posted on March 31, 2003 09:31:17 AM new
colin
Being that you want to get those responsible for 9/11.
Even though there is no world wide recognition of any association to Iraq, there is however recognition of cia training of alqaida and being that you ‘know’ that saddam is responsible I’m assuming pentagon had to do with the crap Saddam got his hands on.
You asked me to move the crater to where it would help.
Well I’m telling you where some of those terrorists are, so why not get’em.
And the ‘humane’ bit, well that was just my attempt at sarcastic humour. You know, how drumsfeld is concerned for Iraqi civilians.
The fact that the PNAC does not have room for the discovery of truth re: 9/11 suggests to me, that they have something to hide, and I don’t think that protecting any ‘source’ would weigh in that heavily.
I’m certainly no terrorist.
But if I felt that my children’s lives were in eminent danger and the only way I had to prevent it was to be one, I most certainly would be, & I trust you would too.
Matter of fact, if my children lost their lives because of an a-hole, (and I even slowed down typing, horrid thought), I would probably still be a terrorist just for revenge. As I think you might too.
I think if osama and his palls had the military strength to achieve their ‘goal’ they might even don a military uniform; and even sign a formal declaration first just to amuse them selves. But they didn’t have the military strength, so they became terrorists.
Similarly our paramilitary covert groups allegedly operate among us. Like they infiltrate gangs, or even political organisations. I don’t know, it’s cheaper, easier, quicker.
But no, I’m no terrorist, I don’t have a motive.
posted on March 31, 2003 02:24:31 PM new
The British view. The British press has been fairly loyal to Tony Blair by only strongly criticizing him for mistakenly aligning himself with the US, and passing on the major criticisms for diplomatic and military problems to the Bush administration.
Dissent grows over war strategy
As militants try to 'Islamise' the conflict in Iraq, questions are being asked about how the war was planned and how it is being fought, writes Brian Whitaker
Monday March 31, 2003
American leaders moved swiftly yesterday to prevent the opening up of another front in the war - this time between Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, and his military chiefs.
The fuss is over an article published today in the New Yorker magazine, which blames Mr Rumsfeld for many of the problems on the battlefield.
It says that in the planning stages of the war, the defence secretary and his team of civilian advisers repeatedly overruled the military experts because they thought they knew better.
Both Mr Rumsfeld and the war commander, General Tommy Franks, have denied the allegations - though it's an open secret that Mr Rumsfeld's style of management has annoyed many in the Pentagon.
Meanwhile, a sign of possible dissent in the British ranks is a report this morning that three unnamed soldiers from the 16 Air Assault Brigade have been sent home to face a court martial. They are understood to have complained about the way the war is being fought and the growing danger to civilians.
Following the first suicide bombing of the war, which killed four American soldiers on Saturday, Iraq has claimed for have more than 4,000 other volunteers ready to "martyr" themselves.
Although Saddam Hussein's regime is largely secular, religious militants throughout the region will probably make strenuous efforts over the coming months to "Islamise" the conflict - as happened during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad group yesterday issued a statement announcing "the good news" that the first of its suicide bombers had arrived in Baghdad. Because of the extremely tight security in Israel, American and British troops in Iraq are likely to become an easier and more attractive target for the foreseeable future.
Angered by the TV images of civilian casualties and the feeble efforts of their own governments to prevent the war, Arabs from various countries have been volunteering to fight in Iraq. Reports mention 100 in Algeria and 50 in Egypt. In Lebanon, 20 volunteers are said to have already gone, while hundreds more have applied for Iraqi visas.
In northern Kuwait yesterday, 15 US soldiers were injured when a civilian charged at them in a pick-up truck just outside their base at Camp Udairi. The attacker, said to be an Egyptian migrant worker, was shot and critically injured.
Bombing in and around Baghdad continued relentlessly over the weekend - though the US says three-quarters of the attacks are aimed at weakening the Republican Guard, which has set up a protective cordon around the city. Early this morning the information ministry was in flames, having been targeted by Tomahawk cruise missiles to "reduce the command and control capabilities" of the Iraqi government, according to the US.
One of the ministry's main functions is to supervise foreign journalists working in Iraq, and normally they are required to file reports from the ministry building so that their activities can be monitored. Night-time scenes of Baghdad frequently shown by CNN came from a camera on the ministry's roof. Ahead of the attack, much of the media activity had been transferred to the Palestine Hotel.
Also this morning, there are reports of significant military activity around Nassiriya where, according to the BBC, 5,000 additional US troops, including special forces, are being sent in an effort to defeat continuing Iraqi resistance.
A dawn raid on Shatra, north of the Nassiriya, reportedly targeted Saddam's cousin, "Chemical Ali", and other senior Iraqi officials who are believed to be directing guerrilla attacks in the area.
In Nassiriya itself, the US says marines have found large quantities of gas masks and anti-nerve gas chemicals in an abandoned Iraqi camp. It is reported this morning that American troops are attempting to communicate with Iraqis in the field via a hand-held electronic box known as a Phrasealator, which was first tried out in Afghanistan.
posted on March 31, 2003 02:53:36 PM new
Austy,
Get off those commie websites and start reading other things.
Your becoming very narrow minded.
Saddams regime is a part of the over all Terrorism coming out of the Middle east.
Even though you may not like to admit it, He's done terrible things to his own people and those around him.
The Middle east and the Militant Muslims are a time bomb waiting to go off. Either we defuse it now of pay the consequences.
It's not a great thing we are doing, It's something we must do.
We don't like to scrub the garbage pail but we do have to clean it with a good washing from time to time.
When I perceived someone became a threat to one of my children I took immediate action. Usually non violent but as you know I can be intimidating (our joke)
History will tell if this was the right thing to do. We can argue and debate all we want to no avail.
I believe in ruling with an iron hand. You believe in protesting and kissing the enemies A**.
As the ground campaign against Saddam Hussein faltered last week, with attenuated supply lines and a lack of immediate reinforcements, there was anger in the Pentagon. Several senior war planners complained to me in interviews that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his inner circle of civilian advisers, who had been chiefly responsible for persuading President Bush to lead the country into war, had insisted on micromanaging the war’s operational details. Rumsfeld’s team took over crucial aspects of the day-to-day logistical planning—traditionally, an area in which the uniformed military excels—and Rumsfeld repeatedly overruled the senior Pentagon planners on the Joint Staff, the operating arm of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “He thought he knew better,” one senior planner said. “He was the decision-maker at every turn.”
On at least six occasions, the planner told me, when Rumsfeld and his deputies were presented with operational plans—the Iraqi assault was designated Plan 1003—he insisted that the number of ground troops be sharply reduced. Rumsfeld’s faith in precision bombing and his insistence on streamlined military operations has had profound consequences for the ability of the armed forces to fight effectively overseas. “They’ve got no resources,” a former high-level intelligence official said. “He was so focussed on proving his point—that the Iraqis were going to fall apart.”
The critical moment, one planner said, came last fall, during the buildup for the war, when Rumsfeld decided that he would no longer be guided by the Pentagon’s most sophisticated war-planning document, the TPFDL—time-phased forces-deployment list—which is known to planning officers as the tip-fiddle (tip-fid, for short). A TPFDL is a voluminous document describing the inventory of forces that are to be sent into battle, the sequence of their deployment, and the deployment of logistical support. “It’s the complete applecart, with many pieces,” Roger J. Spiller, the George C. Marshall Professor of military history at the U.S. Command and General Staff College, said. “Everybody trains and plans on it. It’s constantly in motion and always adjusted at the last minute. It’s an embedded piece of the bureaucratic and operational culture.” A retired Air Force strategic planner remarked, “This is what we do best—go from A to B—and the tip-fiddle is where you start. It’s how you put together a plan for moving into the theatre.” Another former planner said, “Once you turn on the tip-fid, everything moves in an orderly fashion.” A former intelligence officer added, “When you kill the tip-fiddle, you kill centralized military planning. The military is not like a corporation that can be streamlined. It is the most inefficient machine known to man. It’s the redundancy that saves lives.”
posted on April 1, 2003 12:29:50 AM new
Colin,
I do not deny saddam has done terrible things to his people, so your wrong there for starters.
And as I perceive it, many American & UK and I gues now Australian actions past and present are at the root of many issues which threaten my children. And if I though strapping a bomb to myself (or crusifiction as bear offered me) were the only way to ensure removal of that threat, then I’d do it, As I’m sure you would too.
“Militant Muslims are a time bomb waiting to go off” as are militant christians and bikers. But you see, these people are not just natives of the middle east.
I might be inclined to agree there is a fuse set and it must be diffused but don’t forget, ‘you’ set it. And to think with ‘certainty’ that you are able to diffuse it in this manner, shows your close mindedness and even self-riotousness.
“History will tell if this was the right thing to do. We can argue and debate all we want to no avail.”
We can discover the truth Colin.
“I believe in ruling with an iron hand. You believe in protesting and kissing the enemies A**. “
If a man called bob or colin had slaves 100 years ago, Im sure that sentiment would have gone down just as well, and you could probably easily convince Linda to follow. (our Joke)
posted on April 1, 2003 03:54:17 AM new
austy,
Your posts make no sense at all. You were better off clip & pasting.
I'm a face to face type person. Never would I even consider strapping on a bomb and blowing people up. If you would, I'm right about you needing counseling. I've always considers suicide a cowardly thing to do. Cowardly for anyone that's not mentally ill I should say.
I have no use for militant Christian but have never heard of them blowing themselves and the people around them up. Outlaw bikers on the other hand have been known to blow up rival gangs...but again not themselves.
The truths your looking for are Not there. The conspiracy you post to the boards are not true or half truths.
You seem to be looking for the answer to life. It's different for everyone. You won't find yours in the message board.
Go out, meet some people that aren't full of hate and misinformed alliance. Take up a hobby. If you have children, spend more time with them.
This last post of yours sounds desperate. I don't like hearing that. Time for you to make some changes. Stop reading the pinko crap, read a good book. Maybe something by Ayn Rand.
posted on April 1, 2003 11:59:37 AM new
"The article quoted the senior planner as saying Rumsfeld had to "do the war on the cheap" and believed that precision bombing would bring victory."
Then antiquary said: "Typical administration/neoconservative approach to everything."
The Rumsfeld war plan also had to be designed with a far smaller military than we had in 1991. To refresh some memories, defense spending fell in absolute terms in seven of eight years of the Clinton Presidency. At the time this was called the "peace dividend," believe it or not. Colin Powell was able to deploy the Ronald Reagan war machine in 1991; Mr. Rumsfeld inherited the rump Clinton model, about 40% smaller in troops, older planes and ships.
The question is not what a man can scorn, or disparage, or find fault with, but what he can love, and value, and appreciate. J. Ruskin
