STOP THE RUSH TO WAR
Most Americans agree that Iraq's longtime dictator, Saddam Hussein, is
a sadistic thug. Despite this, White House calls for a massive,
preemptive invasion of Iraq are dangerously misguided, and not in tune
with Americans' current priorities. Take Action!
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/flo?y=eL2j0BAw7f0FDj0W5O0An
Nobody can predict how a U.S. invasion would fare, but we can be
reasonably sure of a few things: It will cost tens of billions of
dollars, alienate our allies in Europe and the Middle East, kill many
civilians, further dim prospects for peace between Israel and
Palestinians, explicitly violate the UN Charter and increase the
likelihood Hussein might launch his nastiest anti-civilian weapons
against our troops or Israel.
Invading Iraq will not lessen the threat of terrorism against the
United States, and may actually increase it. No evidence has been
produced linking Iraq to the September 11 attacks, and a U.S. war
against Iraq could incite stronger support for Al Qaeda across the
Arab and Muslim worlds.
Tell President Bush invading Iraq would be a terrible mistake. Take Action!
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/flo?y=eL2j0BAw7f0FDj0W5O0An
**Please forward this newsletter to your friends and help spread the
word about this important campaign!
-ACTIVISM OPPORTUNITIES-
SUPPORT TREATY ON HUMAN RIGHTS FOR WOMEN
U.S. ratification of the treaty for the rights of women is long
overdue. Urge President Bush to use the full powers of his office to
strongly support ratification.
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/flo?y=eL2j0BAw7f0FDj0W5P0Ao
OPPOSE BACKDOOR LOGGING PROPOSAL
The Bush administration is using the present, devastating fire season
to advance a proposal that would promote commercial logging under the
guise of fire prevention. Urge the Senate to oppose the plan and focus
instead on proposals that would reduce the risk of fire in our forests
without risking the forests themselves.
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/flo?y=eL2j0BAw7f0FDj0W5Q0Ap
**Please forward this newsletter to your friends and help spread the
word about these important campaigns!
TIME TO CAST YOUR VOTE
Each year, Working Assets donates millions of dollars to progressive
nonprofit groups out of our revenues. If you use one of Working
Assets' services (long distance, credit card, wireless, ShopForChange
and GiveForChange) you are eligible to vote.
Since 1985, we've raised nearly $30 million in donations. This year
alone, we hope to raise $4 million for 50 worthy groups. The great
news is, customers play a critical role in deciding who gets how much.
If you are already a customer, please take a moment now to vote. Want
more of the money channeled to organizations working for world peace?
Civil liberties? Environmental protection? Fine by us. Want all groups
to receive an equal amount? We'll see to it. The important thing is to
vote. This year's donation ballot is available online at
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/flo?y=eL2j0BAw7f0FDj0RiG0AS
posted on August 29, 2002 01:35:06 PM new
"Nobody can predict how a U.S. invasion would fare"
This must be an attempt at humour. Iraq's army is half the size of '91 with ancient equipment
"It will cost tens of billions of dollars"
I would think we would bill-back Iraq at the very least.
"kill many civilians"
Doubtful
"further dim prospects for peace between Israel and Palestinians"
There are none.
"explicitly violate the UN Charter"
The Charter itself or the resolution for the '91 action the administration says is still in effect?
"likelihood Hussein might launch his nastiest anti-civilian weapons against our troops or Israel"
They don't work nearly as well against troops as they do women and kids. But if he DID use them, you could probably cut the amount of time the operation takes in half. And the Israelis are not gonna be nice about it.
posted on August 29, 2002 03:14:29 PM new
I read your link. The guy just sounds nuts to me. 'Let's get this bastard before he develops nuclear capability?' Then whom should we get? And then after that?
If the writer is so concerned about the "Arabian world" then let them deal with him, which is what they want.
The writer rationalizes that *threatening* a first nuuclear strike is a deterrent. So why doesn't he advocate *that* if he has to yak?
Personally, I'm going to spend my attention on this other danger to the world: Bush. Hussein is not the only one dancing by himself.
posted on August 29, 2002 05:47:28 PM new
I dunno. I'm thinking it would be pretty damn hard for Saddam to just fly a war plane into our airspace and drop a nuke. How is he going to attack us unless we are over there? His neighbors have a lot more to worry about than we do and they don't seem overly alarmed.
posted on August 29, 2002 06:24:15 PM new
"pretty damn hard for Saddam to just fly a war plane into our airspace and drop a nuke. How is he going to attack us unless we are over there?"
He doesn't have to. His dream is to be the leader of the united Arab world. All he has to be able to do is just provide a threat to the world's oil supply. This would rapidly plunge virtually every economy on the planet into a deep recession. It does not even matter that the US has plenty of its' own oil. Millions around the world will lose their jobs. In poor countries millions will die of starvation. All he has to do is say "I have missles and if you don't do THIS, I'll hit the (fill in the blank) oil fields."
"His neighbors have a lot more to worry about than we do and they don't seem overly alarmed"
There are "public" stances and "hidden" ones. The Saudis are not going to take a stand against him because they are chuck full Islamic wackos that they try desperatly to apease. Its' the same reason they stone women for adultery IN Saudi Arabia, while at the same time spend 3/4 of the year whore mongering and swilling booze in European & US Casinos.
The French and the Germans are heavily dependent on Mideast oil so they will sell their souls for it if need be. Meanwhile, France, of course, has an absolute crash program for nuclear power. The British has their own oil sources and gee, look whose buddy THEY are.
The degree of the threat is really not that hard to calculate. Hussein could make Stalin, Hitler, and Mao rolled into one look insignificant.
posted on August 29, 2002 06:37:23 PM new
I still cannot force myself to accept the fact that Charles Krauthammer is a board-certified psychiatrist. And we worry about the inmates running the asylum!
posted on August 29, 2002 07:08:24 PM new
So, Desquirrel, what you are saying is that it really IS all about oil.
For what it's worth I hardly think his neighbors would lie down and let him roll over them. He would have a mightly battle on his hands.None of his neighbors want him to be the sole ruler of the middle east...that's a job each and every one of them wants.
Remember when Khadafi [sp]was the one we were supposed to be worried about? Oh, he was going to start a war and send the middle east into turmoil.......whatever happened to that? Then it was the Kohemini [again sp] and cries of war,war ,war. Well whatever happened to that? Iran has gotten more pro-west [at least till Bush quite literaly took office].
I haven't seen anything that would make me think this is urgent and must be done RIGHT NOW OR ELSE....what do you,DeSquirrel know that the rest of us don't? Are you privy to some inside information?
[ edited by rawbunzel on Aug 29, 2002 07:09 PM ]
posted on August 29, 2002 08:29:51 PM new
" So, Desquirrel, what you are saying is that it really IS all about oil"
Of course, why you thought it was to start a new branch of the jelly of the month club. You say that like it is a big revelation. How else would they be a world threat.
" Remember when Khadafi [sp]was the one we were supposed to be worried about? Oh, he was going to start a war and send the middle east into turmoil.......whatever happened to that?"
I thought he and the rest of OPEC dramatically raised oil prices and caused that 10 year recession in the seventies. If you're talking the 80's, Reagan sent him a message and he's been relatively quiet since them, just blowing up a plane or two.
"Well whatever happened to that? Iran has gotten more pro-west [at least till Bush quite literaly took office]. "
This is a joke right? Iran is the most active supporter of terrorists in the region. Funnelling arms to the Palestinians. Was it 2 months ago an Iranian minister was urging a crash nuclear program to build weapons for the sole purpose of annihilating Israel because his theory was that Israel did not have enough nukes to completely destroy Iran and all the Arabs. Iran may one day be a target, but might behave with a UN force administering Iraq.
posted on August 29, 2002 08:40:14 PM new
***sigh****
Irans government is crappy no doubt but the young people were becoming more westernized and liked our ways better than they had before. How do you think change comes about? You have to win the hearts of the young and then the old ways go through attrition. It takes time...not bombs.Bombs will set everything back.
Desquirrel, everyone in the government has denied that it is all about oil. They say it is about keeping us safe. Remember the mantra? Anything to keep us safe? Oil doesn't keep me safe. Apparently it is the one thing in this whole world that has the potential to doom us all.
Oil and the power that goes with it.Who besides Saddam do you think would like that power?
There was an article in the paper about how the Iranian prime minister was pushing for reforms because of public pressure. He was making public statements which was not done before (bet he ain't long for this world) His problems include he "runs" one gov branch, the mullahs control the courts and other branches. It's pretty hard to exercise restraint if you feel you've been empowered by God. I think Iraq's fall would probably give them oher ideas about stirring up trouble.
"has denied that it is all about oil. They say it is about keeping us safe. Remember the mantra? Anything to keep us safe? Oil doesn't keep me safe"
They have to use govspeak when talking to people. Tell the average person Iraq threatens the world's oil supply and they think they might have to tade the Explorer in for a Honda or maybe they could ride their a bike to work 3 days a week. Oil controls everything. You cannot move your hand 6 inches without something based on oil. It lubricates the machines that make things, it transports our goods, it furnishes electric power, it provides the source for petrochemicals and makes plastics and fertilizer. A rise in the price of oil causes the price of goods to rise because transportation and raw materials cost more. Higher prices mean lower sales which means people lose their jobs which means less tax revenue. Then the gov cuts back on entitlement programs. Food becomes more expensive like everything else. Governments spend less on aid and because of it poor nations must use more of their limited funds to buy less food at higher prices. People die. Even though the US has its' own oil supplies, it is a world economy and the effects ripple.
So when people say we don't need their stinkin' oil, we (the world) does. And it is obtuse to say Iraq is no threat to us because his missles can't reach us. If he exploded a device in the straights of Hormuz (sp?), it would be worse than if it hit Chicago.
posted on August 30, 2002 10:43:35 AM new
Saddam Hussein is a madman and he will and has threatened his neighbors. He is gleeful over the 9/11 attacks and he harbors terrorists and provides the families of suicide bombers with funds.
The U.S. will not get much support from the surrounding Arab nations because they have the most to lose. They are the prime targets of a nuclear attack. I'm not just sure if he would attack the Arab nations first to gain almighty control or if he would show them how he can cripple the U.S. first by attacking us close enough for the loss of many civilian lives. Life is not sacred to Saddam.
I remember in the 60's and 70's when people were building bomb shelters against the thread of nuclear attack from Russia. That was a real fear. Looking back, we didn't have as much to fear from the Russians as we do about Saddam.
We will kill civilians you say. Yes, it is a sad fact of the way Saddam chooses to fight. He likes a good street fight using civilians as human shields because he knows we are humanitarian and value the lives of others. He thinks he will win the fight because the U.S. wouldn't want the bad press of killing civilians. Saddam is an evil man. War is not good, but history has shown us that the road to peace is littered with war stories.
No one wants to go to war. No one wants to send our troops into battle. No one wants another 9/11 or worse.
I don't have a link to give you. My thoughts are my own based on all that I have read and listened to from the right and the left. My internal filter sifts out the propaganda and postering from what is probably the truth.
posted on August 30, 2002 11:10:14 AM new
At least after 9-11 Saddam didn't exclaim he'd hit the trifecta. I wonder who that could have been....hm?
Any country can be run by madmen...even ours.
Remove the blinders...we aren't always in the right.
I do agree Saddam is a madman with no regard for human life.I simply disagree on the methods we are using.... and the freedoms we are ever so willing to give up...to solve the problem.Since I am still allowed to disagree in this country I shall use that right and freedom until it is taken away from me like all the others we have lost in the past years.
I have never been one to "Baa". [although KRS and Borillar most likely think so..they have no idea what I am like here in RL. ]
My filter filters it too pclady.I just come to different conclusions ~ as is my right and yours too.
Desquirrel, Yes, the world runs on oil. It lubricates most everything we use. Of course the oil companies have for years bought the rights to anything that might get in the way of that.Why don't cars get more miles to the gallon? Because the oil companies don't want them to. Why are we so dependent on oil for everything? Because they want it that way. We need research into ways to reduce our demands for oil but mostly our money goes into ways to help the big oil companies.
This country is run by corporations. Look around you. Everything is a huge corporation anymore...what ever happened to not allowing monopolies? The mergers that have taken place have created some of the hugest monopolies we have ever had.Why is this allowed?It's not just oil. We are manipulated in every way.
posted on August 30, 2002 03:04:09 PM new
Personally, I was disappointed they just didn't **take him out** since the Gulf War. I naiively expected it would be done.
posted on August 30, 2002 04:39:43 PM new
I agree Cyn. They always tell us what the Israelis are capable of..I can't imagine why they haven't gotten to him at the very least. Him and his son as well. I understand the son is worse than the father.He would have to go too.
Really, that seems like the best way to take him out ...with covert actions and not bombs and more destruction.
posted on August 30, 2002 04:48:00 PM new
I had the same opinion about Osama bin Laden and nobody listened to me. Now, we've destroyed a few camps in Afghanistan which can be rebuilt as fast as they fall and Bin Laden is still missing.
posted on August 30, 2002 04:58:40 PM new
As I recall bush promised us a war [with Afghanistan] unlike any we had seen before...mostly covert actions and nothing spectacular to see on TV as in times past. What did we get? Same ol' same ol'. Difference was we didn't see much since the media was kept at bay.
posted on August 30, 2002 05:02:46 PM new
Pakistan says so? Then Islam is indeed the "best" religion! I've never seen anyone die and be resurrected so many times!
