posted on December 17, 2002 01:52:59 PM new
Helen,
Re your list of countries - if you meant nukes, France, England, Russia, China and POSSIBLY North Korea and a bunch of former Soviet Countries.
However,the inspectors are looking for and the discussion is about Weapons of Mass Destruction which includes Chemical and Biological weapons and must include many more likely holders including Iran.
Re your comment "the only country that has ever used them" in reference to the US is incorrect. Iraq used them against the Kurds and possibly our troops in Desert Storm; Iran and Iraq against each other in their long war; Germany et al used them in WWI; Japan used them (sparingly) in WWII and there is some evidence the Soviets/North Koreans used them in Korea. There are probably other cases as well, these are the ones that come to mind.
posted on December 17, 2002 02:03:08 PM new
Craig Kilborn had an alternative last night to war. If Sean Penn can't defuse the situation, send the Baldwin brothers, Cher and Sarandon/Robbins. Then refuse them reentry to the US until Saddam resigns. If he doesn't quit within a week, send in the big guns, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Barbara Striesand , and if he still fails to resign, pull out all the stops and go with the truly horrible, Geraldo, Maury and Jerry Springer.
30 days of that and Ron Popiel can be on Iraqi TV selling Goat-a-Matics, just set it and forget it! Kabob spears available at extra cost.
posted on December 17, 2002 02:31:48 PM new
>"Borillar- We should not start a war over there if WOMD are found? We should negotiate with the psycho? We should respond with fear of their use? Asking if I would feel "better" if WOMD were aimed at our ground troops is the type of question asked by someone who has run out of sensible defenses for their position."
Ah! Now you get it! You can see what is wrong with Bush's nonsense, don't you? About this? That if Iraq has WOMD, then they will be sure to use them against our troops (what does Saddam have to look forward to if ousted?) Therefore, Bush is making retarded remarks on this subject, and he makes these silly and asinine suggestions only to impress the American People with his Big Talk. Can't you see that his stance to go attack Iraq in a ground war IF WOMD are found is just plain nonsense? Surely you can! Tell me it is so!
posted on December 17, 2002 02:38:03 PM new
bob9585
I was referring to nuclear weapons when I made that statement, "that the United States was the only contry that has used them".
Actually, the United States supplied the helicopters and biological weapons to Iraq which they used to gas their own people.
We used agent orange in Vietnam to gas people also...to destroy the rice or food supply of the viet cong...But then everyone was affected and the effects are still affecting those exposed.
And, I'm reading a book with an entire chapter devoted to the use of Chemical and Biological Weapons by the Uninted States abroad and another chapter detailing use of chemical and biological weapons by the United States at home. as close to me as Washington DC.
When I replied to Stusi's question, I was focused on countries in the mid east and korea with nuclear weapons...those countries that may use them when war begins in the mid east. I was not considering chemical and biological agents.
The hunt for weapons of mass destruction is just a charade. If they are NOT found, they will be declared HIDDEN. Some justification will be found for this war.
posted on December 17, 2002 03:05:08 PM new
Borillar-As much as I am not a Bush supporter, I must disagree with your assessment that he is trying to "impress the American people with his Big Talk". It is agreed that our troops may encounter unspeakable attacks. It is also true that Hussein and other such sicko egomaniacs may not be so quick to seek martyrdom while instructing their troops to do so. Using nuclear weapons on his own or directly neighboring turf is very unlikely. Using biological or chemical weapons on his own turf is more likely but not at the expense of his own safety. Once again I ask you, if we find WOMD should we not then attack Iraq? Why is it so difficult to get this answer from the anti-war faction? Perhaps because it would be an admittance of an indefensible position? Don't even think of using the negotiation idea as this guy has proven he is untrustworthy.
posted on December 17, 2002 04:33:13 PM new
stusi, the problem is not whether or not Iraq has weapons of mass destruction or fulfills the requirements of the UN charter! After all, GW Bush and the GOP side with the UN and make it all-fired sacrosanct when it fits into their agenda, but when it doesn't, the UN and its Rules and Measures and whatnot are nothing but whisps of fog. Silly you - if they don't honor the UN when they don't agree, why should Saddam and Iraq? Need I go on, sirrah?
posted on December 17, 2002 06:22:45 PM new
So it is a U.N. issue? The U.N. has been mostly ineffective in world affairs. If there was no U.N. what would your excuse be for not answering the question?
[ edited by stusi on Dec 17, 2002 07:01 PM ]
posted on November 4, 2003 12:38:18 AM new
Stusi Baby....
Your question is nearly one year old.
Now that WOMd have Not Been Found!!!
Does it make any damn difference to you at all??????
.............Hell No!!
For some people, somethings never change, regardlerss of new facts.
Linda still with the LOLs
Helen made statement then & it still stands.
"The hunt for weapons of mass destruction is just a charade. If they are NOT found, they will be declared HIDDEN. Some justification will be found for this war. "
posted on November 4, 2003 05:36:04 AM new
The question had nothing to do with WOMD! Please go back and read it carefully, since it seems you were waiting almost a year to throw it in my face.
posted on November 4, 2003 08:24:14 AM new
Hi Stu - since it seems you were waiting almost a year to throw it in my face.
Don't know if has waited almost a year or not. BUT I have noticed a recent pattern of his. That is when any poster who hasn't posted here for a while comes back, he must review their old posts. When he finds something he disagrees with or thinks he can use against the returning poster, he does so. It's happened with others too....not just you.
Some just can't handle that others might hold different opinions from theirs. So they resort to this kind of thing.
posted on November 4, 2003 08:52:46 AM new
Actually austbounty can't grasp the fact this is a US board and must continually stick his nose where it doesn't belong.
Just laugh at him... every board needs comedy relief and he provides some of the best, along with skylite...
posted on November 4, 2003 11:08:58 AM new
Yep that would be this boards "axis of evil"
Austy, skylite and helen . Well that or this boards three stooges, however you want to look at it.
Over 5,000 sheep died during their time on board what some Australian media dubbed the "ship of death" as more than 20 states turned them away on health grounds.
posted on November 4, 2003 04:43:22 PM new
Celebrity's are just regular citizens who have the same concerns as those who post here. Only difference is there viewpoints are publicized because they are known. Whats wrong with them speaking out or doing something because they feel compelled to do it? Y'all are just jealous because you probably couldn't afford to do it, even if you wanted to.
posted on November 4, 2003 04:58:53 PM new
Well, we probably could afford to go to Iraq, although right now, I'm not sure its a place for tourism, or if they are even allowing it. Given what is going on there now.
When Sean Penn went there almost a year ago, he did not go on a diplomatic mission. He went as an American citizen with his camera. He did not meet with Saddam and try to reason with Saddam to comply with the UN's resolutions, that Saddam and his regime refused, after agreeing to them.
Why did he go there? not for vacation. He knew he would get media coverage, because he is Sean Penn, and by doing this, try and show people here that the Iraqis are a peaceful people
I agree, the citizens of Iraq are, it was the regime that was running the place that were not.
Wanna Take a Ride? Art Bell is Back! Weekends on C2C-www.coasttocoastam.com
posted on November 4, 2003 06:01:27 PM new
The reason I've gone back, is to demonstrate to some of you extreme nationalists that you aproved of going to war on the basis of a lie.
You accepted the misrepresentations then and are yet to acknowledge the misrepresentations; in spite of EVIDENCE to the fact that the checkenhawks' intentional misrepresentations lead you like sheep.
posted on November 4, 2003 06:46:30 PM new
Hates or fears foreigners, hardly, only Austi's that have a unnatural sexual interest in eves.
Sheepophile, again nope. But again that is a phrase or word best describing a aussie like Austi that exibits sheep wool matted around the nether regions of their bodies.
Aust is from that part of Australia, where men are men & sheep are afraid....
Must be why he maned his first "kid" BAAAAAAAAAA
"Another plague upon the land, as devastating as the locusts God loosed on the Egyptians, is "Political Correctness.'" --Charlton Heston
posted on November 4, 2003 07:37:37 PM new
Linda_K- You are right, of course. The truth is that I believe in our effort in Iraq, WOMD or not! I do have problems with the current killings of our guys. A better plan is necessary.
posted on November 4, 2003 08:33:53 PM new
“A war is coming.. get use to it. We'll do what we have to.
If he wages a war, and nothing is found he would be committing political suicide.
He, and the people behind him are not fools."
Reverend Colin “ on Jan 29, 2003 06:23 AM
It sounds like Colin doesn't think Bush will get in again.
That sounds like a good plan to me.
I'll be sure to cut and paste some more in a year from now.
Oh yes Nearthesea "list of why we went to war with Iraq" is getting much longer as ammendments are made.
As reasons A,B&C are forgotten.
A.Responsibillity for WTC.
B.Nuclear WOMD
C.Biological WOMD
posted on November 4, 2003 08:58:56 PM new
12
American board????? You keep saying.
Your idea of liberty & free speech are a fallacy,
I am OWED the right to speak on your turf, because I pay a few dollars a month.
The Best democracy money can Buy!!!
Now 12, don't go CUTTIN' A RUSTY,
but if I can convince just one person to vote against Bush in the next ellections, then your vote will count as a blank.
I wonder what you'd do then 12, would you again feel the need to go back & LICK YOUR CALF OVER.
posted on November 4, 2003 09:39:09 PM new
Aust, don't have any link or url, as it was on the radio, and I listen to the radio alot.
You pay to post here? for real? I put a CC up, but they never dinged it once...
Now, can't we all just get along?
btw, do you get Art Bell down under? (OT, but serious question, when I do listen late at night, he has an international line, but can't remember any Australians call in)
Wanna Take a Ride? Art Bell is Back! Weekends on C2C-www.coasttocoastam.com
posted on November 5, 2003 12:16:19 AM newActually austbounty can't grasp the fact this is a US board and must continually stick his nose where it doesn't belong.
A US board? Really?
I've been here since '98 and they have always allowed everyone from countries all over the world here.
WoW, unbelievable. Where does it say that in the terms of use? Please show me. Or did you just become management, twelvepole? Is it on the Announcement Board?
posted on November 5, 2003 04:05:36 AM new
Twelvepole- As much as my thoughts on assbounty are no secret, I am quite surprised at your declaration of this being a US board. Perhaps, however, his paying "a few dollars a month" is the new Vendio whacko tax.
posted on November 8, 2003 09:23:16 PM new
twelve, you amaze me with your self-created delusional boundries of who can and cant do what on a public message board! (Do you ever stop to think how ridiculous you sound sometimes?)
If Aussie pays a few dollars probably means he is vendio service member (uses their auction services)and fully enjoys the right to post here even though you dont have use their services to post.
posted on November 9, 2003 01:13:19 AM new
Twelve only emulates the attitude of his heroes in Washington in his belief that the world has nothing of value to say.
If he can't shout it down with insults it is declared to be irrelevant and ignored. That's the image we need as a people, arrogant and unwilling to hear the ideas of others.
Republican, the other white meat!
