posted on March 21, 2003 12:40:31 PM newbut I imagine for some posters here, they've probably got their popcorn and beer set up in front of the TV.
What a despicable thing to say. What the hell is wrong with you?
I notice you don't have the least bit of criticism for Saddam for subjecting his "beloved" city and people to this. Just criticism toward America. He could have just left and lived on his millions that he has stashed away in Swiss bank accounts. Paris would have happily taken in their old friend.
sidenote: Anyone else find it interesting that Kuwait is being bombarded with Scuds that Saddam "doesn't have". So what else "doesn't he have" that we'll find?
posted on March 21, 2003 02:29:09 PM new
Well now... Ari said people like Helen, are American after all... just not able to provide any solutions but feel they need to throw some tantrums like children...
posted on March 21, 2003 04:09:03 PM new
KatyD - Anyone else find it interesting that Kuwait is being bombarded with Scuds that Saddam "doesn't have". Yes, I did. Deuce posted that yesterday, and I responded....but you won't find one of the anti-war people admitting to it. They are never wrong.
posted on March 21, 2003 07:11:26 PM new
The bombing in Baghdad also killed a Palestinian terrorist that was wanted by the US. He masterminded the Achille Lauro ship hi-jacking and murder of an American passenger.
Oh my, there are actually terrorists in Iraq ? I thought this was all about oil and American imperialism and had nothing to do with terrorism.
posted on March 21, 2003 07:57:34 PM new
There are terrorists in nearly every country. The fact that one was killed in Iraq accidentally doesn't lead to the conclusion that we are there to kill terrorists. We are there to increase the Bush power base, strategic position and oil, of course.
The latest justification is that we are there to liberate the Iraqis...by dropping 3,000 bombs on their heads.
posted on March 21, 2003 08:52:30 PM new
The hawk’s ’tactics’ are still gestating.
I’m confident that no one with a brain in their head would believe that Turkish involvement, which has been invited, could possibly contribute to a ‘low friction’ resolution to this war, for those that the 'willing' are claiming to liberate.
The Turks and the Kurds have a long history of friction, one could be forgiven for thinking, even if incorrectly, that their involvement is intended to create further division of the global Muslim community.
But Bush has given his word & ‘promised’ safety for the Kurds, just as Reagan falsely promised the Palestinian families safety in Lebanon, prior to pulling out. But I guess any man can make a ‘mistake’, and when acting on advice of ‘trusted’ neo-conservative advisers, perhaps we should be forgiving and say that he’s not evil, but just dumb, for trusting an incompetent or deceptive group of advisers.
I also heard on the radio, don’t know if it’s true, that the Kurds in the North of Iraq will be responsible for taking care of the POW’s of Iraq. Wow! Can you imagine, do you think that would be anything like asking Israel to ‘look after’ former Nazi soldiers.
Do you think these might be divide and conquer tactics?
posted on March 21, 2003 09:21:38 PM new
Another thing I noticed about these so called "peace" protestors, was the use of masks.
I noticed the cops all do that now too. In fact they often have no badge or specific ID as to what organization they are with. But I guess if they have a big gun that tells us their authority...
I'm back tonight to read more of your dribble. If you don't feel that the war effort is a good idea, then what is?
Saddam has scoffed at the first UN resolution. If he failed to recogineze the first one, why would he recoginze any additional ones.
Diplomacy failed. Saddam has used up all the time allowed. There is a starting time and an ending time for everything. Since 1991, and the end of the 1st Gulf War, he's had the chance to destroy all the weapons he originally agreed to. However he failed to comply. When the weapons inspectors were in iraq, Saddam said they would find none because they were none. Now during a time of war, he threatens to use the same weapons he denied having. Does that make any sense to you?
If your ideas are so great, why don't you go to iraq and restart talks with them? Afterall, the people that went there originally were probably not as skillful as you.
Are you aware that Saddam has chemical, and biological weapons that if not used on US, the USA, by Saddam's army, then by anyone he wants to give them to?
Why are you starting to ignore reamond's posts? Is the truth starting to make you crack? Or could another opinion other than your's offend you?
Your juvenile taunts are disrupting this thread. Sorry, Helen. This is still a free message board open to all that feel like posting. If you want to exclude anyone, then start your own message board with like minded people. It might require a password to enter. My password could be 9-11.
If you are upset about the comment "Deine Fuhrerin" please check to see who started that "disruptive" comment. It will be you thinking pal, austbounty. You should appreciate the fact that I used the proper article when addressing you.
maybe you and your friends and fellow protestors could start collecting material for some new uniforms for the iraqi army. They look pretty shabby. The clothes at the local Goodwill look like the high dollar line.
posted on March 21, 2003 10:21:57 PM new
To read chomsky is to remember what George Orwell cautioned
us about in "Animal Farm" Beware of the totalitarians use
of newspeak when up is really down, peace is really
war, and freedom is really slavery. Orwell had chomsky
in mind.
posted on March 21, 2003 11:36:16 PM new
Yes, up is really down, peace is really
war, freedom is really slavery, and "Animal Farm" is really "1984." An Orwellian nightmare indeed.
posted on March 22, 2003 01:41:40 AM new
I just don't get it.):
This is a man, his sons and his cronies who have killed, maimed, tortured, raped, starved, bombed, poisoned and dislocated probably more than 5 million people through his years of power.
Sometimes war has to be fought and in my opinion this is one of those times.
posted on March 22, 2003 04:06:28 AM new
keiichem,
Hi, I've not seen your ID before, I'm austbounty.
Some of our comrades here have evaded a factor, which may be an underlying fuelling of this turmoil.
You seem to be one of the intelligencia: Do you think that there are any members of the PNAC which have any association with any group which may seen as Jewish, Hebrew, Israelite, or dare I say Zionist?
If so, do you think their presence can be considered ‘out of balance’ when measured against their proportional representation in the wider American community.
Do you think there may therefore be a possibility of a conflict of interests, as we saw in 59 when Israel attempted to damage US/Muslim relations by blowing up Americans and attempting to give the appearance that the terrorist acts were undertaken by Egyptians.
I fear you may be right, perhaps there is an attempt to give the appearance that up is down, when the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
I thank you in advance for your honest, and what I think will be a most enlightening answer.
posted on March 22, 2003 04:49:36 AM new
Thank you, keiichem, for posting a very good look at how the leaders of the 'anti-American' and 'blame America first group' think. How they twist what our nation does/has done, how they profess a better way of government even of those that have failed miserably. But hey....when you hate what America stands for....but fully enjoy the benefits that same country gives you...you have the best of all worlds.
For forty years, Noam Chomsky has turned out book after book, pamphlet after pamphlet and speech after speech with one message, and one message alone: America is the Great Satan; it is the fount of evil in the world.
In Chomsky's demented universe, America is responsible not only for its own bad deeds, but for the bad deeds of others, including those of the terrorists who struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In this attitude he is the medium for all those who now search the ruins of Manhattan not for the victims and the American dead, but for the "root causes" of the catastrophe that befell them.
to make a link clickable just use this code:
[url$]YourLinkHereNoSpaces[/url$]
and remove the $$.
posted on March 22, 2003 05:48:39 AM new
snowyegret - How do you reconcile your beliefs in regards to how badly your country [in your view] has behaved, with the fact that your husband has served/currently serves that same country?
posted on March 22, 2003 07:04:12 AM new
David Horiwitz is a right wing commentator and reporter for the Jerusalem Post. It doesn't surprise me that many of you find him acceptable.
I believe the Chomski article is excellent. Again, I have to say that finding fault does not translate to hate.
LindaYou state...
"In Chomsky's demented universe, America is responsible not only for its own bad deeds, but for the bad deeds of others, including those of the terrorists who struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In this attitude he is the medium for all those who now search the ruins of Manhattan not for the victims and the American dead, but for the "root causes" of the catastrophe that befell them."
Searching for the root cause of a problem is not demented. Every problem that you solve must be examined carefully for a cause. Otherwise, your search for a solution would sometimes become a never ending hit and miss, in the dark affair
Recognizing the root cause and making an effort to correct the cause is how intelligent people solve problems.
Bush, on the other hand prefers to have never ending wars. Last night, I read this article about Bush's view of the Israeli, Palestinian conflict. He clearly reveals his thought process...gut reaction...shot in the dark and in this case another permanent war.
posted on March 22, 2003 07:23:53 AM new
Linda, I consider it as engagement to make such reprehensible abuses public, on the order of whistleblowing. While I may be whistling in the dark, we as Americans can do better. I believe our service members deserve the highest consideration before sending them overseas to face death and disability for corporate interests.
The vets I know are mainly Vietnam, and all of them are rather cynical about the motives that drive this war. They support their brothers.
fixspelling
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
[ edited by snowyegret on Mar 22, 2003 07:24 AM ]
posted on March 22, 2003 07:28:02 AM new
I didn't state that...I agreed with that statement.
Sure...exam all. But when one [Chomsky and those who think like him] ALWAYS puts the blame for EVERYTHING that happens in this world at the American door step...that isn't a balanced view or opinion. That's anti-American and 'blame America first' thinking, imo. Surely you aren't claiming Chomsky is pro-America. He's not......
posted on March 22, 2003 07:40:39 AM new
Linda, I was speaking for myself, as a member of the Loyal Opposition. Can't speak for Chomsky or Coulter, for that matter.
It's sort of like those who blame Clinton for everything, just a different blamee.
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on March 22, 2003 07:41:57 AM new
Of course you agreed with it Linda. I believe everyone understood that. I suppose I should have said Linda cut and pasted the following remark.
posted on March 22, 2003 07:50:48 AM new
snowyegret - on the order of whistleblowing. That whistle's been blowing for many years. From your article it appears that neither the Clinton administration, nor different Congressional groups haven't done anything about it. Maybe they don't see the 'problem' in the same way?
We as Americans can do better. One can always strive to do better. But when I compare my country to others, I find mine least offensive.
I believe our service members deserve the highest consideration before sending them overseas to face death and disability for corporate interests. I do too....but I don't see these Iraq, NK, Iran, Afghansitan issues as 'for corporate interests, but rather as national security issues.
The vets I know are mainly Vietnam, and all of them are rather cynical about the motives that drive this war. They support their brothers. We know many Vietnam vets too....not one has mentioned that this is just like Vietnam, because it's not. Not the same at all. We also know Desert Storm vets who support this action. So, it's only natural there would be vets from all the different wars....some supportive, some not of this administrations decision. Just like in the general population.
posted on March 22, 2003 07:55:59 AM new
::I’m confident that no one with a brain in their head would believe that Turkish involvement, which has been invited, could possibly contribute to a ‘low friction’ resolution to this war, for those that the 'willing' are claiming to liberate. ::
Aust - there's one huge flaw in this... The Turks were NOT invited and when they announced that they were sending troops in to northern Iraq the US was not happy, had not agreed to it. Ii seen it as a potentially huge problem
"A more imminent concern for the KRG is coping with the military activities of different groups during any conflict. The country is likely to be overrun by forces from Iraq, the USA, Turkey, militias loyal to the Kurdish factions, Islamist movements such as Ansar al-Islam, and the Iranian-backed Badr Corps of the Supreme Council for Islamic Resistance in Iraq."
What chaos that will be!!!
Helen
This topic is 7 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new
From your article it appears that neither the Clinton administration, nor different Congressional groups haven't done anything about it. Maybe they don't see the 'problem' in the same way?