posted on September 25, 2003 02:30:51 PM new
-Doug Saunders of Toronto's Globe and Mail:
"Six months before, the world had cheered as the statues of the dictator came crashing down. The Americans had seemed heroic. But now things were going very badly. The occupation was chaotic, the American soldiers were hated and they were facing threats from the surviving supporters of the dictator, whose whereabouts were uncertain.
"Washington seemed unwilling to pay the enormous bill for reconstruction, and the president didn't appear to have any kind of workable plan to manage the transition to democracy. European allies, distrustful of the arrogant American outlook, were wary of cooperating."
The New York Times:
"More than a million displaced persons roamed the country, many of them subsisting on criminal activities."
Doug Saunders and the New York Times were writing not of Iraq in September, 2003. They were writing about Germany in November 1945.
posted on September 25, 2003 03:14:44 PM new
I know, I've mention this fact many times. Asked others to take a look at what the US did after WWII. They don't care their hatred of this President clouds their vision for our nations best interests.
Like your article said about Marshall(D), "...one of the few ...to put the welfare of the country ahead of short-term partisan advantage."
But I'm holding ground that most Americans will see, before the 2004 elections, this president has handled this the right way. And look at the news today...it's encouraging.....
Schroeder Offers to Support Bush on Iraq. I'm sure that's just a beginning of what's ahead. Most will come around. After all, it's in their best interests too. They are able to see the terrorist work [bombings] in the other countries too. [Bali, etc] And who knows when they'll be next? Just as I think the UN NEVER thought they'd be attack. Now they've been attacked twice.
posted on September 25, 2003 06:21:02 PM new
You are full of excuses for your president Linda.
40 People will be murdered in USA today by guns alone.
God knows how many will be victim to stabbing, paedophilia, rape, assault, crime syndicates, etc.
Next time you support a war on a sovereign nation or any action on the basis of lies from untrustworthy (to put it mildly) sources; consider the rancid evil, corruption and debauchery in your own ‘great nation’.
USA, the greatest contributors to pollution.
Record holders for killings in an industrial environment.
Greatest contributors to the arms race.
Funding, training & supply of weapons to terrorists and dictators.
Stand tall Linda, because ‘power’, your nation has.
Also directly wasting my time and resources and those of billions around the world.
I alone receive about 80 SPAM a day, most from USA.
‘Increase your manhood’
‘Spy on your wife’
‘Check out Lolita’
‘I noticed you yesterday’
‘Drugs without prescription’
‘Update you credit card info’
Basically meddling, here there and everywhere.
To many extreme nationalistic Americans like you Linda are either ignorant or arrogant as to US negative contributions to the world.
Consistently and arrogantly demanding answers but not answering questions.
Only showing concern when it hits your hip pocket.
And now it’s all coming home to roost.
Your home stinks, big time.
Clean it out before complaining and displaying faux concern about others.
Here is a quote from you Linda, back in your face.
“But when people like you can't be honest and admit other's in their own party have done wrong...I think that's being a hyprocrite.”
Taking unilateral action and then begging multilateral support.
Enjoy the spoils of war.
posted on September 26, 2003 08:32:24 AM new
The French cheered the American as they liberated ( and rapidly left ) their soil in WW2. The Vietnamase did not see the American as liberators but instead as the latest conqueror. The Iraqis are the same as the Vietnamese.
I wonder what would happen if the US said that they would leave Iraq to an Iraqi elected government exactly six months after the verification of a dead or captured Saddam Hussien? You think that would hasten the death of the guy? I do.
-------------- sig file ----------- Most costume jewelry is unsigned. After all, the vast majority of it was made to be worn a few times, then discarded. It wasn't made to be durable. --- The Fluffster
Two years ago, as the bombs began to drop, George Bush promised Afghanistan 'the generosity of America and its allies'. Now, the familiar old warlords are regaining power, religious fundamentalism is renewing its grip and military skirmishes continue routinely. What was the purpose? John Pilger reports
Saturday September 20, 2003
The Guardian
At the Labour party conference following the September 11 attacks, Tony Blair said memorably: "To the Afghan people, we make this commitment. We will not walk away... If the Taliban regime changes, we will work with you to make sure its successor is one that is broadbased, that unites all ethnic groups and offers some way out of the poverty that is your miserable existence." He was echoing George Bush, who had said a few days earlier: "The oppressed people of Afghanistan will know the generosity of America and its allies. As we strike military targets, we will also drop food, medicine and supplies to the starving and suffering men and women and children of Afghanistan. The US is a friend of the Afghan people."
Almost every word they spoke was false. Their declarations of concern were cruel illusions that prepared the way for the conquest of both Afghanistan and Iraq. As the illegal Anglo-American occupation of Iraq now unravels, the forgotten disaster in Afghanistan, the first "victory" in the "war on terror", is perhaps an even more shocking testament to power.
Almost every word they spoke was false. Their declarations of concern were cruel illusions that prepared the way for the conquest of both Afghanistan and Iraq. As the illegal Anglo-American occupation of Iraq now unravels, the forgotten disaster in Afghanistan, the first "victory" in the "war on terror", is perhaps an even more shocking testament to power.
It was my first visit. In a lifetime of making my way through places of upheaval, I had not seen anything like it. Kabul is a glimpse of Dresden post-1945, with contours of rubble rather than streets, where people live in collapsed buildings, like earthquake victims waiting for rescue. They have no light and heat; their apocalyptic fires burn through the night. Hardly a wall stands that does not bear the pock-marks of almost every calibre of weapon. Cars lie upended at roundabouts. Power poles built for a modern fleet of trolley buses are twisted like paperclips. The buses are stacked on top of each other, reminiscent of the pyramids of machines erected by the Khmer Rouge to mark Year Zero.
posted on September 26, 2003 09:04:31 AM new
Austi - You appear to be suffering from short term memory loss:
Next time you support a war on a sovereign nation or any action on the basis of lies from untrustworthy (to put it mildly......
As your country was one of several who also believed Saddam had womd and it appears from your papers *today*, your leaders still stand by the intelligence THEY had when THEY supported this effort. And it also appears THEY STILL DO.
So...maybe you'd like to run your objections to this by them. I could care less how you see the decisions the US makes in our own best interests.
But Mr Howard said yesterday he believed the pre-war intelligence Australia had acted on to send its forces to a war in Iraq was "credible".
"I can only repeat, and I repeat this very strongly, the intelligence we had at the time about their capability was very credible and very strong and I don't retreat one iota from the decision that we took,"
"I would like to see the Iraq Survey Group's work, but I certainly believe that there will be evidence found that (Iraq) had programs."
[i]Foreign Minister Alexander Downer also dismissed the report, saying he had not seen it and it would be better to wait until the survey group had completed its work.
Mr Downer said the UN had been in no doubt that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when it passed resolution 1441 requiring Iraq to disarm in November last year[/i].
"The debate was over whether dealing with that problem was best to do through continual UN inspections or whether it was better in the end to take military action," Mr Downer said.
This is clearly an uncomfortable question for the Bush administration. Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell met with Times editors. Asked whether Americans would have supported this war if weapons of mass destruction had not been at issue, Mr. Powell said the question was too hypothetical to answer. Asked if he, personally, would have supported it, he smiled, thrust his hand out and said, "It was good to meet you."
posted on September 26, 2003 09:55:02 PM new
Linda, You or any one for that matter can ‘claim’ to ‘believe’ what ever you like.
The fact is that the coalition of the willing liars have no sound basis to believe most of your claims.
They are morally or intellectually impaired, take your pick.
Dumbya
"I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question."— Reynoldsburg, Ohio, Oct. 4, 2000
Well aint that a great basis for war.!!!!!!!!!
When you say “I could care less how you see the decisions the US makes in our own best interests.”
You should have said ‘the decisions certain factions within the US make in their own best interests.’
Meanwhile back in an Islamic Oil rich State, a little boy sits there with nothing more to remember his mother by, than the remnants of her left tit in his right hand.
posted on September 27, 2003 04:47:32 AM new
That is a two way street Austbounty, but the point is YOU did not answer Linda's question and are trying to take the eye off of Australia and once again place it on the US where you have no say or business...
If you don't like the spam... you claim comes from the US... call your local government and complain...
How many people were murdered in Australia today? Last Night?
How is it you come here and spout the US does this and the US does that... but you fail to mention how Australia treats their own.
Is it because quite possibly you would get the sh*t kicked out of you if you say anything bad against the mother country? Are you afraid to say anything against Austrailia, and the fear turns your already jellied spine into liquid?
Next time, look up some facts before going off on the US
Here is a Headline for ya:
Britain, Australia top U.S. in violent crime Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
-WorldNetDaily
The TRUE fact is violent crime here in the US has dropped every year since 1994...
So lets talk again when you actually have some facts...
posted on September 27, 2003 05:59:26 AM new
The difference between me and you 12 is that I have the integrity to admit when our nation has made a 'bad' move.
USA is the 'prime-mover'.
U gave money to Ossama.
U gave Saddam WOMD.
U assassinated Salavtore Alendes.
Those who have represented your Nation are responsible for many many many atrocities, and not just within your shores.
Their tentacles reach far.
12 “US where you have no say or business...” ?????
Unfortunately for humanity many ‘patriots’ like you insist that USA have business anywhere and everywhere.
The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century:
Is a gauntlet thrown to the whole world and an open invitation for criticism and even attack.
These fascists who represent your nation have ‘brought it on’.
I will not shut up, because those Fascist nationalists who represent YOUR NATION are a risk to the global security of MY worldbecause of their aspirations to DICTATE.
Your neo-fascist PNAC is throwing out the challenge and saying Bring’em On.
What yea sew so shall yea reap.
posted on September 27, 2003 06:16:19 AM new
...and still you won't answer any questions about Australia and seem to think you know anything about the US...
IF you would take the time to learn about your own country's problems and take issue with them, then and only then could you even be seriously taken on matters of the US
You always tap dance your way around any questions concerning Australia, you have yet to "admit" anything about your country and in fact every response has been to perform more US bashing...
Your sir have not a fkn' clue what you are talking about and I hope others, by just reading here will see that; you must get your "information" from some street bum standing on the corner with that huge sign saying "THE END IS NEAR"... once again how about lets talk about Australia and all that is wrong there... but watching you squirm and dance has its own enjoyment so lets see the next act...
"And the United States and our friends and allies will first take care of the Iraqi citizens. (Applause.) And they'll have some money to help themselves. After all, oil is now flowing. But this time the revenues are not going to be used and skimmed off by greedy gangsters. It's going to be used in a special account on behalf of the people who own the oil -- the citizens of Iraq."
posted on September 27, 2003 07:04:34 AM newRealm of Realism
"This is the beginning of the administration presenting realistically eye-popping numbers to the American people," said Rachel Bronson, director of Middle East studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. "The number is probably on the low side of what's needed, but we're finally in the realm of realism."
And Bush compares his preemptive invasion of Iraq based on false charges to World War 11.
In his speech on Sunday night, Mr. Bush himself compared his plans to rebuild Iraq with the effort after World War II, saying, "America today accepts the challenge of helping Iraq in the same spirit."
posted on September 27, 2003 07:13:31 AM newWho believes that now?
I do for one... Time will tell.
Their oil fields are in terrible shape, the environmental disaster that could occur by forcing oil productions to levels not seen in 20 years could be devastating to Iraq...
giving the President a year to get things going is not unreasonable nor out of the oridnary.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
[ edited by Twelvepole on Sep 27, 2003 07:41 AM ]
posted on September 27, 2003 08:44:51 AM newFrom Baghdad
Aqila Al-Hashimi was buried today in the holy city of Najaf, in the south. Her funeral procession was astounding. Rumor has it that she was supposed to be made Iraq’s ambassadress to the UN. There are still no leads to her attackers’ identities… somehow people seem to think that Al-Chalabi and gang are behind this attack just like they suspect he might have been behind the Jordanian Embassy attack. Al-Chalabi claims it’s Saddam, which is the easy thing to do- pretend that the only figures vying for power are the Governing Council, currently headed by Al-Chalabi, and Saddam and ignore the fundamentalists and any inter-Council hostilities, rivalries and bitterness between members.
What is particularly disturbing is that the UN is pulling out some of its staff for security reasons… they pulled out a third tonight and others will be leaving in the next few days. Things are getting more and more frightening. My heart sinks every time the UN pulls out because that was how we used to gauge the political situation in the past: the UN is pulling out- we’re getting bombed.
Someone brought this to my attention… it’s an interesting piece on some of the companies facilitating the whole shady contract affair in Iraq. The original piece is published by The Guardian Unlimited and discusses contracts, the Bush administration and how Salem Al-Chalabi, Ahmad Al-Chalabi’s nephew fits into the whole situation- Friends of the family.
This Atlantic article suggests that corruption is just as pervasive at the bottom as it is at the top.
You can preside over the most catastrophic failure of intelligence and national defense in history.
Can fire no one associated with this fatal chain of blunders and bureaucratic buck-passing.
Can oppose an inquest into September 11 for more than a year until pressure from the relatives of those killed on that day becomes politically toxic.
Can name Henry Kissinger, that mortician of truth, to head the independent commission you finally accede to.
You can start an unnecessary war that kills hundreds of Americans and as many as 7,000 Iraqi civilians—adjusted for the difference in population, the equivalent of 80,000 Americans.
Can occupy Iraq without a plan to restore traffic lights, much less order.
Can make American soldiers targets in a war of attrition conducted by snipers, assassins, and planters of remote-control bombs—and taunt the murderers of our young men to "bring it on."
Can spend hundreds of billions of dollars on nation building—and pass the bill to America's children. (Asked to consider rescinding your tax cut for the top one percent of taxpayers for one year in order to fund the $87 billion you requested from Congress to pay for the occupation of Iraq, your Vice President said no; that would slow growth.)
You can lose more jobs than any other President since Hoover.
You can cut cops and after-school programs and Pell Grants and housing allowances for the poor to give tax cuts to millionaires.
You can wreck the nation's finances, running up the largest deficit in history.
You can permit 17,000 power plants to increase their health-endangering pollution of the air.
You can lower the prestige of the United States in every country of the world by your unilateral conduct of foreign policy and puerile "you're either with us or against us" rhetoric.
Above all, you can lie the country into war and your lies can be exposed—and, if a majority prefers ignorance to civic responsibility, you can still be reelected.
For all their worldliness the Founders were naïve to regard property as a shield of incorruptibility or the property-less as inherently corruptible. Their core insight, however, remains valid. A republic can be corrupted at the top and bottom, by leaders and led. The re-election of George W. Bush would signal that a kind of corruption had set in among the led. Our miserable failure as republican citizens would match his as President.
posted on September 27, 2003 09:17:45 AM new
You know all this President Bush bashing is fine and dandy... what is that saying, if you can't beat 'em.... call 'em names....
How easy you all accuse me and others of doing that, but look at your own words... LOOK!
You are no better and actually worse because you berate someone and name call on someone that is not here to defend themselves.
IF the Democrats had one candidate that could even carry President Bush's dirty jock... then it might be worth listening to... however the current crop offer nothing even remotely as something a savvy voter would even vote for....
President Bush will succeed in 2004 and it may not be that everyone likes him, it is just they will hate the other choice even more.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
[ edited by Twelvepole on Sep 27, 2003 09:32 AM ]
posted on September 27, 2003 09:31:35 AM new
Of the 10 Democratic candidates there are three currently that polls indicate have a good chance of sending the current occupant of the White House to the unemployment line. I expect the campaign to be extremely negative on the part of the Republicans playing to peoples worst fears and prejudices which seems to be a modern Republican tradition.
posted on September 28, 2003 03:41:07 AM newFor Sale:
A fertile, wealthy country with a population of around 25 million… plus around 150,000 foreign troops, and a handful of puppets. Conditions of sale: should be either an American or British corporation (forget it if you’re French)… preferably affiliated with Halliburton. Please contact one of the members of the Governing Council in Baghdad, Iraq for more information.
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
[ edited by austbounty on Sep 28, 2003 03:44 AM ]
