us, and you'll see we were right all along,” it said.

The paper further said that if the U.S. and U.K. allegations were right, so why did not Saddam use “his WMDs” to deter the invaders?

“Indeed, it collapses at the first serious examination. Why should Saddam part with his most effective means of defense, when the survival of his regime and himself was on the line?” It wondered.

Well, Saddam is now gone, it added, and with him has disappeared any conceivable risk to those intelligence sources (assuming they ever existed).

“So just what was this information on the basis of which Washington and its faithful ally launched an unprovoked invasion of a ramshackle third world country? A country with a very nasty regime to be sure, but not a great deal nastier than some other potential candidates for “liberation” in the Middle East and elsewhere,” it said.

“If only for the credibility and reputation of our country, this newspaper hopes that enough weapons of mass destruction will be discovered to justify a war that has grievously weakened the UN, strained the Atlantic alliance and split the European Union.

The paper concluded its editorial by saying that the Bush administration and Prime Minister Tony Blair should provide their hard evidence on their claims or they would be held accountable for waging illegal war.

“Having rushed into war to suit its own military and domestic electoral timetable, the Bush administration now has the nerve to claim that a year may be required to establish the whereabouts of the WMDs.

“This pointless war cannot be un-made. If no "smoking gun" has turned up by then, a full parliamentary inquiry is essential – into the competence and accountability of the intelligence services, and into how our Government used them to sell a mistaken and reckless policy,” it said.

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 05:10 PM

I have explained this several times in these recent posts, I will try again.
First, even if there is no WMD's in Iraq. it was in our national interest to take down Saddam. agreed??
Second-Taking out Saddam gained Israel(which I support) a needed foothold in their war against terrorism.
Three-SADDAM IS GONE!!!
Four- We kicked butt and are stronger for it.
I dont know about you or where you are from or how old you are, but my Father always told me that the Middle East was full of terrorists and our government has never had the guts to confront it, so if the only way for us to get our FOOT in the terrorists back yard was to go into Iraq, then that is justified.
Five- whether or not there is WMD's in Iraq, I believe the operation was a SUCCESS based on the first four reasons I have stated.:D

xsforce

April 20th, 2003, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by ozzy67
I have explained this several times in these recent posts, I will try again.
First, even if there is no WMD's in Iraq. it was in our national interest to take down Saddam. agreed??

Nope.

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 06:00 PM

Thats not what The Iraqi people said.

xsforce

April 20th, 2003, 06:02 PM

I'm glad for the Iraqi people but I didn't know it was the US's job to go over there and liberate them.

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 06:12 PM

Well, chalk it up to a learning experience.
Are you waiting on someone else to do it?
If you followed world events BEFORE the Iraqi war, you would know that the Middle east has no stomach for spending their oil money on liberating their enslaved neighbors, they leave that to us to do that.
I dont know if you noticed this, but that is not an opinion thats a fact man.
I do believe though that there IS one place they might try to liberate, but the Israeli people wouldnt stand for that, now would they?

Happy Easter, Xsforce I see that you are high on them boiled eggs you ate today(you know, protein and all):D

Lithium666

April 20th, 2003, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by ozzy67
Thats not what The Iraqi people said.

I guess you missed that huge demonstration telling the coallition to get the F**K out!!!!!!

It's amazing how a couple of thou Iraqi's boo the coalition and our media/gov says they were scared of Saddam. Armed malitia, etc.

A couple of thou Iraqi's cheer the coalition (out of a city of millions) and they claim the Iraqi's are jubilant. Well could these not be the same people that were afraid off Sadams boys now afraid of the armed coalition troops????????

The simple fact is the biggest demonstration (by FAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) has been against the coalition presence.

Bush has set a precedent justifying pre-emptive action WITHOUT glabal support. I fail to see how this is in our interest. Whats to stop other nations following suit now???????

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 06:31 PM

These people are worried that we are going to leave them standing and not help them like we did in 1991.
I dont think you will see us do that this time and as far as the Iraqi people go they would have to be blind to think that they are worse off without Saddam.
We will just have to wait and see now wont we.

junglemike

April 20th, 2003, 06:34 PM

Whats to stop other nations following suit now???????

------------------------------------------------------
WE WILL , people need to learn , what we want , we get,come up against us and see what happens. we will always be the head dog in the junkyard , i personally think we were too easy on them

JM

newmex

April 20th, 2003, 06:38 PM

First, even if there is no WMD's in Iraq. it was in our national interest to take down Saddam. agreed?? OZZY67

lets look at news before war:
In the begining the war was about the WMD:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/09/powell.transcript/index.html

Wednesday, October 9, 2002 Posted: 8:54 PM EDT (0054 GMT)
(CNN) -- CNN's Larry King talked with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell Wednesday night about Iraqui terrorism
KING: A great general once told me, Chappy James -- I know you knew him well -- that no one hates war more than a warrior. You've been a warrior. Do you fear the possibility that if military action does occur it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and Iraq then uses its chemical weapons on a state like Israel?
POWELL: War should never be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It should always be a deliberate act by people acting rationally, hopefully. And in this case, as the president said the other night, we are trying to see war as a last resort.
There is a way to avoid war, but it must include the disarmament of Saddam Hussein, taking away his weapons of mass destruction and the capability to produce them.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76915,00.html

Tuesday, January 28, 2003
Bush Says Saddam 'Deceiving Not Disarming' in State of Union Address

WASHINGTON — Building a case for war against Iraq, President Bush said Tuesday night he will present fresh evidence to the United Nations next week of Saddam Hussein's illegal weapons and vowed the United States will lead a campaign to disarm the Iraqi regime if he refuses to surrender its arms
"The course of this nation does not depend on the decision of others," Bush said in his second State of the Union address.
"We will consult, but let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm for the safety of our people, and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him," the president said.
Specifically, Bush said Saddam has not accounted for up to 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulism toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard gas and VX nerve agent and upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical weapons.
Bush said Saddam has shown "his utter contempt" for the United Nations and must be brought to account unless he disarms.
"The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving," the president said.
Among his charges:
-- The British government has learned that Saddam recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
-- Three Iraqi defectors say Iraq had several mobile biological weapons labs in the 1990s that are now not accounted for.
Powell will allege that not only was Iraq hiding chemical and biological weapons from U.N. inspectors but smuggling in technology for long-range missile and nuclear weapons programs, a senior U.S. official said.

As today the militar operations had been a great success, troops are coming back and PoWs are free,im really glad about that, but let´s just dont loose the starting point, this was never about freeing iraq, it was about the WMD, that by the way havent been found yet.

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 06:48 PM

On the contrary, it is no longer about the Wmd's(at least not on Saddam's part).
I will try to explain this one more time.
This war was about more than just Wmd's, no matter what Powell or Bush said.(startling revelation??)
I believe it is time to just accept the fact that we did what we did and whoever wants to challenge that fact can.
It is obvious that some do not feel that it was our responsibility to free the Iraqi people and how can I debate that??
Whether or not there is Wmd's in Iraq is a lost point now, even though I think that anyone who thinks he NEVER HAD THEM is lacking insight.

xsforce

April 20th, 2003, 07:25 PM

Happy Easter, Xsforce I see that you are high on them boiled eggs you ate today(you know, protein and all)
How'd you know? Low carb rules! Happy easter!

Lithium666

April 20th, 2003, 07:34 PM

The primary justification given was this war is about WMD.

This cannot now be dismissed as a secondary concern.

Bush cannot talk about liberation with allies such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan. Not to mention Iraq being an allie not to long ago (Saddam Hussain and all).

Originally posted by ozzy67
I believe it is time to just accept the fact that we did what we did and whoever wants to challenge that fact can.

What we essentially did was invasion/regime change. This sets a very clear precedent. Will you accept other nations taking advantage of this.

For example:

India going into Pakistan?
Arab nations going into Israel because they dont like the current Israeli regime?
Country X going into Saudi Arabia to liberate the Saudi's and bring them free speech and democracy?
Country Y going into Kuwait to liberate the Kuwait people and bring them free speech and democracy?

Hypocracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is what you are asking the world to accept. If Bush wants to clean up the world, he should start in his own back yard.

Take to task:

- Those people who armed and trained Bin Laden.

- Those who argued Bin Laden & Afghan mujahadeen were "Freedom fighters" when they were using US arms to kill Russians.

- Those who supplied arms to Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war. Where were all the concerns about the Iraqi peopl then??????

- Those who supported and even helped install dictators around the world.

Will he support any action against ex secratary of state Kissinger for his collusion with General Pinochets Regime??????????? (Brief history lesson - 1973 US backed coup overthrows democratically elected goverment and initiates heinous reign of terror of General Pinochet).

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Because Bush's stance against terrorism is conveniant BS!!!!!!

ozzy67

April 20th, 2003, 08:10 PM

You need to keep it simple.
Everybody knows what Kissinger did(at least where I come from).
That is not what we are talking about here.
If you want to oppose or dislike Bush that is fine but I do not see this hypocracy you see in spreading a little democracy in a land full of terrorism.
Yes, If India was to wipe Pakistan off the map(hopefully without nuclear) would you miss Terrorist Pakistan??jmo
I dont think you would, you dont seem to think anything about the iraqi people.
I am telling you, you are just going to have to see how it plays out in Iraq.
If you never see the good in it then you wont, thats OK.
Saudi Arabia?? An argument aginst the Iraqi war??
Saudi Arabians are not being abused by their leaders, are they??
Sooner or later you will have to see that there was some good to this move into Iraq, otherwise, keep quoting Kissinger.
Happy Easter and listen to your POWS.
I have to address your convienient bs claim and your history of how Conservative leaders over throwed Democracies, YES, that did happen, dont know why, but one thing i do know is that that doesnt look like whats going on now, at least not as far as I can see.
One more thing Lithium, you do know that both sides are bad dont you?/
You cant vote in this country without accepting the bad with the good.(rule number one, you are allowed to ELECT, NOT SELECT MY FRIEND)

Bone Daddy

April 21st, 2003, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by xsforce
How'd you know? Low carb rules! Happy easter!
Ahh yup Dr Adkins is the man!!! 10 pounds in a week!!!Too bad he's gone...And I ate 6 deviled eggs baby!!:cool:

robinhood

April 22nd, 2003, 11:28 AM

originally posted by Lithium666

Arab nations going into Israel because they dont like the current Israeli regime?

They are living on Israeli territory already and have been for year...Israel territory goes from the Suez Canal northward to the River Euprates and those who parked there will be cleaned out...read on you have the mark of the beast...666...of your own choosing...
:mad:

majrmembr

April 22nd, 2003, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by robinhood
They are living on Israeli territory already and have been for year...Israel territory goes from the Suez Canal northward to the River Euprates and those who parked there will be cleaned out...read on you have the mark of the beast...666...of your own choosing...
:mad:

As you may know, the Israel that you are referring to was "given" to the Jews, post-holocaust, by Western powers. The Israel you are referring to is the Zionist dream, it is the very myth that propels the centuries old practice of people landing on the shores of a desert, building homes, scratching a living from the land, and above all, refusing to leave. I think you really need to get into the mindset of people like that to really understand them.

You know, its a strange characteristic of humanity, that if you ask a homeless man why he chooses the miserable life of suffering that he does, he will still tell you he is happy, because he is "free". And when the inevitable day comes when he can bear his misery no more, and that homeless man decides he ought to own your home and enjoy the life you have...what do you think happens?

That's right, the homeless man comes up with an ingenious strategy. He calls you a terrorist!

ozzy67

April 22nd, 2003, 09:21 PM

Marjmember, Israel never squatted any land. Israel is older than any Western power. The land of Israel goes back to Abraham and Issac.
The last war of the world(Heard of Armageddon?) will be over the land that was given to the Jews by God himself.
Yes, I do believe the Biblical view of the Middle East and it hasnt been proved wrong yet.
Heres a news flash for you though.
Israel will never cease to exist precisely for the reasons I just specified. It is Holy land and does not belong to the Arab world , it will always be Israel's and the world will eventually(one way or another)have to accept that.
I dont know what you believe or even if you have a belief in God, but my personal feelings are that all of Israel's enemies will be defeated in the future.
The religion of the suicide bomber will one day be a thing of the past. HALLELUIA!!!

Lithium666

April 22nd, 2003, 10:17 PM

Ozzy

1) Bush used the good versus evil justification, therefore Kissinger has everything to do with this. If he doesn't address the evil actions of his countrymen what right does he have running around the world lecturing & attacking others.

2) Examples of Bush's Hypocracy:

- He has allies such as Pakistan proven to have WMD and support terrorism against India (largest democracy in the world). Yet he attacks Iraq by quoting the same reasons.

- He embarks on a war against terrorism around the world. Yet he ignores those who support(ed) terrorism within the CIA/Goverment (eg. Al Queda). Or those within his own country who have funded groups such as the IRA.

3) Iraqi people?????? Did they not have that huge demo asking the coalition to get the f**k out???? The one that dwarfs all those the media and goverment paraded as justification?????

I THINK we should have a clear understanding of why we attack another country. Not the plethora of interchanging BS we have been given to date. Not the "You know what we meant, wink wink" BS people are now suggesting. Not the wait and see approach. Alot of people have died. And if the President cant give clear cut truthful reasoning/evidence to justify a war, we SHOULD NOT GO TO WAR.

4) Saudi Arabia & Kuwait are reasons not to go to war because they serve as examples to destroy another of Bush's excuses. Namely the whole "We are going to liberate the Iraqi people, bring them democracy and freedom"

Well neither the Saudi's/Kuwait's have democracy & freedom (and we faught to liberate Kuwait just to give it back to another dictatorship). Both are classed as allies by Bush.

No democracy!
Poor Human rights record!
No freedom of speech!
Wealth of country drained by Saud family!
Penalty of Imprisonment/Death for speaking against Saud family!
Those not considered "true Saudi's" automatically considered guilty when the opposing party is a "true Saudi"!
Torture of political activists/prisoners!
Public beheadings!
Penalty for theft includes having a limb removed!

Given that, I would say the Saudi's are being abused by their leaders!!!!!!!!!!

5) I hope this isn't Bush trying to install a puppet regime in Iraq (remember Saddam Hussain was cemented in power by US, French, British help). But I would be more comfortable without the "We fought this war so we should control what happens now" retoric. Hand it over to the UN. Although that wouldn't gaurantee fairplay at least it would make it more difficult for any one country to assert its whole will!

6) Sadly it does come down to whose worse not better when voting!

BTW I don't subscribe to either side really. I was critical of many things Clinton did (1 obvious act, as the President he could surely do better :) )

Lithium666

April 22nd, 2003, 10:29 PM

ozzy67

April 23rd, 2003, 05:05 AM

Lithium, I have to admit this.
Having Pakistan as an "alliea' was probably not the right word to use for Bush to describe Pakistan's efforts but we had to use them to go into Afghanistan because we dont have many friends in the Muslim world.
I support India in their struggle against terrorism and I believe behind the scenes the US probably does to.
We cant get involved in the border dispute in Kasmir ebcause it is simply to hot to control.
I hope we are not hurting India in it's fight and yes I believe we should not help Pakistan to increase terrorism concerns for India.
The truth is that I dont know much about that dipute other than I know that both Pakistan and India want to control Kasmir, tough situation there and was tough way before the war on terrorism.
My stand on iraq is Justified or not, at least Saddam is gone.
As far as saudi Arabia and most other Muslim countries go, we cant change their religious based power structures so it is not in our interest to try.
I have to say though that Saddam was worse than the Saudi family at human rights, wouldnt you think.
I am well aware that we didnt have to go into Iraq but we did, that all I can say. I hope that Iraq prospers in the long run and I think that will probably be the only gain for America in that respect.
As far as Kissinger goes, Kissinger ought to be imprisoned or thrown out of the country because he is a blight on our government, but not the only one.
Lets put this to rest this way.
There is a lot of problems with our own government that needs to be fixed and maybe we can fix them in the years to come.
I am not a hardcore bush supporter and personally would like to see a John Mcain or someone else of that stature to be our President, but it's like I was told by a Judge once"Son, we have the right to ELECT, NOT SELECT" I know that is not exactly Democracy in every sense of the word, but, my man, that is all weve got Im afraid to say.
God help us.

majrmembr

April 23rd, 2003, 07:52 AM

Ozzy,
God did not "give" Israel to the Jews. A Jewish prophet(s) gave Israel to the Jews. I guess what it boils down to is if you believe the words of men are to be taken literally as the words of God. Men gave Israel to the Jews in the time of Abraham and Isaac, when the Hebrew slaves needed a vision of hope and freedom to deliver them from their suffering. And men gave Israel to the Jews in the 20th century, when Israel was established by Western powers to appease the holocaust and centuries of anti-Semitism.

Isn't it amazing how the idea that God has given you land and chosen your people gives you such a deep motivation to kill? Or maybe somtimes God is a convenient tool used by evil men to get others to carry out their evil deeds, in the name of "God"!

The entire problem with the Holy Land, it always has been, is that everyone thinks they believe in the one true God, and that Israel henceforth rightfully belongs to them. Or at least belongs under their control.

And as long as there are religious zealots such as yourself, which include (but is not limited to) terrorist groups on all sides, that believe the Bible or the Koran tells them to enact violence on other religious groups in the name of God, there will be war. And there will be plenty of religious self righteousness to fan the flames of destruction on all sides.

The idea that one idealism must prevail over another in order for there to be peace, is the biggest LIE, the biggest DECEPTION, and most EVIL of all EVIL falsehoods that is perpetuated by the hate-mongering religious fanatics, and it the biggest single obstacle to peace known to mankind.

And ironically, perpetual war is certainly NOT the will of God. But as long as one side or another convinces itself that it will prevail, these fanatics will be able to convince themselves that they are justified in their cause, because they operate under the assumption that their ultimate victory will result in peace!

ozzy67

April 23rd, 2003, 07:07 PM

Isarel existed on that very piece of land way before hte Holocaust and Israel will always own that land, why?? Because God promised them that land and so far so good.

majrmembr

April 24th, 2003, 07:32 AM

The main difference being back then, people who spoke to God were prophets.

Today we find them in psychiatric wards.

And yet some of us still accept their words as absolute truth. Scary.

scavenger

April 24th, 2003, 08:07 AM

Originally posted by majrmembr
The main difference being back then, people who spoke to God were prophets.

Today we find them in psychiatric wards.

And yet some of us still accept their words as absolute truth. Scary.

Back then the prophets words from God were written down ...Today we have the written word of God in the bible, and can be tested for truth, anything else spoken that doesn't coincide with it is not the truth. But don't take any one's word for it,,read it for yourself and then make the decision.

majrmembr

April 24th, 2003, 09:25 AM

In fact, I have read it. Better still, I read, and I understand what I am reading.

Some of those passages are thousands of years old. You have to understand the context and the audience for which they were intended. Which is something fundamentalists of all stripes refuse to do. You cannot isolate and de-contextualize selected sentences from any religious text and purport it to be absolute truth. Especially as they relate to current geopolitical discussions. Unless you are one of two things: (a) ignorant and stupid, or (b) abusing the words of the text to manipulate the otherwise good-intentions of the religious faithful.

I think its pretty clear that the official US government position has been guilty of using (b) to take advantage of the (a) in the American public.

So at your next church group meeting, perhaps someone should ask, "Where's the f*ckin' WMD, reverend Bush?". Hopefully someone will be there to record the word of God when he gives his response.

xsforce

April 24th, 2003, 10:42 AM

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!:eek:

xsforce

April 24th, 2003, 12:36 PM

Well, North Korea just admitted that they have Nuclear weapons! I mentioned in another post that NC is a much bigger threat than Iraq ever was! So since they are part of the "axis of evil", what do the U.S. do now? Invade and disdarm NC? What's your take ozzy?

ozzy67

April 24th, 2003, 06:44 PM

Sorry. just got back in from the movies, went to see Anger Management.
What was your question Xsforce? Will we attack North Korea?
If they threaten us enough all I can say is well have to wait and see, BUT, before we go into North Korea, we have to liberate the French is what I say, what do you "pro-war" guys think out there?
:eek:

ozzy67

April 24th, 2003, 06:54 PM

Marjmember, are you a "tough guy or something"?
I dont care what you think.
I even went out of my way to tell you that I respected your opinion so lets end our conversation this way since I dont believe I care to butt heads with you anymore.

HAPPY TRAILS!!!

Good luck on that I hate Bush complex and your endless search for WMD's, but I think if you turn around you might find one in one of the most unlikely of places.
It really doesnt matter to me where or if they find them, but you would have to be lacking common sense to think we would NEVER find them.

scavenger

April 25th, 2003, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by majrmembr
In fact, I have read it. Better still, I read, and I understand what I am reading.

Some of those passages are thousands of years old. You have to understand the context and the audience for which they were intended. Which is something fundamentalists of all stripes refuse to do. You cannot isolate and de-contextualize selected sentences from any religious text and purport it to be absolute truth. Especially as they relate to current geopolitical discussions. Unless you are one of two things: (a) ignorant and stupid, or (b) abusing the words of the text to manipulate the otherwise good-intentions of the religious faithful.

I think its pretty clear that the official US government position has been guilty of using (b) to take advantage of the (a) in the American public.

So at your next church group meeting, perhaps someone should ask, "Where's the f*ckin' WMD, reverend Bush?". Hopefully someone will be there to record the word of God when he gives his response.

I agree with you that the bible has to be read with an open mind and in the context of the date and geography when it was written...Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that there are a lot of things going on with Iraq that none of us fully understand either...Also I'm not fully convinced that G.W. Bush is a saint either, However, people do not deserve to be under tyranny as they were in Iraq.... and it's also quite possible that setting them free from Saddam's regime may only be to have them put under another tyrant....Those people don't know democracy as they have never lived it, as well they are fuelled by some controlling factors with the muslim religion as well as there are religions under the banner of "Christian" that want to manipulate and control their followers...But it isn't God's will and that's what I do know

I also know each day that passes is another day in history and one day closer to the future.....You can deny this next passage or agree with it... but read and make your own decision...Its from Matthew 24 verse 3-14

...."What will be the sign of Your coming, and the end of the age?"
And Jesus answered them saying "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name saying, 'I am the Christ' and will deceive many. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines and disease, and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name, And many will be offended, and will betray one another and hate one another. Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. And because lawlessless will abound , the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures til the end will be saved! And this gospel of the kingdom of God will be preached in all the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.

The thing is no one can control the world...at least none of us anyway. But we can live at peace within ourselves with Christ and take some control over our own individual lives to some extent. My only goal is to encourage everyone to do so.

Because I believe that this passage reflects our time here now and not 2000 years ago when it was written.

majrmembr

April 25th, 2003, 07:07 AM

Good post scavenger! I agree. And its nice to hear a quote from the Son of God, thanks for sharing it. Indirectly you've brought up an excellent point - which is there is good reason why the war mongers won't find anything useful in Christ's teachings, and that is because he clearly would NEVER support ANY war or violence. Anyone who tries to suggest otherwise is a LIAR. Good Christians should not allow themselves to be swayed by the LIES of greedy men who only seek to control and dominate the riches of the Earth.

ozzy67

April 25th, 2003, 01:10 PM

Anyone who thinks that Israel is squatting on that land over there in the Middle East has never read the Bible I read and have read.
Revelation will let you know every thing you need to know regarding Israel(start with the Old Testament) and I can tell you before you start reading that it does take sides with Israel and that has nothing to do with President Bush.
One thing you have to consider is that Israel will be over there when the rest of the Middle East(and their suicide bomber religion) are put down by God himself.
I can quote from the Son of God if you like but I would prefer that you do some reading yourself.
If you look at the passage that Scavenger posted from the Bible, it is speaking about false prophets but Marjmember if you think that is talking about Bush you must be misguided because I have researched that and it only applies to false religion.
As a matter of fact Bush is the most God friendly president we have had in a long time, just ask the Israeli people.
Another small fact that some might be missing is that the United States and Israel are unseperable, we are hated just like Israel is and it has nothing to do with Bush once again.
Before you can understand what is happenning. you have got to get "Bush" out of your thinking for a moment and see the "Big Picture".
The suicide bombers were killing way before any Bush came to power and will be killing when President Bush is gone, WHY?? Because only God can preserve Israel, lets hope he preserves the US too, but if you have read
One thing is for sure, that Bible has never been wrong and it in no uncertain terms defends Israel, even if that means war to stop the violence, read brothers read.

scavenger

April 25th, 2003, 04:04 PM

One of the key things in that passage that we need to really understand is when Christ says "see to it that you are not troubled for these things must come to pass, but the end has not yet come"

If you read the old testament you will obviously see that God led His people into the promised land (Israel) and the place was filled with pagan tribes, He led them into war and they defeated with His help. Now my understanding is that the old testament is the physical state of the people of God and the new testament is the spiritual state of God's people who also now include those who have become heirs to his blessings by being adopted by their faith in Christ.
But God is the same yesterday, today and forever!

Does this new state of the spiritual now rule out the fact that we will no longer have any physical battles,I don't think so. Nor does it take away from Israel' who had been given the promise of His blessing in the first place. But now in this life we are faced with war... and on both sides.. physical and spiritual. The spiritual life will continue after the physical is long been done away with...So I beleive that this spiritual state deserves a more concentrated effort on our part. but we still have this physical realm that we still must live and deal with...But if we chose to put all our strength into the physical we will not be able to deal with the spiritual side of things, which are most important as far as I'm concerned. simply because they are eternal. And lets face it God is in control ultimately anyway...That is why He said " See to it that you are not troubled....." during these times we are now facing.
He knows the heart of man and what motivates him,,,if it is evil or good, So we need not worry about whether G.W. Bush is only doing it for his selfish desires..because God will use the situation to fulfill His plan even if that is the case...And His desire is that all mankind be free from Tyranny of all kinds and has an opportunity to hear His gospel... after that has happenned He will return and judge what each person has done. Including G.W. Bush...
And what we are discussing in regards to Wmd's today will probably be the last thing on all of our minds while bowing before the throne of the Almighty God! So we really need to hear what Christ wanted us to hear in that passage and to me it is not really the signs that will be around us ...but how we should deal with them...And that is to "see that we are not troubled...."
But I have decided to place my attention mainly on the spiritual battle that the world is facing instead of what consumes me with the physical side I am still apart of....May the God of peace be with you all!

ozzy67

April 25th, 2003, 05:06 PM

Thats exactly right Scavenger and being a Christian I realize that you have read what I have read and understood what you read.
I am one of the Christians that voted for Bush because of my views on an unborn child's right to life and other faith based issues.
I am by no means totally happy with the way Bush has done certain things but I can say that he has at least showed some belief in people's rights to express their beliefs and that God should play a role in people''s lives spiritually.
I believe our secular schools have tried to convince Americans that they dont need God and I see a President that at least "respects" the spiritual benefits that Americans can recieve by faith based organizations.
As far as the Americans that seem to want Bush gone at all costs, thats fine they have a vote and a voice.
I myself only hope the best for America and the world and I do trust God no matter what, I hope we all will be able to trust God in the future because America and Israel face evil from all sides and I hope we all realize just where to stand and who to stand for in what I see as rapidly crucial days ahead. God Bless

majrmembr

April 25th, 2003, 06:30 PM

Happy trails Ozzy! (?)

Yes, I agree the destinies of Israel and the US are inseparable. But you don't need a Bible to see why. It is quite simple really...there are millions of Jews in the US, and there are literally tens of thousands of Jews in positions of power and influence in the US. Israel is the symbolic, more recently political, more recently still militarily significant, Jewish homeland. So obviously there will be deep ties between the foreign policies of the US government, and the political activities of Israel. In fact, Israel wouldn't even have a policy (or perhaps even a country) if were not for direct finiancial and military support by the US government.

Anyone can see that, because 911 would not have occurred if it were not for that connection. Everyone knows that US involvement in Israeli affairs is not only a reason, it is THE reason, why the US is involved in this Middle East mess in the first place. Or did you think Osama Bin Laden just "made all that crap up about Israel" for the hell of it? In fact, what this is ultimately about is another war for the holy land, another "crusade" if you will. Because certain interest groups in Washington don't want to allow their Arab enemies to become too rich and too powerful, to the point where their beloved promised land could be seriously threatened by an Arab invasion!

I don't know where you get off on these connections between the persecution of Israel and the persecution of America, and being "alone in the world". What nonsense! The US is a global superpower and it does as it wishes! The fact that Israel is a close ally of the United States is no accident and is no fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And neither is all the terrorism and war that is resulting from it.

You keep looking for your explanations in the Good Book, nothing wrong with that if you like playing Nostradamus. And by that I mean you will ALWAYS find passages that suit just about anything you are seeking to prove. Just don't turn a blind eye to reality. The USA is not a Christian country anymore -at least not the people calling shots. I tell you solemnly, it is no accident that when Bush quotes the Bible, they are carefully selected verses from the OLD TESTAMENT.

ozzy67

April 25th, 2003, 07:21 PM

Just like I told you Marjmember, I fully respect your opinion, but I will understand in when in the near future you will or will not take off those "politic colored" glasses and see that this world is not only physically but spiritually inhabited and that things are happening that you will increasingly not be able to blame one person or persons for.
What I am trying to explain is that Israel is an oddball in the Middle East.
There is not going to be a day when there is a political solution to the Israeli problem.
This thing is more than just"Oh well the United States did this and Israel did that" it IS the Holy Land and if you dont believe it, Arafat can explain it to you because he believes Jerusalem is HIS god's holy place too.
Israel is the home of the true God, that is what Jesus Christ said and so far Ive had good success with Him.
I dont need to search the Bible for what I can see with my own eyes, but when the Bible says this and then i see it happen (over and over again) then I tend to lend some credibility to it.
No Nastradamus, just plain ole 2000 year old predictions from the Book of Peace.
Once again, this has nothing to do with Bush or any of man's political aspirations, just something that Bible believing people believe and by the way, we dont always agree with the republicans, I voted for Perot one time.;)

majrmembr

April 25th, 2003, 08:18 PM

Ozzy,
Let me say that I also respect, and agree, in the spiritual interpretation of these issues. I think in this particular matter, the spiritual side of the equation CANNOT be ignored. Therefore, it must be part of the solution. But how? The paradox is, religion is just as much the problem, as it is the solution! I think in the end the world needs to figure out a way to "share" Israel in a way that will bring peace to the region. It is going to require some painful compromises on all sides. But I think you would agree that all three religions in question know that true sacrafice, and not death and destruction, is the path to God. Perhaps if the world had better Christians, better Jews, and better Muslims -that truly believed this, we would have been on that path a long time ago. I suppose you will say that this is where the hand God comes into the picture. The only problem I have with that interpretation, is that no matter what happens, it is always the work of God. So while we must have faith in God, that does not excuse us from doing things we are uncomfortable with, in order to bring about peace! Nor does it excuse us from following the more difficult path to peace, which is to compromise and negotiate, not dominate and destroy.

ozzy67

April 25th, 2003, 09:10 PM

That is what the world needs Marjmember, better Christians, Jews and Muslims.
That is proof that a lot of what man does and says that God told them to do it is not always true.
Jesus said in the New Testament that he was like a Mother with unruly children that would not listen.(explains a lot doesnt it)
My personal belief is that some follow a god that is not a god at all.jmo
You know by now my view of the Middle East problem so I will spare you that conotation but I will say that there are two beliefs in the Middle East and I will just say that it is not Israel that is strapping bombs onto their children to prove their god is right.
I would love to see peace between Israel and the Muslim world but What I believe is that this will be the last thing to happen.
Yasser arafat was offered 50% of Jerusalem and the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied teretories but he flatly rejected the Clinton-Barak proposol.
Clinton did all he could do to deal with Arafat and Arafat CHOSE terrorism(historical fact).
Right now The US has issued Arafat an Ulltimatum"make peace or else", lets hope it works but remember Arafat is under pressure (financially??) to continue the killing in the West Bank.
My personal belief is that there will be no peace with Arafat in Palestine, he is a terrorist and you cant teach an old dog new tricks.
One more thought, this is exactly in line with the Bible's view of what would happen, it states that there would be a temporary peace for a short time and then Israel would be attacked from all sides.
I hope for the best and prepare for the worst, how about you?

scavenger

April 25th, 2003, 09:56 PM

It is that temporary peace solution that will be the most deceptive of all I think......what needs to be remembered is, at what cost to us, will this peace come? Here's an interesting site to check out ,,,Again it is for everyone to make their own conclusion regarding the information here...

http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/chicon/321/mark_of_the_beast.htm

ozzy67

April 25th, 2003, 10:17 PM

Scavenger, naturally I know something about this topic, my Father and both my brothers have Bachelor degrees in a Bible college. My Dad has a degree in Old Testament prophecy and my two brothers both work in Baptist churches.
The mark of the beast as you know will come when the rapture takes place in the tribulation is what i seem to get from Revelation.
Israel as I have stated is predicted by the Bible as you know to make peace for a short time during the seven year period we know as the coming tribulation.
There will be peace for the first 3 and one half years is the way I read it.(same with you?)
I know that what me and you are talking about is between us so we wont have to worry about explaining ourselves I hope.
Both me and you know that Israel will have to defend itself very soon from Satan himself(plain enough?) and the world will witness that either with their eyes open or after the church has left the earth is what I was taught and that there would be a "strong delusion" that the people would believe a lie".
That is what I feel the Bible says on this ,am I right?

scavenger

April 25th, 2003, 11:19 PM

Ozzy
Lately I have been looking into this a little deeper for some reason... I have heard several different versions of when the rapture will take place....But the best I've heard is "pray for "Pre" but prepare for "Post" .. The book of Revelations definitly mentions that there will be those who have the seal of God on they're forehead who have come out of the Great Tribulation who have been beheaded for their testimony and Faith in Christ.( you might think beheading as a capital punishment is a thing of the past but if the vital organs were to be saved it would be the best way to execute a person)

It also states in Revelations that Christ will return at the sounding of the last Trumpet (The 7'th trumpet) and gather his people from all ends of the earth. So if you look at the previous trumpets and what follows them, well it certainly seems like the great tribulation to me.

And in the 2nd book of Thessalonians chapter 2 it talks about His return as well and some events that will also take place ( the strong delusion that befalls the world is spoken there, as well as many falling away from the faith). So as far as whether the Beleivers will be spared from this tribulation period... well I know some will not, and again I would say hindsight is the best sight, but look at the disciples and Christians in the early days who were put to death for their faith, I suppose they most likely thought that it was the Tribulation period happenning to them in their time.

In regards to Israel I fully agree..It is the place where The Lord has marked out for His people ( Jerusalem) being the city where He shall first set down his foot on His return.. I have been looking into certain prophecies as to what will happen there in the last days and I read it as stating... the whole world will turn there back on them before God steps in to restore them to safety. That may be the US included or it may only mean the surrounding Islam countries....I guess hindsight will be the best here for me on this topic....But I am quite convinced that it could happen very soon....The hour is a lot shorter now that's for sure...But for the spiritually minded these days can be filled with revealed prophecies. I can honestly say that I myself feel extremely blessed.

ozzy67

April 26th, 2003, 06:27 AM

I cant be specific regarding verses without opening my Bible, but what I think we are hoping for is where it says that we would be saved from the "wrath to come".
If what I am seeing is the "wrath to come" then this could possibly be soon coming.
I dont see the Arab world getting ready to extend their hand of friendship to Israel any time soon is my opinion.
Yes, I think Bush will twist some arms in the Arab world for a while and you might see this "Roadmap to Peace" come to light and Israel will soon make concesions in a gesture for peace, but you and I know that the Arab world will never be satisfied with antyhting but "complete annhilation" of the Jewish state.
A lot of people do not realize(and I have not reaveled this to the ones opposed to the Iraqi war here) is that Iraq will probably be the "rebuilt Babylon) that Revelation says WILL BE BUILT.

We are as we speak preparing for the "world trade system" that will extend into the Middle East.
Bush has always been adament about bringing this to light and I think that is what will be set up in Iraq.(Im coing to get some HUU'S over this one so watch my back Scavenger)
Babylon is being built for that period of "temporary peace" in the world wouldnt you say?
That will pave the way for "one man"(ANTICHRIST) to take over the reigns of the world economy.
When this new International Trade system headed by the Antichrist gets into full swing then you will see that "mark" be offered that I beleve they will promote as the only way to keep up with this explosion of new trade and to weed out the negative feedback from Hackers and you guessed it TERRORISTS.
We are MUCH closer then we can imagine thanks to terrorism and It doesnt look like any thing can stop it.
One ting I do know is that September 11 didnt do the job for the cause of terrorism so I see unfortunately another catastrophy on the horizon, but lets hope not.
I just live it day by day and thank God that I live in America for now. GOD BLESS AND PROTECT HE ONLY KNOWS THE FUTURE

scavenger

April 26th, 2003, 09:25 AM

Ozzy
Just touching on the scripture I think you were referring to regarding "saved from the wrath to come" The word wrath is used several times throughout the word...It is used in Romans 5 verse8-9
"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us...(9)Much more then, having now been justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.." Wrath is also used later in Romans 13 in terms of the ruling authorities on this world(governments) executing their own version of wrath for people who break the laws of the countries they live in...So we can't just take the word wrath and consider it to be the tribulation period mentioned in that paticular verse...Because it doesn't coincide with revelations when the beleivers are going through the 6 trumpets of wrath before they are removed from the earth before the 7'th trumpet and the final wrath that follows. But I am not an expert on this subject, however there must be something pretty powerful and deluding on earth, in order for there to be a vast number of beleivers falling away from the faith before the rapture I would guess. Jesus mentioned about Antichrist coming but He also said the spirit of antichrist was already in the world(that being the denial made by anyone who said.... He was not the Christ(savior).

'Babylon' as we look at it the old testament was the commerce center of the world back then and located 50 miles south of what is now called Bahgdad. If 'Bahgdad' was to be the rebuilding of 'Babylon' then it would only mean that in the spiritual sense it would become the commerce center of the 'new world' coming. (note that is only my interpretation) Babylon of old time was regarding as the city of iniquity because it centered on the 'love of money' which is considered the root of all evils...Note that money in itself was not evil but the love of money was what caused people to do evil. The 'mark' on each person would do away with all money,credit cards, bank cards and causing it to be imprinted on each person would do away with cash in general....And if money becomes useless then if we think about it, everything a person earned would have to go through this new banking system and things like illegal cash (i.e. drug money) would be useless because it couldn't be explained through the revenue dept. The IRS and tax depts. would have complete control of everything and it would end the 'war on drugs'!(If drug money cannot be used anywhere who would traffic drugs? does this make sense)?
The man "Antichrist" is supposed to be the answer to all of the problems in the world in that time. He will come in with a peace treaty that will end all the turmoil... and doing away with religion will be on his agenda, because even as we see it now in this thread, this war has alot to do with differences in peoples beliefs and them being unable to come to a compromising agreement....But the way I see it NOW is the time when we should be seeking what God's desires are for us. So we may be saved from the wrath to come when He does avenge the evildoers on this earth. And like the wrath that spread through Egypt to all houses except the ones who spread the lambs blood on their doorposts, we must allow God to spread His Blood on us,(and this is done by opening our hearts and accepting His Son)
Ozzy you are quite fotunate to have spriritual authorities in your family to help you understand what is going on..I have no one in my family who takes any of this seriously, but I am very thankful that God has given me a hunger for His word so I can understand and rest in His peace through all this.

xsforce

April 26th, 2003, 09:40 AM

North Korea not only says they have nuclear weapons, but they are boasting on how much they have and are threatening to test them with no notice, and sell them to countries who wants to buy them. Now, do we go in like we did Iraq? I think not! Everyone says that this Iraq war makes everyone feel safer but that is just hogwash! NK is a serious threat and now, all of a sudden they are calling our bluff!! So exactally what is the U.S. to do now? I'm just curious as to what good ole' boy Dubya is gonna do about this REAL THREAT! XS.

scavenger

April 26th, 2003, 10:08 AM

Ozzy
just one more thing on the returning of Christ and where the faithful will be at that time....The 1'st letter to the thessalonians in chapter 5 is specifically written to the believers....it says
"For you yourself know perfectly that the day of the lord(His return) shall come as a theif in the night. For when they(the world) says we now have "Peace and Safety!" then destruction comes upon them, as labour pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. But you brethren, are not in the dark ,(meaning we will see that true peace is not really here) so that this Day( His return) should overtake you as a theif.
Actually after considering this passage the beleivers may very well escape the wrath because they do meet the Lord in the air just before His return.....But hindsight has always been my best vision.... But as I understand beleivers will be in the great tribulation put on the world by the antichrist as he establishes his version of peace on earth but escape the wrath of God that follows ....JMO

ozzy67

April 26th, 2003, 11:05 AM

What did you think about the Iraq-Babylon connection?
I think we are getting ready to push into the Middle East and enforce some kind of peace in this area.
I dont believe we are going to let Syria just be a Country Club for terrorists anymore seeing that the US economy just cant take another strike of any magnitude.
It is almost seeable with the naked eye now that this One World Government is going to be established in order to effectively block the free-for-all terrorism that has been going on for the last 30+ years.
I dont know what, but we are going to see some interesting changes in the Middle East.
One recent example would be the Arab council(along with Syria) announcing they want a resolution in the UN banning all WMD's.
We are definitely getting ready to see some shuffling of the cards in The Middle East.
I guess we will just have to see what will happen in the next few years, one thing is for sure, it is going according to someones plan.

scavenger

April 26th, 2003, 12:05 PM

JMO...But I think that Iraq is the staging point right now for (1) either the formation of a coalition set up by all of the Islam nations to ban together and defend their religion and independance, which would lead to more terrorism, therefore people would accept any solution for peace even if it means tossing out the constitution... or possibly (2) For "Babylon" to rebuilt successfully and prosperously (most likely to be in Bahgdad) so that other Islam nations will want to be a part of the New world and receive their share of the riches that will be obtainable through selling oil to the rest of the world....but either way you slice it I personally beleive "Babylon" will be rebuilt as a center of commerce in the world and is definetly going to be a place that will be full of deceptions...And again it will fall but forever next time!....I myself don't put any faith in what the world's version of peace will be ... or how it will be offerred in that time. So if I am alive then, I will most likely be one of the outcasts and probably considered as an enemy of the state.
As well I think in either case, Israel will stand alone and be considered a Rebel country to the rest of the world because they will want to remain independant.. or the true hatred that Islam has for them will be covered by a deceptive version of peace..Let's face it anyone who is convinced enough in their heart to become a suicide bomber is probably beyond the point of redemption and will have no problem making a fals agreement of peace with the enemy( look at all the fake surrenders they pulled off in Iraq only to fulfill their real mission) In any case Israel will have the appearance of being the ones not willing to be a part of the world peace agreement and be hated by all...also I think that oil in vast amounts will be soon discovered there.....And the other nations will want it because of greed.

ozzy67

April 26th, 2003, 06:09 PM

Sorry, I would have replied a while ago but had errons to run.
I believe that even Israel will be part of the new world government, remember,Israel will make peace for the first three and a half years and then the Antichrist will set himself up as God in Jerusalem is what I read Scavenger.
In any terms though we are getting ready to see it go down.
Let me give you a Israeli Intelligence Interney site that is recognized as accurate in every sense of the word as far as Israel goes.
That site is "DEBKA.COM"
Look at it some time, I think you will be impressed Scavenger.
Another note, DEBKA says that Bush knows the WMD's are in Syria and they reported it over a month ago, and what do you know? Thats where the Iraqi regime went.

majrmembr

April 26th, 2003, 06:21 PM

Oh, is THAT where the WMD's are now? NO wonder they can't find them in Iraq, LOL! Its all making sense now. :Z

ozzy67

April 26th, 2003, 06:28 PM

Yep, the Information Minister has got them under his bed in Damascus as we speak.
Mohammed Aldouri is next door it's like a good episode of Friends Marjmember!!,:cool:

scavenger

April 27th, 2003, 12:07 AM

Debka is a very informative site Ozzy..Doesn't make the world look like it will see an end to all this turmoil in the Mideast any time soon..... I too agree that the whole world including Israel will be under the one world Governing system soon, but I do seem to have read somewhere and I can't remember where right now that Israel would be surrounded on all sides by all the armies of the world.....I might have misunderstood though...However it doesn't hurt to keep tabs on where their political state stands as opposed to all other countries....because they have had their share of hardship throughout history. And that always seems to have a way of repeating itself.....There sure doesn't seem to be much positive news on that site that's for sure.

xsforce

April 27th, 2003, 07:51 AM

ozzy67

April 27th, 2003, 01:28 PM

Im not sure what we will do with North Korea, but i think we will call their bluff seeing that if they dont get help domestically then what was it 7 million will starve?
Kim Jong Ill will stop his nuclear ambitions ONLY after he sees that the world will not let him be a terrorist supplier to the world.
Going and "bowing the knee" to him will only make him laugh at us.
If you are wondering why we dont just go in there and take him out like we did Sadaam, well, it's like some people said about the "Iraq war", you remember dont you XS? "HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS DEAD FROM URBAN WARFARE?"
Well with North Korea there would be thousands if we went in on the ground and thats just not going to happen.
We will negotiate him to death and give him some aid and IF thats not good enough for Kim Jong. well, I guess the Ole boy will have to rebuild his reactors after they have been bombed.
DONT underestimate the power we have to shut Kim Jong up!!!

ozzy67

April 27th, 2003, 01:52 PM

Scavenger, When I said that Israel will join the One world government what I meant is that it will be temporary.
They will make peace with the Beast for the first half of the seven year Tribulation and then the Antichrist will turn on them and Israel will(if I read correctly) be left defensless at the end of this period of time.
It is at this time that Israel will be attacked from all sides and it says in the Bible that Jesus will then destroy the armies of the One world Government and set up His reign for 1000 years in Jerusalem as the ruler of the world.
Boy!! The guys aroung here will know Im a basketcase after they read this Scavenger!

xsforce

April 27th, 2003, 02:04 PM

Ha ha ha!!!! Ozzy, you're the man!!!!

ozzy67

April 27th, 2003, 02:36 PM

Thank You Xsforce, Ill be here all week or until they commit me, THERE COMING TO TAKE ME AWAY HA HA!!!:K

scavenger

April 27th, 2003, 08:34 PM

You're not alone Ozzy...All my friends ride harleys and are always trying to drag me out to party on the weekends, none of them really have much interest in the spiritual side of life, but myself I can't deny that Jesus is alive....I spent over 3 years of my life in the bucket and one night in my cell. actually about an hour before I was being released, I was alone and just waiting for my ride and something came over me, I don't know why I did it because like I said previously, I was never raised in a family that even beleived in God, but I called out to Jesus and He came upon me in a more powerful way than I could ever explain, Even my parents thought I had lost touch with reality. But I can not deny that He is alive today because I know that I know that I know and no one can tell me otherwise.

Lithium666

April 27th, 2003, 09:28 PM

Although legally there is an argument against "testing" being theft, morally I cant see how it can be considered anything else.

You guys seem to be extremely religious, so how exactly do you balance that with your interest in testing?

(A sincere question, so don't take it the wrong way).

As to the whole WMD question. Unilateral (such as that against Iraq) action is not going to deter states from developing their own weapons programs. Clearly nobody is going to match the US army in a straight fight. So that leaves other nations 1 option, develop nuclear weapons programs and ICBM's.

As proponents of the "mutual destruction deterent" theory its difficult for us to now suppress other nations nuclear ambitions.

We should also remember USSR, China, Pakistan (non democracies) have never used their nukes. The US is the only nation to have dropped nukes in anger.

Furthermore Israel happeneds to be an undeclared nuclear power which everyone conveniantly overlooks!

ozzy67

April 27th, 2003, 09:53 PM

Israel is certainly not overlooked as a nuclear power, Einstien was the proposed originator of the nuclear bomb if i am correct.
Israel could never have protected themselves without that "psychological" deterrent.
It is truly unfortunate that so many people who should never have been allowed to have Nuclear weapons have them, that has always been an unanswered question for me.
Why did the US allow these countries to aquire these weapons??
It is possible that maybe back with japan, even with the thousands of men that would be lost, that we should have not dropped the bomb and went in on the ground to finish japan, but we had already lost so many men(A Generation of young men) that we decided not out of anger, but of mercy to our young enlisted was the reason we did what we did.
Someone was going to die. Japan would not face the facts that only death would come if they did not surrender, so we felt that they made their choice in not surrendering.
None of America's history is easy to swallow, but we seem to have always had our back to the wall because our way of life has and always will be a minority in comparison to the way the rest of the world thinks.
I have never personally looked aT America as a superpower in only the military sense, we are the only truly successfull democracy in regards to our Constitution which Thomas Jefferson described as "the most important Document on the face of the Earth next to the Holy Bible".
Without that Document we would not be the blessed people we are in my opinion.
We are the bastian of Christianity that Alexander the Great paved the way for in his conquest of the world which without we would have never even existed, thats heavy man.

Lithium666

April 27th, 2003, 10:34 PM

I cant find any justification for dropping the first bomb! But given your argument, why drop the second?

The current Bush ponchent for pre-emptive action leaves 1 option to the "evil" nations of the world - become nuclear capable.

Openheimer clearly regreted what he had helped create. And the world may well regret Einstein didnt keep his little equation to himself!

"Bastion of Christianity"? Which flavour? Even the Christians of the World can't live in peace with each other.

Seperation of religion and state is a key (and very important) tennant of the constitution. Bush should remember that.

ozzy67

April 27th, 2003, 10:54 PM

I dont think Bush really thought about what he was saying when he used the word "pre-emption".
It was clear to the american people before G.W.Bush that our Intelligence allowed us to strike first at any Nation that means us harm.
Bush has said several things that in retrospect doesnt seem to have been necessary.
The truth is Lithium is that we have been able to protect ourself in that manner for many years, we didnt need our President to "announce" that right to the world, you see what I am saying,? the weight of Bush's words are simply words.
All the former Presidents have taken liberty to say things that were not needed at times Bush 43 is no different.
As far as Evil dictators making bombs? Correct me if I am wrong but hasnt North Korea informed us that they ALREADY have made bombs?
Doesnt look like they waited to see what Bush 43 had to say.
It looks to me that they waited on what the former President clinton had to say.
Trust me in the future Bush will say what needs to be said and nothing more.
Lets not kill ourself worrying about what a word can do to us and realize that the threats to our security our older than any "Bush Presidency".jmo

scavenger

April 27th, 2003, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by Lithium666
Although legally there is an argument against "testing" being theft, morally I cant see how it can be considered anything else.

You guys seem to be extremely religious, so how exactly do you balance that with your interest in testing?

(A sincere question, so don't take it the wrong way).

I for one Lithium am far from perfect in many ways, So what you asked is a fair and valid question.....The reality is where I live(Canada) testing is somewhat of a controversy,however morally it is theft anywhere I suppose, So I often have an unsettled peace about it myself...The only way to have true peace is by doing what your conscience says is right. .But I am not religious per say as belonging to a church and following a set of doctrines...As well There are other things in my life that are also in need of correction...the truth of the matter is that Christ has made me perfect by what He did, and not by what I do or have done, or it would be impossible for anyone to have a relationship with Him, especially me... That is why I am so thankful that He has made it possible for us to become reconciled with Him, and only by what He has done ...Don't get me wrong because I am in no way saying that because of what He did gives me a liscence to engage in criminal activities, because it doesn't. He has called us to live in peace. Also he's got alot of work to do with me yet as I have always been a rebel. But when I come to God in prayer I don't look at my life and what all my faults are as there are many, but I look to the cross as a way for me to be made perfect, That is the way He has made for man to be cleansed from all unrighteousness. If we look at the time when He was crucified He was sentenced with 2 criminals, One mocked Him , And the other asked Him to forgive him. Jesus told the man who asked forgiveness that he would be in paradise with Him.
That guy never had a chance to get down off that cross, go to church , or get baptized, but he was made righteous only because of his act of faith. And that is all I have really is faith. God's ways are not man's ways so it may be difficult to understand..as we have always been taught that if we do good we get good,go to work, work hard, get a raise, Do bad get punished, But He has nade a way that denies all forms of any self-righteousness. Otherwise we would have reason to boast in ourselves and become prideful. He is rich in mercy to all who ask for it and then it's up to us if we obey what our consciense tells us in order to live in this world at peace with ourselves and all men. This is the only way I can really explain my relationship with God, and I don't have all the answers. But day by day He shows me a better way. There is really no difference between me and anyone else, except I have a faith in His ability to deliver me from this place I am now and wash all my sin away by accepting His payment for them. I hope that answers what you asked.

NotHome

April 28th, 2003, 06:13 AM

The dropping of the two nuclear devices on Japan was neccessary. The number of lives that would have been lost would have been greater if we had gone in with conventional warfare. American troops were dying in ridiculous numbers, we were tired and weary. The opportunity to stop the war in an instant was taken. It also serves as a lesson as to the horrific nature of these weapons. Let's not forget who was the agressor in that conflict. That we dropped two was a calculated decision the result of which was that with two there would be absolutely no question as to the destructive power. And we did drop leaflets (sp?) telling people to get out, the problem was it was made illegal to pick up and read our papers. If you still think it is wrong to use overwelming force to save our troops, you volunteer to bring the letters to the wifes and mothers of our fallen and explain to them why they lost there sons and daughters to save the enemy.

North Korea can be dealt with through diplomacy. All of the people who were against going into Iraq are asking why we don't go into North Korea. Why ask this? I thought you were for peaceful solutions. The best defence is sometimes a good offence. The world has taken notice that the bulldog has it's teeth ready to react.

As far as separating church and state, lets not forget freedom from oppression. Bush has the constitutional right to be religious and he campaigned fully exposing his beliefs.

NotHome

Lithium666

April 28th, 2003, 08:25 AM

1) "The number of lives that would have been lost would have been greater if we had gone in with conventional warfare."

Although accurate figures are hard to obtain. Most reports indicate 140,000 people died in Hiroshima alone! With a population of 350,00 those figures seem believable. (That doesn't include secondary deaths in the subsequent years).

The death toll may have been greater on the US (army) side but I very much doubt the total death toll would have been more (especially civilians).

2) "If you still think it is wrong to use overwelming force to save our troops, you volunteer to bring the letters to the wifes and mothers of our fallen and explain to them why they lost there sons and daughters to save the enemy." & "Let's not forget who was the agressor in that conflict."

You seem to be suggesting its ok to kill civilians to save our troops. Perhaps you should apply that argument in reverse. Would it be ok for Iraq (or any other nation we are at war with) to drop a nuke in Washington?

3) "As far as separating church and state, lets not forget freedom from oppression. Bush has the constitutional right to be religious and he campaigned fully exposing his beliefs."

He also has the obligation as President to keep his religious beliefs seperate from the way he governs the country. Admittadly a difficult task.

4) "The best defence is sometimes a good offence."

An argument other nations will very likely be quoting to justify their own weapons programs. Infact the very same argument that fuelled nuclear proliferation throughout the world.

5) "It also serves as a lesson as to the horrific nature of these weapons."

This could be achieved without dropping 2 in population centres!

By your argument Germans could argue the Reich was needed to serve as an example of the horrific nature of genocide. Just because something serves as an example it does not justify the action.

6) "That we dropped two was a calculated decision the result of which was that with two there would be absolutely no question as to the destructive power."

So your saying the 2km ash plane, 140,000 killed, etc were not good enough.

It was an "evil" decision to drop the first. I have no words to describe those who chose to drop the second.

"Calculated decision", will your opinion be so detached if one of our enemies decides to drop a third closer to home?

majrmembr

April 28th, 2003, 10:10 AM

I'll give you a reason for the second bomb Lithium....the belief at the time that the whole of Japan was an evil race of war-crazed monkeys. Genocide does not require a valid justification other than a racial profile!

scavenger

April 28th, 2003, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by Lithium666
1) He also has the obligation as President to keep his religious beliefs seperate from the way he governs the country. Admittadly a difficult task.

Is that true or is it just an opinion ...I'm not familiar with all of the presidential oaths..other than some that are grounds for treason.

Lithium666

April 29th, 2003, 08:00 AM

Its down to interpretation really.

Being an American citizen he has the right to his religious beliefs. The question is as President should he impose those on the rest of the nation.

In my opinion the stipulations that seperate religion and state are their to prevent him from doing so. i.e he should govern for the people not his church.

Of course its sometimes difficult to achieve.

BTW is that John Stewart thing about "Bush the Candidate meets Bush the President" on today? Remember seeing a clip but can't remember when & where.

NotHome

April 29th, 2003, 08:01 AM

1. As far as equating American soldiers lives to those of an aggressor, YES THE LIVES OF MY COUNTRIES HEROS ARE WORTH MORE. Sorry if that crosses the line but that is what I believe.

2. If we acted as the Japanese did in WW II, then yes, it would have been legitamate to drop those weapons. Unfortunately you are trying to equate the victim with the attacker. We were attacked with out warning (I don't care that it was by mistake) and we responded with force to stop the agression.

3. He campaigned professing those beliefs, therefore he has every right to use those beliefs to govern. The point at which he crosses the law is when he tells others how they must believe and/or worship. When that point is crossed, you will see me campaining for his removable and jailing.

I am one of the less religious individuals I know but I like the idea of his firm religous foundation. That foundation gives him a moral obligation to do what he feels is correct, unlike his predicessor (sp?).

4. True, but that does not mean that the more responsible nations should not police the less predictable ones.

5. The action was justified by the saving of American lives. The lesson comes as an after effect.

6. In science, nothing ever happens once, you must recreate a result for validity. Had we done it once there would be questions if we could do it again. That was why two bombs were dropped.

If one of our enemies drops a nuclear device on the United States for the same or like reasons to the US nuclear attacks on Japan, then they would be justified. I have posted several times before stating my opinion that those bombings were a black mark on US history.

Try to equate this to a street fight. If you were standing in line waiting and someone walks up and punches you in the face, what do you do?
Your policy says you should do nothing more aggressive, so you can at best punch them back anything more is unjustified.
My policy says you use everything in your power to protect your life. If it takes beating that person to a bloody pulp you are justified because you were not the agressor.

NotHome

Bone Daddy

April 29th, 2003, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Lithium666
1) "The number of lives that would have been lost would have been greater if we had gone in with conventional warfare."

Although accurate figures are hard to obtain. Most reports indicate 140,000 people died in Hiroshima alone! With a population of 350,00 those figures seem believable. (That doesn't include secondary deaths in the subsequent years).

The death toll may have been greater on the US (army) side but I very much doubt the total death toll would have been more (especially civilians).

2) "If you still think it is wrong to use overwelming force to save our troops, you volunteer to bring the letters to the wifes and mothers of our fallen and explain to them why they lost there sons and daughters to save the enemy." & "Let's not forget who was the agressor in that conflict."

You seem to be suggesting its ok to kill civilians to save our troops. Perhaps you should apply that argument in reverse. Would it be ok for Iraq (or any other nation we are at war with) to drop a nuke in Washington?

3) "As far as separating church and state, lets not forget freedom from oppression. Bush has the constitutional right to be religious and he campaigned fully exposing his beliefs."

He also has the obligation as President to keep his religious beliefs seperate from the way he governs the country. Admittadly a difficult task.

4) "The best defence is sometimes a good offence."

An argument other nations will very likely be quoting to justify their own weapons programs. Infact the very same argument that fuelled nuclear proliferation throughout the world.

5) "It also serves as a lesson as to the horrific nature of these weapons."

This could be achieved without dropping 2 in population centres!

By your argument Germans could argue the Reich was needed to serve as an example of the horrific nature of genocide. Just because something serves as an example it does not justify the action.

6) "That we dropped two was a calculated decision the result of which was that with two there would be absolutely no question as to the destructive power."

So your saying the 2km ash plane, 140,000 killed, etc were not good enough.

It was an "evil" decision to drop the first. I have no words to describe those who chose to drop the second.

"Calculated decision", will your opinion be so detached if one of our enemies decides to drop a third closer to home?

What a load of crap...I try to stay out of these nonsense threads...Why not compare the US aggression to the nazi's while we're at it..And what if monkey's flew out my butt??? Where's the POINT???These analgy's are so pathetic...Why did the romans stone people??Why oh why did the indians use arrows???Hmmm one thought,because they HAD THEM!!!I don't see anyone crying for those poor indians here...I guess there plight didn't serve any agenda..If we can't come up with anything better than this ,then this thread is going away..

majrmembr

April 29th, 2003, 09:02 AM

Sure, but we are not talking about retaliation for any specific attack in this thread, are we? I think the point is, who decides whether or not a sufficient threat exists to warrant PRE-EMPTIVE action? It should not be a matter of political opinion, religious conviction, or media spin-doctoring. It should be based on hard facts and evidence. And if you are going to act pre-emptively, you always run the risk of being perceived as the agressor.

And don't forget, this is the same administration that has NO *confirmed* WMD in Iraq.

I think the point is if the US was capable of over-reacting to a REAL threat in Japan in WW2, than it is certainly capable of over-reacting to false and/or perceived threats TODAY!

NotHome

April 29th, 2003, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by majrmembr
I think the point is if the US was capable of over-reacting to a REAL threat in Japan in WW2, than it is certainly capable of over-reacting to false and/or perceived threats TODAY!

I don't think the US over-reacted in WWII. Japan did not surrender even though they were defeated. They were going to try to bleed the US as much as possible as they went down. How many civilians do you really think would have died with the conventional bombing needed to take over Japan. Remember, a smart bomb in that day was one that hit within a few hundred yards of the intended target.

The Japanese would have had extremely heavy losses had a ground war been fought. It is easy to say that those civilian loses would have been less, but that was the way war was fought back then. Today, we can do better and therefore must strive to reduce civilian risk.

I like how you word your statement to make it seem as though the US acts on false information knowingly.

NotHome

majrmembr

April 29th, 2003, 11:53 AM

Who said they are knowingly acting on false information? They are the ones providing it! What they act on and why is a completely different matter. But maybe it IS false information on which people base their opinions about whether or not the US government is doing the right thing. Sure, two nukes ended the war in Japan. It doesn't mean it was the right way, but at least IT WORKED.

So where is the evidence that invading Iraq is solving global terrorism, with no WMD? Going into Afghanistan didn't stop the bombing in Bali, did it? Did it stop the anthrax scare? Did it stop them from trying to make ricin? It didn't even catch Bin Laden! So where did Saddam go? So where is all this leading? To a solution to global terrorism? Well, I guess you can always dream!

But after all, something good did come out of Iraq...THE OIL IS SAFE!

NotHome

April 29th, 2003, 12:54 PM

Who said - YOU DID - I quoted that part.

As far as global terrorism, I have not verified the statistic but here it is. The lowest occurance of terrorism since the early 80's is the period after 9/11. If this is true, then that is your proof.

The anthrax letters have stopped, there were no chemical attacks on US soil and I haven't seen any highly organized attacks lately.

You are completely convinced that oil is the only reason we went into Iraq therefore any argument is wasted bandwidth.

NotHome

majrmembr

April 29th, 2003, 01:40 PM

I didn't say oil was the only reason for going in...I said it was the only good thing (so far) that has come out of it so far according to Bush. The other good thing according to Bush was "freedom" but so far its only freedom they have is to have the kind of government the US wants. :Z

And as for it reducing the threat of global terrorism...let me re-interate...where is Saddam, his sons, the WMD's? Where's the al qaeda connection to Iraq? What happened to all the cheering crowds of happy Iraqis? But where's the oil? Ha ha ha...there's the OIL...and the big fat contracts too...:K

ozzy67

April 29th, 2003, 02:00 PM

Oil is not such a bad thing Marjmember.
By the way what does your car take? Unless your riding a bicycle.
As far as the war on Iraq goes, it sure did bring Syria and North Korea around didnt it.
Seems that they like them good ole US Government contracts too.
As far as Saddam and them WMD's go where are they?
One thing is for sure Saddam and the WMD's are not in Iraq anymore, as a matter of fact, the Iraqi Officials that have been captured have said that Saddam destroyed them RIGHT BEFORE we went into Iraq.
If thats true well then game over, we won.

Lithium666

April 29th, 2003, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by Bone Daddy
What a load of crap...I try to stay out of these nonsense threads...Why not compare the US aggression to the nazi's while we're at it..And what if monkey's flew out my butt??? Where's the POINT???These analgy's are so pathetic...Why did the romans stone people??Why oh why did the indians use arrows???Hmmm one thought,because they HAD THEM!!!I don't see anyone crying for those poor indians here...I guess there plight didn't serve any agenda..If we can't come up with anything better than this ,then this thread is going away..

Very coherent argument!

LOL.

Mayb you quoted the wrong post because there are no analogies in my previous post.

majrmembr

April 29th, 2003, 07:36 PM

Ha ha ha...well of course the US WON! Who is questioning THAT? But will it reduce global terrorism...well, that has almost become a joke at this point hasn't it? Is North Korea serious about its threats? Well, only as long as China keeps pumping the OIL in. Now with SARS China is extremely vulnerable...the US and its allies have exactly what they need to leverage some pressure on North Korea's vis a vis China (OIL). As you can see, the terrorist attacks continue in Israel despite positive developments with the Palestinian leadership and the collapse of their alleged supporters in Iraq, and the fact US has Iraq's OIL. Just makes one realize all the more no matter what kind of military action you take in the Middle East it will remain messed up and the terrorism will rage on. But at least the OIL is safe! THAT IS THE MAIN THING DUBYA :eek: OIL!!!!

Ha ha, sorry, couldn't help it :gg

ozzy67

April 29th, 2003, 08:07 PM

Marjmember, do you believe everything you see on the local news?
"Positive developments in the Middle East"?
I dont know if you noticed but there is a terrorist in Palestine called"Yasser Arafat(heard of him??) who will until he is completely destroyed will conduct terrorist attacks on Israel.
Until someone takes Arafat out there will be no peace in Israel or Palestine(ask Clinton).
As far as oil goes well, fine, we all love oil.\
I am concerned about your view that "nothing has been done to reduce terrorism".
Where are you living or what planet Marjmember?
I live in America and to be honest with you so far so good.jmo
As far as what Bone Daddy said, I agree with him, this thread has run out of steam.
I would say that you research the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, identify the terrorists, and play with your Hu card.
The fact is, Marjmember is that nothing is going to stop terrorism in the West Bank bacause it is a WAR and Arafat wants the spoils, this is the issue that is on my mind, not whether we where right to take out saddam, because friend, I didnt care for him that much(niether did the Iraqi people)and I do think he eventually owuld have been a big problem and being a supporter of Israel anything to hurt that terrorist bunch(Syria etc...) is just finr with me.
I also think you miss a point here regarding terrorism.
What incursion or invasion in the Middle East by the United States caused the September 11 terrorist attack??
I have had a lot of fun talking about this over the past few weeks and I hope you have seen it as fun and informative too.
The major concern is Israel and always will be Israel until the cows come home, so watch whats happening there and you will see where the "Problem" lies.
As far as Iraq goes, well I hope htey will enjoy their freedom because Anything includind the Bush Presidency is better than Saddam.

Bone Daddy

April 29th, 2003, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Lithium666
Very coherent argument!

LOL.

Mayb you quoted the wrong post because there are no analogies in my previous post.
Yep looks like a misquote, sorry Lithium666..It was a busy morning..

Lithium666

April 29th, 2003, 08:17 PM

No probs

mmmmkaaay

April 29th, 2003, 09:44 PM

Originally posted by NotHome
I don't think the US over-reacted in WWII. Japan did not surrender even though they were defeated. They were going to try to bleed the US as much as possible as they went down. How many civilians do you really think would have died with the conventional bombing needed to take over Japan. Remember, a smart bomb in that day was one that hit within a few hundred yards of the intended target.

The Japanese would have had extremely heavy losses had a ground war been fought. It is easy to say that those civilian loses would have been less, but that was the way war was fought back then. Today, we can do better and therefore must strive to reduce civilian risk.

I like how you word your statement to make it seem as though the US acts on false information knowingly.

NotHome

Look at your history books again and this time please try to find a non biased source (that means NON american authors/historians)

The Japs offered to surrender AFTER Hiroshima.....(the Japs did NOT want their island invaded by US troops) USA refused to accept Japan's surrender. Nagasaki was dropped to show the world (mostly the communists) it could be done twice.

NotHome

April 30th, 2003, 04:50 AM

I am pretty sure the first surrender offer was a conditional surrender where the emperor would still have power. That was not an acceptable position for the US. I agree that the second bomb was a bad choice, I just don't believe the first was.

Any history book is going to be biased, the only way to get an unbiased view is to read many different versions.

NotHome

majrmembr

April 30th, 2003, 06:40 AM

Hmmm Ozzy,
Well, as long as you are always going to take a pro-Israeli stance no matter what, than that pretty much pre-determines what your view is going to be. Because to you the Arabs are the eternal enemies of Israel and their religion is the evil cult of suicide bombers. I'm glad we straightened that out.
Well...I'll agree the Israelis will always have at least one good thing going for them and that is they don't strap on bombs and blow up innocent people. So I suppose in that regard they will almost always find more support than opposition, regardless of the excuses the Palestinians take for their actions. There really is no excuse for what they do, I have to agree with that.

NotHome

April 30th, 2003, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by majrmembr
Hmmm Ozzy,
Well, as long as you are always going to take a pro-Israeli stance no matter what, than that pretty much pre-determines what your view is going to be. Because to you the Arabs are the eternal enemies of Israel and their religion is the evil cult of suicide bombers. I'm glad we straightened that out.
Well...I'll agree the Israelis will always have at least one good thing going for them and that is they don't strap on bombs and blow up innocent people. So I suppose in that regard they will almost always find more support than opposition, regardless of the excuses the Palestinians take for their actions. There really is no excuse for what they do, I have to agree with that.

When the bombers choose military and governmental targets, they will get world support. Until then they are simply terrorists and must be wiped out. And for as long as the images of arabs rejoicing over the killing of school children fill my television, I will consider them an uncivilized society embracing what amounts to an evil religion.

Action speaks louder than words - and lately the actions of Islamic Arab men has proven the words of the clerics wrong. It is time for the majority of muslims to purge the filth from their ranks and prove they are a good, peace loving people. That is not a job for the US or any other country to do, it is something that must be done from within.

Israel is not innocent, they aggrevate a lot of the problems but they don't specifically target civilians. They do however take almost no care in reducing civilian injury/death when reacting to a terror attack and this is wrong, very wrong. Israel is just the lessor of two evils in this conflict.

NotHome

majrmembr

April 30th, 2003, 12:13 PM

NotHome,
Well said. I fully agree with your views on that very messy situation.

Lithium666

April 30th, 2003, 12:30 PM

Continuing on from that I make a further distinction between Islamic terrorists and other terrorists around the world.

They not only target civilians they also choose to target other countries. Yes the US and the west has to take some blame for their plight. But they should remember muslims in these countries have more rights then anywhere in the middle east.

They would get more support if they first addressed the plight of their muslim brothers within their own region. I dont believe the Koran makes any distinction between cast, stature, family or ethnic origin. Yet countries thorughout the middle east oppress groups based on these factors.

Its ironic that a Philopino muslim in Saudi Arabia is given less consideration then a westerner!

ozzy67

April 30th, 2003, 05:56 PM

Whoa, the "lesser of two evils"??
Israel has used a heavier hand in recent attacks Nothome but this conflict was instigated by a war thatw as declared on Israel in 1967 by the entire Middle East.
Since then Israel has endured more grief from these people who CANNOT make peace because they would not even recognize Israel as people.
Every country in the world including the US is to blame for the
plight of the Palestinians and the Israelis because yasser Arafat should have been removed from power or better yet never been allowed to come to power in Palestine.
With that said Israel has no choice but to do what they have done in Palestine, it is a land that trains terrorists for the sole purpose of destroying Israel.
Think about that when you think of Israel as "the lesser of two evils".
Israel and Palestine are at war and war is not pretty but Israel COULD do more damage to palestine but they want Yasser Arafat, not the Palestinian people.
It's hard not to have civilian casualties when you are fighting an urban warfare against terrorists.

majrmembr

April 30th, 2003, 06:10 PM

Yes Ozzy but BOTH sides are going to have to make concessions. Both sides can be right or both can be wrong...take your pick. It really doesn't matter at this point. They are both at war with each other and therefore they are equal. Both sides have to stop thinking they will garner enough support from outside Israel/Palestine in order to overwhelm the other. Israel turns to America and Palestine turns to the Arab world and Europe. The polarization of the issues and the politics has got to come to an end and anyone who is serious about peace knows this.
So I have to wonder whether or not someone who continually takes sides on this issue, be it one side or the other, is really interested in peace at all.

NotHome

April 30th, 2003, 06:56 PM

Ozzy

I believe Israel is correct in it's actions, just not in the extent of execution. The "lessor of two evils" was way too harsh on Isreal. I meant to portray that Israel does not come to the tabel with clean hands. It is completely understandable why they act in the manner they do, but the fact is Israel deals a heavy hand to terrorists and those in their way. When innocents are killed there is an apology but they react the same way over and over. This is in no way anywhere near the problem of palestiniens (sp?) who kill innocents as a target instead of an accident.

NotHome

ozzy67

April 30th, 2003, 07:10 PM

Israel will make concessions or there will be no negotiation, you are right about that because Palestine will have to get all the land back that they lost when they declared war against Israel and lost.
That is what burns Yasser Arafat to the core. He tried to annhillate Israel in 1967 and in turn he endedup having to retreat.
The facts of the matter is that Palestine and the rest of the Middle East tried to do away with Israel(much like Hitler), now Israel will give back that land for peace with the Middle East and that will work for a while but make NO mistake, the everlasting Middle East hate for israel which they call "Zionists" will not be pacified until they try and crush Israel again.
If you have watched the news Yasser Arafat TODAY has said that he would rule Jerusalem and that it would be the capital of Palestine and Jerusalem is historically the Land of Israel.
It doesnt bother me if Israel wants to make peace with Palestine if thats what they choose, but dont blmae if I say I told you so when down the road the same mess starts all over again.
The history of the Middle East has been a bloody one and the problem with the middle East is not "Zionism", it is "radical Islam".
All that said good luck to them if it gives both sides some peace, at least for a short time.

Mel

May 1st, 2003, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by majrmembr
Ha ha ha...well of course the US WON! Who is questioning THAT? But will it reduce global terrorism...well, that has almost become a joke at this point hasn't it?

30 Apr 2003, 21:21 UTC
The State Department, in its annual report on global terrorism, says the number of terror attacks declined sharply last year due to increased international cooperation and resolve.

The State Department says there were 199 terrorist attacks last year, a 44 percent drop from 2001 and the lowest figure in more than 30 years.

majrmembr

May 1st, 2003, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by Mel
30 Apr 2003, 21:21 UTC
The State Department, in its annual report on global terrorism, says the number of terror attacks declined sharply last year due to increased international cooperation and resolve.

The State Department says there were 199 terrorist attacks last year, a 44 percent drop from 2001 and the lowest figure in more than 30 years.

That's an interesting statistic, if you like to believe State Dept. war propaganda. Plus I think you are confusing the issues. The war on terrorism is a GLOBAL effort that goes vastly beyond the conflict in Iraq. Seeing as Bush likes to harp on the point as terrorism threats as THE main reason for the Iraq war, you will note nations that are much more guilty of supporting global terror such as the Saudi's have not seen a single bomb. I wonder why? (OIL)

And I am not trying to be fecetious by saying oil either. Now that the US controls Iraqi oil they have in effect eliminated their dependence on Saudi oil. Opec's refusal to cut production in light of the Iraq situation is proof that the Saudi's are anxious to remain in the loop of international supply now that they are no longer the biggest player in the game. Everyone knows where the money came from that funded 911 and now is when the Saudi's are really going feel it as the US begins pumping serious cash into Iraq.

Mel

May 1st, 2003, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by majrmembr
That's an interesting statistic, if you like to believe State Dept. war propaganda.

Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeease that’s a bit of a stretch is it not. You make it sound as if there were a bunch of terrorist attacks that killed a bunch of people and they are not telling us about them. It is a fact that can be easily checked and verified.

Iraq was a small battle in the fight against global terrorism just like Afghanistan was.

As for the Saudi's I would partially agree with you. With Saddam gone there is no reason to have our troops their or be dependent on there oil. Why should we buy oil from a country where the revenues go to a select few when we can buy oil from a country where the revenues go to the people, People that are working toward freedom and democracy.

BadDragon

May 2nd, 2003, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by NotHome
When the bombers choose military and governmental targets, they will get world support. Until then they are simply terrorists and must be wiped out. And for as long as the images of arabs rejoicing over the killing of school children fill my television, I will consider them an uncivilized society embracing what amounts to an evil religion.

Action speaks louder than words - and lately the actions of Islamic Arab men has proven the words of the clerics wrong. It is time for the majority of muslims to purge the filth from their ranks and prove they are a good, peace loving people. That is not a job for the US or any other country to do, it is something that must be done from within.

Israel is not innocent, they aggrevate a lot of the problems but they don't specifically target civilians. They do however take almost no care in reducing civilian injury/death when reacting to a terror attack and this is wrong, very wrong. Israel is just the lessor of two evils in this conflict.

NotHome

And also the fact, that their military has killed over 4,000 palestinians so far this year, most of them, protesters and such, does not make them look good, or help their cause any.

BD

Lithium666

May 2nd, 2003, 09:24 PM

Originally posted by Mel
Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeease that’s a bit of a stretch is it not. You make it sound as if there were a bunch of terrorist attacks that killed a bunch of people and they are not telling us about them. It is a fact that can be easily checked and verified.

Iraq was a small battle in the fight against global terrorism just like Afghanistan was.

How do you verify this "fact"? Where do you get independant figures from?

The state dept's stats have to be taken with a huge pinch of salt. For example the state dept and ---- Cheney classified Nelson Mandella as a terrorist. They also classified Al queda as freedom fighters. Why should we now believe classifications have not been changed to suit their requirements.

As for Iraq. People forget the Iraqi regime was secular. Bush may wish to group them with Al Queda and the like, but the fact is Islamic groups despised Saddam & Co.

Bush has repeatedly failed to link Iraq with terrorism. I'm sorry but the "classified" excuse doesnt cut it. If he can't make & prove his case in public why should we believe him? Because he's the President? Well you wouldn't take his word if he wanted to close your local hospital! So why take it when he wants to go to war?

These feable attempts to link Iraq and Al Queda came about when other excuses for this war failed to convince! A good example is the attempt to use a video of Bin Laden asking Muslims to support their Iraqi brothers. They conveniantly negelcted to show the rest of the video which showed Bin Laden calling Saddam an infidel who deserved no support.

If Bush wants people linked to Al Queda he should look closer to home. The CIA would be a good start, they provided more funding (estimated $2 billion) then any Arab nation!

xsforce

May 17th, 2003, 08:35 AM

OK. I'm still wondering...Where Are The Weapons of Mass Distruction??????????????
:R

markAdeck

May 17th, 2003, 09:03 AM

Who cares where they are! We got rid of a bunch of those worthless camel jockey's, not enough, but it is a step in the right direction. When all the namby pamby's in this country wake up and see that Muslim's want every white Christian in the world dead, it will be too late.

paul13usa

May 17th, 2003, 09:17 AM

i say lets make i'm a state and then they"ll have to deal with the irs then they"ll find out what a real weapon of mass destruction is.

BadDragon

May 17th, 2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by markAdeck
Who cares where they are! We got rid of a bunch of those worthless camel jockey's, not enough, but it is a step in the right direction. When all the namby pamby's in this country wake up and see that Muslim's want every white Christian in the world dead, it will be too late.

What if your an American citizen and not a white christian, what then, back to the slave pens, I suppose. Not trying to start a flame war, but the issue is just bigger than that.

markAdeck

May 17th, 2003, 10:33 AM

I thought about the wording of that and decided to leave it as was. But I will clarify it somewhat. Americans of color no matter what the shade of skin, or shape of eyes are probably a little safer. More convertable to Islam is how those goofball's may think. But as soon as they figure out you are a dyed in the wool Christian you are just as worthless to them as the Whites. Sorry for the poor wording.

xsforce

May 17th, 2003, 10:53 AM

I still say that Bush had better find the WMDs because that was his reason for the war! He talked too much rhetoric about these weapons and how the US is unsafe until he disarms Iraq. That was a JOKE! Saddam is gone. Who cares? After about 26 billion dollars and over 100 American servicemen killed, how did the war make the US safer? Sooner or later, Bush will have to adress that question!

BadDragon

May 17th, 2003, 10:59 AM

quote
----------------------
I thought about the wording of that and decided to leave it as was. But I will clarify it somewhat. Americans of color no matter what the shade of skin, or shape of eyes are probably a little safer. More convertable to Islam is how those goofball's may think. But as soon as they figure out you are a dyed in the wool Christian you are just as worthless to them as the Whites. Sorry for the poor wording.

-----------------------------------

Don't be. With so much PC now a days, its almost impossible to state the obvious, whereas I may not totally agree with you. Whether we want to or not, it looks like we're headed towards a gigantic struggle, east vs west or northern hemisphere vs the southern ones, or more simply, Whites (North Am and Europe) vs the rest. It could be the end result of the colonial and imperialist phase we went through and maybe not. But it sure does look, we're heading that way, if Jesus was alive today, he would weep.

BadDragon

paul13usa

May 17th, 2003, 12:52 PM

look bush won't have to justify anything.its my country(usa) history to do what it damn well pleases. there would have been no vietnam ho chi ming wanted to sit down with truman and become a province like the phillaphines he told them to go get f**ked.afganistand isn't about terroist its about oil they wantbuild to a pipe line across it to get oil from the caspian sea. iraq is about oil.look at are war on drugs who benfits from that. how many countries have we taking there goverment out of power and put one in that condones drugs (the farming of popies for opium and herion)i say we hit the twin towers boy does that start ----.its about control we always have to have a buggyman so the american people can get lead around like sheep so the rich can make more money and cover their scandals.50 some odd years i watch this from one thing to another.ilove my country some of its actions i bow my head in shame.and i fought for it this is not a draft dogger talking.s**t read about the winter war in finland in 39 they need bullets we sent them bandages,they finally went to the nazis for help. we gave the indians ligour the hispanics and blacks crack and the whites credit its called control.