the irony of these peace protests

[Groucho]

So, you are absolutely 100% beyond the shadow of a doubt convinced that lobbing 1000's of bombs and missiles at Iraq's infrastucture and population centers is the only way of preventing
Saddam from possibly doing something nasty to the US?
As opposed to, maybe, just for an example, keeping the arms inspectors there for the next 1 or 5 or 10 or 20 years, at a cost of 5 or 10 or 20 million dollars a year and no lives lost?

 

[zog]

There's more to it than meets the eye...

I don't know. I've seen my share of fights where the instigator was foolhardy and weaker than his opponent. Often the bigger man tries hard not to get into a fight with a smaller opponent but, in the end, has no choice but to defend himself.

Saddam is that little guy that does not know when to shut up. George Bush has the ability to kick the crap out of Iraq...and he has been motivated.

The question is...is the United States mature enough to honestly try everything else before succumbing to violence?

We'll see...

Zog.

 

[apostate]

Saddam is a brutal thug who I would love to see hang for his crimes, but without backers, people like Saddam never amount to anything other then low life criminals .

The actual irony is that it is the appeasment protesters and nations like France and Germany which are encouraging this little psycho to keep playing his games, thereby insuring war.

 

[james t kirk]

The actual irony is that it is the appeasment protesters and nations like France and Germany which are encouraging this little psycho to keep playing his games, thereby insuring war.

You mean, "ENsuring" war.

France, Germany, China, Russia

I guess they are all wrong eh?

This whole thing gives me a bad feeling. I agree 100% with Groucho.

Anyway you cut it, this is a first strike war and not something we should ever be proud of. It demeans the US in my eyes. This is a war where you are attacking a country and you are probably going to kill 10s of thousands of poor innocent slobs just going about their day to day lives without that country ever having attacked you.

That leaves a bad feeling too.

This war is not about oil, it is not about weapons of mass destruction, it is about politics and rhetoric. The US can't fight terrorists in a conventional manner and the republicans know that in the next election the WILL loose because they will be perceived by the American public as being the guys who were asleep at the wheel on September 11 and did nothing about it. Add in the terrible US economy and a the "moron" factor and you are out on the street quicker than you can say Saddam Hussein.

 

[zog]

Don't blame Bush for 9-11

the republicans know that in the next election the WILL loose because they will be perceived by the American public as being the guys who were asleep at the wheel on September 11 and did nothing about it.

This "perception" is enhanced by people who continue to repeat this type of unsubstantiated accusation.

I'm about the exact opposite of a George Bush supporter. I strongly object to the false accusations and implications that his administration is using to promote a mood of antipathy toward Iraq. However, I would be a hypocrite if I supported the same brand of misinformation against Mr. Bush and his gang.

No one expected September 11 and no one knew it was coming. The US was not asleep at the switch.

It may not be pleasant to acknowledge that Bin Laden and his advisors are intelligent and crafty but, alas, this is true. These terrorists are very smart, highly competent, and very determined. Brute force and pariotism will not stop them.

Whatever else negative you want to say about the current US government, it was not their fault that 9-11 happened. Credit for that goes right to the source, al queda.

Zog.

 

[apostate]

of all of the arguements, attempting to link Saddam with Hitler has got to be the stupidest, yeah Saddam is about march on Ottawa,

Not Ottawa.

What the hell would he want with Ottawa?

If you knew your history you would know that before taking the Rhineland the first thing Hitler did was violate the WWI treaty by building his nations armnements and military to excessive levels.

If the allies would have acted then, WWII may have been prevented.

And Saddam not only intends to achieve regional hegemony, he believes he can.

And people like you encourage him.

 

[james t kirk]

Re: Don't blame Bush for 9-11

This "perception" is enhanced by people who continue to repeat this type of unsubstantiated accusation.

I'm about the exact opposite of a George Bush supporter. I strongly object to the false accusations and implications that his administration is using to promote a mood of antipathy toward Iraq. However, I would be a hypocrite if I supported the same brand of misinformation against Mr. Bush and his gang.

No one expected September 11 and no one knew it was coming. The US was not asleep at the switch.

It may not be pleasant to acknowledge that Bin Laden and his advisors are intelligent and crafty but, alas, this is true. These terrorists are very smart, highly competent, and very determined. Brute force and pariotism will not stop them.

Whatever else negative you want to say about the current US government, it was not their fault that 9-11 happened. Credit for that goes right to the source, al queda.

Zog.

Actually, there were some individuals who knew something was coming.

Under Clinton an entire anti-terroism unit was set up. When Bush took power, his team shut it down prior to 911.

There was a very interesting article in Time Magazine in July of 2002 outlining how the entire programme was scrapped by Rice and Rumsfeldt prior to 911 for political reasons. They and their boss hated ANYTHING to do with Clinton and shut this programme down even though it was already in place to fight al queda specifically.

Just prior to 911 Rumsfeldt himself vetoed 600 million earmarked for fighting al queda.

The two guys who were in charge of the programme left in disgust, one of them ironically took a job as head of security at the World Trade Centre and was killed on 911.

What i am saying is that Bush has to demonstrate to the American people that he is a tough guy in tough times orelse he will lose the next election.

The american military is not geared up to fight terrorism. They are geared up to fight wars with other countries. Iraq is the perfect scape goat. They are isolated, their leader is a whack job, the other arabs don't particularly like Hussein because he is secular, and they pissed you off already once before.

 

[drg]

What is going on is a referendum against George W. He has pissed of the rest of the world to the point that Sadam is winning a popularity contest with him.

When he stole the election Dubya took the line that the US was number 1 and did not need the rest of the world. So when the US lumber companies compliained the fucked Canada. When the Germans wanted Kyoto ratified he he spit on it. Also his conservative cronies also seem to project a belief that they are superior to the rest of us. Witness any interview with Rumsfeld or Frum Jr.

So when a bunch of dark fellows from some backward desert coutries show up and take down a symbol of US power their world was turned upside down. Along with that is the point that James T Kirk made about the Bush administration shutting down the agencies hunting down Osama. this really makes Bush want to prove that he was not asleep at the switch.

When they went into Afganistan the rest of the world followed. This gave George W the idea that the rest of the world would follow him anywhere. Under the auspice that he was going to shut down Sadam's weapons program and bring freedom and democracy to the Iragi's. (Despite the fact that after 10 years Kuwait does not have a democracy) Unfortunately the rest of the world is saying no and transparent acts like recent speech about brininging peace to the middle East are not cutting it.

In my view Sadam should be taken out. He is a truly evil man who is charge of a truly evil regime. His atrocities are numerous and the world should not tolerate people like him. However what the rest of world does not trust is the US motives for doing this. Rightly or wrongly George and his administration have not built up a reputation for doing anything that is not 100% in the interest of conservative US elements. Even dirty little Willie went into Somalia, Yugoslavia and tried to broker Middle East peace with no immediate benefit to the US. George has no reputation for doing this. His acts have either been for Immediate benefit like drilling oil in the arctic or revenge.

So the rest of world for: humanitarian reasons, selfish reasons (French), pacifist reasons (Germany), or a belief that the US will not be in this for the benefit for the Iragi people or the long run opposes Bush. Even if his cause is noble. Nobody believes them.

 

[apostate]

You mean, "ENsuring" war

So you got me.

My typing and spelling skills are about as good as your current event comprehension.

France, Germany, China, Russia

I guess they are all wrong eh?

Wrong about what?

If you think they are opposing us because of a love of peace or concern for the Iraqi people you are deluded at best.

They are interested in oil, avoiding becoming targets by standing up,trying to demonstrate non-existant relevance, and sticking it to the US, in no particular order.

The US can't fight terrorists in a conventional manner and the republicans know that in the next election the WILL loose because they will be perceived by the American public as being the guys who were asleep at the wheel on September 11 and did nothing about it.

The american military is not geared up to fight terrorism. They are geared up to fight wars with other countries. Iraq is the perfect scape goat.

We have been fighting terrorism.

Try reading something other than Mother Jones for a change.

um yea I do know my history, so you thing the Versaille Treaty was a good thing do you ?, I supposse you of course as well support us attacking Syria, Iran and perhaps Egypt , which the chickenhawks are already talking about

Lloyd George was a vicious a-hole and Tommy Wilson was an idiot.

And if we take out Sodom it will give the others something to think about.

I guess we just disagree.

You stick with appeasment, I'll take pre-emption and deterence.

Just glad GWB is on my side.

Any more spelling errors?

 

[alphaBIT]

I am shocked about how many contributors to this board appear to be brainwashed by CNN propaganda. I am participating in peace rallies because the Bush administration's war mongering is having a direct impact on my life ... at this point through increasing gas prices, declining stock markets, and the fear of much worse to come. The way I see it, the US are only waiting for confirmed disarmament so they can occupy Iraq with minimal losses (just those due "friendly fire" and "accidents"), so they can void existing oil contracts and re-award them to major US and British companies. Saddam is one of too many evil dictators around, sure, but Iraq is as much a threat to the US as Canada. Today it's Iraq for oil - tomorrow it may be Canada for water. Should we take this bullying? Let's say a collective no tomorrow at the next peace rally.

 

[Mahatt MaCoat]

12 years = redundant

 

[apostate]

I am shocked about how many contributors to this board appear to be brainwashed by CNN propaganda.

CNN???

That warmonger Ted Turner, who insisted aftes 9/11 his anchors refered to Al Queda as "alleged terrorists" and refused to allow the us flag to be displayed on screen?

I am participating in peace rallies because the Bush administration's war mongering is having a direct impact on my life ... at this point through increasing gas prices, declining stock markets, and the fear of much worse to come

The gas prices are more due to labor problems in Venezuela and Nigeria than anything to do with the mid-east,the markets will pick up after the bombing starts, just like in '91...

and the fear.

Fear and cowardice motivates most of these "peace" protesters.

The way I see it, the US are only waiting for confirmed disarmament so they can occupy Iraq with minimal losses (just those due "friendly fire" and "accidents"), so they can void existing oil contracts and re-award them to major US and British companies.

Screwing around with the UN is just Bush being loyal to the one ally who has stuck with the US from the begining, Tony Blair.

And I heard the same crap about oil contracts in the gulf war.

Saddam is one of too many evil dictators around, sure, but Iraq is as much a threat to the US as Canada. Today it's Iraq for oil - tomorrow it may be Canada for water. Should we take this bullying? Let's say a collective no tomorrow at the next peace rally.

Trust me, Canada is no threat to anyone.

Hell, we rarely even remember you guys are up there.

But have fun at your little appeasment rally.

Like anyone cares.

 

[apostate]

so who are these other's apostate?, let me guess Syria Iran Saudia Arabia...

Any nation sponsoring terrorism and threatening the US.

.you see folks apostate would sacrifice millions of American/Brittish troops to save his precious Isreal he could care less about the rest of us, were just a bunch of gentiles who they have been taught have
prosecuted them for thousands of years, so who cares about us right apostate ?

Millions of troops?

Heard that in '91 too.

And it is the US I am interested in protecting.

Just like you are Al Queda and Sodom.

I bet I know one big mouth thats not going to sign up to fight eh apostate , the big mouths never do.

How do you spell Ad Homeniem?

 

[taperman]

Damn this thread is a better Sunday read than the Sun.