LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteALL LIES!
That was written in black marker on the plexiglass of some newsstands in the loop today- I thought it was funny.
p.s. Bush is an idiot
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Feb8.html
What do you think?
ALL LIES!
That was written in black marker on the plexiglass of some newsstands in the loop today- I thought it was funny.
p.s. Bush is an idiot
I think they did fuck up in that aspect. It's probably good for him to admit that mistakes were made. I think it will help him in the coming re-election campaign.
Either way they got a bad person out of power. What about the fields upon fields of human bodies they have been finding?
I don't much like Bush, but I don't think someone else would have necessarily done a better job.
watever, he just wanted a reason for war
People limit the scope of weapons of mass destruction. I mean, when we went in Iraq started firing scud missles towards our basis around the middle east. Sure, they can only make it to Israel, but I consider a GIANT F*ING MISSLE FLYING AT ME a weapon of mass destruction. Throw this missle together with the anthrax and VX nerve gas he used on us before and I would say it is a WoMD. I mean... missle = weapon, gas that makes you die = mass destruction. So, no nukes, but definatly enough that I would be scarred to be anywhere near Iraq.
That and it's hard to search all of Iraq.
First off, I couldn't care less about the WMD in Iraq. Fact of the matter is, he had them, he took 12 years of dissing the UN in order to hide them. Everyone know's he had them, HE USED THEM and killed like a ton of people. You don't find mass graves of people that have been shot, they have been gassed. That's how you mass murder.
#2 What does Bush's time of Military Service have anything to do with anything? What are they trying to prove? My guess is that they are trying to say that Bush is quick to throw others in harms way in a war, but not himself??That's what a leader is for, to direct, not to fight... even if he wasn't the leader at the time.
Problem is, the gay ass LIE-berals have NOTHING and they keep beating the same dead horse about the economy and the war in Iraq because they know those are hot spots. Fact is, they cannot beat Bush and they are Campaigning for 2nd place.
Ask yourself this... Historically, DemoCRAPS are reluctant to go to war when needed. We are now being attacked at home... are you going to want a President or a Presidential Party in charge that is NOT going to defend what you hold so dear? Freedom, Liberty... BEER???
For those of you that are anti Bush/anti War, you tell me, what IS a good time to go fight? Have you not paid any attention to the news on CNN lately? That idiot Neanderthal dude that was sending the letter about the Iraqi Civil War (or trying to start one)... AL-QUEADA (or however you spell it)... That's what Bush said all along. That Saddam and his Neanderthal buddies are in Bed with the rest of the Muslims (they always are) and that Saddam, the most flagrant of the leaders was supporting them. You all know it's true and you keep asking who what when where why and how... it's all right there for you.
Al -Queda doesn't care about life of others or thier own, what better place to live than in a country like Iraq where the leader holds the exact same values. However, super ruthless Saddam was hiding in a whole like a pussy when the man came for that ass. HA!
"Rational arguments don't really work on religious people. Otherwise, there'd be no religious people."
"Everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
preach it brotha
i seen a poster yesterday, and it stated, FREEDOM ISN'T FREE. it had 3 soldiers behind their friends grave. (the grave was an M16 sticking out of the ground with the barrel up and the soldiers helmet over the barrel). kinda made me think what i'm getting into. but somebody has to do it.
and honestly, i think that bush already knew where saddam was hiding. he probably had him in that little rat hole place. and was waiting for the right time to make him look good for re-election. but all in all. we got him and that's what matters. there's still lots to do. i hear that in june we're pulling most of the people we have there and we're going to send some new people there. but i believe that we're not going to send as much either. slowly but surely we're pulling some more people out. but as long as we keep getting bombed and all, we're staying there.
Interesting article. I am not very suprised to read any of this information. The Bush Administration and Tony Blair have all been backstepping lately. This topic reminds me of something I wrote on April 3, 2003 during a discussion on the Iraq war with some friends via email. Although a year has almost passed since I wrote it, 99% of what I wrote is still applicable today. As you all know, I stay upto date with world events. I have presented many historical events in this "article" that are not often mentioned by our media on prime time news. I reccomend anyone who wants to learn more about the history of this conflict to read it. I would like to warn you though. This is LOOOOOONG.
First of all I would like to state that I am an American and wouldn't want to live anywhere else. This country offers MANY good things that you couldn't find anywhere else in the world. You can achieve anything in this country if you work hard enough. Dispite all the good things this country has to offer, I don't support many of its foregin policies and I do not support this war. Unlike what many prowar people in this country think, being antiwar doesn't make you any less of an American or any less patriotic. This email turned out to be way longer than I anticipated. So let me begin...
I believe Saddam is a terrible dictator. But at what point did he become a mad man? Was it in 1959 when he participated in an attempt to assassinate the Iraqi leader Abdul Karim Kassem? Was it in 1968 when he organized a military coup that brought the Ba'ath party to power? Was it in 1979 when he became President of Iraq? Was it when he lead his country into the Iran - Iraq war? Was it 1988 when he gassed the Kurds? Was it in 1990 when he crossed the Kuwaiti border? The answer to this question changes according to US foreign policy, depending in what decade you are in.
In the 80's the US supported Saddam. We helped him build his military to keep Iran in check. For those of you that don't know, there are two major sects in Islam. Shia and Sunni. Saddam is Sunni. Iran is a majority Shia country. The Kurds in Northern Iraq are also Shia and are supported by Iran.
Where were the liberating US forces when Saddam was killing the Kurds in the 80's using weapons we had provided? We were looking the other way because it was in our best interest that the Kurds don't gain power in Iraq. We feared that if the Kurds overthrew Saddam, Iran would gain much more power in the region. BTW we also tried to cash in on this conflict between Iran and Iraq by secretly selling weapons to Iran (read about Oliver North and the Iran Contra Affair). Pretty sneaky of us huh? The US further showed its support for Iraq's actions by giving it 1 billion in aid 6 months after the gassing of the Kurds.
Lets move ahead 2 years into 1990. Its funny how quickly things change. Our "buddy" Saddam had gained much power. He suddenly became a menace when he marched into Kuwait, disrupting the world's oil supplies. It was time to get rid of him and liberate the Kuwaiti oil... err I mean people. We established US military bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait that are still there 12 years later. We bombed the hell out of Iraq day and night. Bush Sr. called for the Kurds to rise up to overthrow Saddam and gave them our word that we would assist them. When they rose up, we quietly stood by as Saddam massacred the Kurds that were waiting for the US support that never came. These events are well documented...or you can go rent the movie The Three Kings if you want to see the Hollywood version. But of course our intentions in Desert Storm was to help the oppressed people.....right?
After Desert Storm, Iraq's military was greatly diminished. Sanctions were placed on the Iraqi people that indirectly killed more people over 12 years then the actual war. The sanctions were designed to ensure that Saddam didn't regain his military strength. Programs such as "Oil for Food" ensured that Iraq could not rebuild its economy.
Last edited by blk97tt; 02-11-2004 at 04:27 PM.
continued....
Lets move ahead to the tragedy of 9/11 and the actions that proceeded it. Afghanistan became the new enemy even though all of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. The US embarked on its new war against terror..."Operation Enduring Freedom." We destroyed the Taliban, gave the Afghani's "freedom" and a new puppet government lead by Hamid Karzai. For those of you don't know, Hamid Karzai was a consultant for Unocal. Unocal is a TX based oil company that was being considered to build a pipeline from the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan across Afghanistan, into Pakistan and to the Indian ocean. Turkmenistan and the Caspian Sea area contains substantial quantities of oil and one of the worlds largest natural gas reserves. Before the war, the Taliban decided to end talks with Unocal and were considering a South American company to build the multi billion dollar pipeline. But the Taliban don't exist anymore...just a pro US and pro Unocal government. But of course we were just interested in giving the Afghani people freedom....right?
Now lets look at "Operation Iraqi Occupation" err I mean "Operation Iraqi Freedom." Yes I know the US has stated we will not occupy Iraq long term. Current estimates say that a US Military government will rule Iraq for about 2 years after which a puppet government will be put into place. Puppet governments are a type of occupation in my opinion. The US is indicating that the UN will have little or no say in rebuilding postwar Iraq. The US plans to have Lieutenant General Jay Garner run the interim government of post war Iraq. What is Jay Garner's background? He is retired 3 star general who has close ties to the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs. Garner has managerial and investment links to US arms manufacturers and has been heavily involved in Israel's ballistic missile defense program. He used to be president of SY Technology...a missile guidance system manufacturer. In Oct 2000 he signed a statement blaming the Palestinians for the current intifada. Very interesting candidate for running post war Iraq, huh?
I know there have been discussions that the economics of this war do not make sense. The 75 billion this war will cost do not seem to justify the 1.5 billion in oil contracts we can potentially get. Simple math tells us 75B > 1.5B. However, I think we need to examine these numbers a little more closely. The 75B is coming from tax payers. The 1.5B will be going into the pockets of private companies. Many of these companies have affiliations with Bush and his cabinet members. For example, Halliburton has already been awarded a contract to repair Iraqi oil fields in Southern Iraq and the war isn't even over. Some interesting facts about oil in Iraq are that the cost of oil extraction is much cheaper then in the rest of the Mideast. The oil in Iraq is relatively close to the ground and doesn't require extensive drilling to extract. There are plenty of oil fields in Iraq that have not been tapped yet. So not only does Iraq have the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, it, has the cheapest extraction costs in the world. This makes it an extremely attractive place for oil companies to operate and maximize profit. In addition to oil contracts, the rest of the country will need to be rebuilt. Streets, buildings, bridges, communication systems will all need to be rebuilt. There are plenty of business opportunities here. I watch the financial news on MSNBC every morning, and they were recently discussing how US and foreign cellular companies are fighting for rights to rebuild the cellular structure in postwar Iraq. So needless to say, many people will get rich from this war that US tax payers are funding.
Is war in Iraq justified? According to the members of the UN it is not. The US repeatedly tells us that Saddam is a global problem. He is an evil man that has the means to hurt any nation in the world. If Saddam is such a big a threat to the safety of the world, he should be dealt with in accordance to the collective will of the world...through the UN. The UN has not supported this war. The members wished to continue inspections and were making progress. The US has basically undermined the authority of the UN by going behind its back. It has set a precedent that if a nation is strong enough, it can go against the UN's wishes. Also, this "preemptive strike" philosophy scares me. The US has declared war on Iraq in anticipation of a possible attack that may or may not occur at some indefinite time. Could you imagine a society where you can go attack anyone because you fear they might possibly harm you at some future time? It would be total chaos. What happens if India decides to attack Pakistan "preemptively" against the wish of the UN? If the US has done it in the past, why can't they?
Has the US provided any evidence in support of this war? The members of Bush's administration have been anti Saddam for years before they even entered office. There is plenty of documentation dating a few years back, stating their feelings that Saddam must go. The administration has been pushing this agenda very hard since 9/11. Remember the anthrax attacks? We tried to make connections to Saddam right away. However, lab reports indicated that the anthrax was a strain created by the US military in the 60s. The Bush administration also likes to hint Saddam had a hand in 9/11. Bush has said 9/11 and Saddam in the same sentence in many of his speeches. This can lead one to believe that they are somehow connected. There has been no evidence provided that Iraq works with or is affiliated with Al-Queda. There were allegations that a senior Al-Queda member may have met with a Senior Iraqi Republican Guard officer in Prague before 9/11. That report has now been dismissed by the US Government as well as the secret services of many European nations. Furthermore, Bin Laden has openly spoken against Iraq's regime. There were news reports that a possible chemical arms factory had been discovered a week ago. Further investigation of the site showed that there were no weapons of mass destruction made there. During a UN Security Council meeting, Colin Powel stated that investigators have found a drone that "should be of concern to everyone." Iraq showed this drone to journalists later that week. It was made out of balsa wood and held together with screws and duct tape. It had 2 small propellers attached to a weed wacker motor. Hans Blix's spokesman verified that this was the same plane investagers had examined and that it was not capable of deploying weapons of mass destruction. The plane has to be flown by remote control by someone on the ground. It has a range of 5 miles...well below the UN imposed limit of 93 miles. The Bush administration also referred to a document showing correspondance between Iraq and Nigeria regarding uranium sales. These documents were studied by the CIA and FBI. The President referred to this document in one of his speaches as proof of Iraq's ongoing nuclear weapons program. When the UN examined the document they were able to immediately tell that the document was forged. Names, titles, signatures all revealed inconsistencies. When Colin Powell was asked about the forged document on NBC's Meet the Press, he responded, ""It was the information that we had. We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine." Umm no it is not fine to wage a military campaign based on false information. BTW all this information I have discussed here is all over the internet. I have seen all these incidents reported on CNN's website...although they did a good job of burrying it deep so not too many people see it. I was just watching a news story on Fox News about "What if no weapons of mass destruction are found." They were interviewing a government official who stated that no evidence of weapons of mass destruction has been found yet. He said that once Saddam is out of power, the civilians will probably show us where these weapons are. This is very embarassing for the US in my opinion and raises alot of questions about the legitimacy of this war. What happend to all the proof we had? Why are we counting on civilians to help us find these weapons of mass destruction we were so confident Saddam had? Has all our military intelligence failed us?
I know there are some who will say, the US does not wish to reveal its intelligence sources. I suppose that is possible. However, the evidence they have provided so far is all flawed. This war has resulted in the most global demonstrations since the Vietnam war, raised our national terror threat to orange (high), will cost billions of dollars and many human lives. I would think the US would want to provide at least some credible proof of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, even if it means compromising an intelligence source. I would think they have amassed countless intelligence sources and pieces of information before starting a 75 billion dollar war without UN support. All they have to do is reveal one piece of solid information to quiet the doubters and legitimize this war. They have failed to do this.
continued....
I believe this war was decided upon long ago. The liberation of the Iraqi people is an excuse. We have let the Iraqi people die for the last 20 years. Why are we so concerned now? There has been no evidence linking Al-Queda and Saddam. We are just playing on 9/11 to gain easy support for this war here. There has been no threat to the US from Iraq prior to this war. The truth is Iraq is a greater threat to Israel then the US. That threat will have been neutralized after this war. Also the selection of Jay Garner as interim leader of postwar Iraq will further Israel's security after this conflict. This war is also a great business opportunity for many US corporations with ties to the Bush administration. This war will boost our ailing economy and give Wallstreet a much needed boost. It is also important to note that after this conflict, the US will have control over Iran's southern and western neighbors (Afghanistan and Iraq). These countries will be the perfect stage for the US to launch an offensive against Iran...who is on the United States list of "Axis of Evil" members. This conflict has worsened the United States reputation in the Mideast and most of the world. The US has to dramatically rethink its foreign policies and double standards if it hopes to change the way the world percievs it. If it is globally accepted that weapons of mass destruction are evil, EVERY country should be required to dispose of them. We can not ask one country to disarm while ignoring its neighbor. The US currently has the most weapons of mass destruction in the world...and has shown it is an agressive nation that will attack without UN support. This is a very scary combination. I hope there is not much loss of life in this conflict and the "preemptive" strikes I am sure Iran will face in the future. The only good thing I can see coming out of this whole thing is the 75 billion dollar geography lesson America is getting.
Sal
holy crap sal
Sorry man, but 3 posts long in a chat forum = doesn't get read very well.
Werd to GenXist - Beautiful Sig.
If you guys want to be better informed on world events check out:
the BBC News
and listen to WBEZ 91.5 FM -> I recommend Worldview, the Tavis Smiley show, and news from 3-7p.m.
It gets read just fine. Nice to see someone that THINKS.Sorry man, but 3 posts long in a chat forum = doesn't get read very well.
Last edited by James; 02-11-2004 at 08:57 PM.
Originally Posted by GenXisT
First off, I couldn't care less about the WMD in Iraq. Fact of the matter is, he had them, he took 12 years of dissing the UN in order to hide them. Everyone know's he had them, HE USED THEM and killed like a ton of people. You don't find mass graves of people that have been shot, they have been gassed. That's how you mass murder.
#2 What does Bush's time of Military Service have anything to do with anything? What are they trying to prove? My guess is that they are trying to say that Bush is quick to throw others in harms way in a war, but not himself??
Problem is, the gay ass LIE-berals have NOTHING and they keep beating the same dead horse about the economy and the war in Iraq because they know those are hot spots. Fact is, they cannot beat Bush and they are Campaigning for 2nd place.
Ask yourself this... Historically, DemoCRAPS are reluctant to go to war when needed. We are now being attacked at home... are you going to want a President or a Presidential Party in charge that is NOT going to defend what you hold so dear? Freedom, Liberty... BEER???
For those of you that are anti Bush/anti War, you tell me, what IS a good time to go fight? Have you not paid any attention to the news on CNN lately? That idiot Neanderthal dude that was sending the letter about the Iraqi Civil War (or trying to start one)... AL-QUEADA (or however you spell it)... That's what Bush said all along. That Saddam and his Neanderthal buddies are in Bed with the rest of the Muslims (they always are) and that Saddam, the most flagrant of the leaders was supporting them. You all know it's true and you keep asking who what when where why and how... it's all right there for you.
Al -Queda doesn't care about life of others or thier own, what better place to live than in a country like Iraq where the leader holds the exact same values. However, super ruthless Saddam was hiding in a whole like a pussy when the man came for that ass. HA!
hell yeaexactly what I am talking about Nakia. Peace
Didn't Saddam supress all religion and force everyone to worship him in Iraq?
Pretty much having an intersection in Baghdad @
Saddam Is Great and Saddam is Good (both Rd's) yeah, they had to worship him. He is (was) the only "art" allowed and all statues were of him. Only other picture in Baghdad was of Bush Sr. on the floor of some gov't building so the Iraqis could walk on his face. You know Muslims and shoes.
That article is a bit off about Iraq and Al-Queda... even recently with that idiot and the Civil War... Al-Queda. Frankly, I"m sick of hearing about whether or not Al-Queda is or is NOT in Iraq. What does it matter? The fact is and remains MUSLIMS hate Western Culture and Western Civilization and advancement and therefore hate the ring leaders of it's perpetuation, the United States of America.
Iraq was the most powerful of the states there, now they have no leader and the Western Ideology which everyone in the world, except the Muslims, knows is a better route, can prevail.
Who loses sleep over this issue anyway? Certainly not me. I only get upset when my soldiers die...
Which brings me to this point...
Be you for or against this war (and especially in the case of AGAINST) STFU until the people giving you the right, liberty and availibilty to voice your opinion, our Soldier, come back home.
Daily they are killed by cowards that detonate remote bombs... blow themselves up and do whatever else. But WE'RE the Infidels??? Where is the logic. The longer they keep up that nonsense, the longer we'll stay. No one wants that.
ok...i'm done for now..
"Rational arguments don't really work on religious people. Otherwise, there'd be no religious people."
"Everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Al-Queda has always been anti-saddam. Actually most of the Muslim world considers Saddam to be an asshole. Osama Bin Laden has openly spoken against Saddam and the Baath party on many occasions. Saddam has never worked with Al-Queda. They have different ideologies. However, I do think Iraq has become a hotbed for Al-Queda AFTER this war started. They had probably fleed Afghanistan and were looking for a new place to fight. Iraq is where the action is these days, so that is where they went. However, this does not mean they have any loyalty to Saddam.
It matters because we started the "War on Terror" by attacking Al Queda in Afghanistan. We then tried to show an imaginary link between Al Queda and Saddam and tied it in to 9/11 to gain support for Operation Iraqi Freedom. This link does not exist. The Al-Queda "connection" was the first of a series of lies fed to the American public by the Bush Administration to get support for this war. Iraq has never posed a threat to the United States. Iraq has NO weapon that can even come close to touching us. It has been almost one year now and no WMDs have been found.
This is a MAJOR misconception. Muslims can care less about Western culture, civilization, or advancement. Most of these Muslim countries are 3rd world countries. Believe me, they could care less what you and I are doing here in the US. They have bigger things to worry about. Many of them don't even know where their next meal will come from. Most of them would come here if they were given the chance. Over here they can achieve the "American Dream."
What they do care about is American foreign policies. This is what directly impacts them. Im sure we have all seen pics of Palestinian children throwing rocks at Iraeli tanks. Take a good look at those tanks. Look familiar? They are American tanks. Take a look at the pictures of Iraeli helicopters flying over Palestine firing missles in busy neighborhoods. Look familiar? They are American made Apache helicopters. Take a look at pics of Israeli soldiers firing at Palestinians. Look familiar? Those are American guns firing American bullets. The United States supplies Israel with all these weapons to use against the Palestinians. This is why many Muslims in the Middle East consider the United States somewhat responsible for the Palestinian situatioin.
There are currently US Military bases across the Middle East that were created during Desert Storm. Its been 12+ years since the war yet the bases still exist. Most Muslims in the Middle East feel the US Military has overstayed its welcome, and it is time for them to pack up and head on home.
All of these US policies directly impact Muslims in the Mideast. They have NOTHING to do with hatred for Western culture, civilization, or advancement.
I also get upset when US soldiers die...specially when they don't have to. I don't feel any safer after this war then I did before. Iraq never posed a threat to America....only to Israel...and that threat was greatly diminised after Desert Storm. It bothers me that 500+ US Soldiers have sacrificed their lives for the Bush Administration when they should be at home with thier loved ones.
Our US Constitution gives us our freedom of speach, not soldiers in Iraq. This war impacts all of us. The terror threat level has gone to orange, countless number of people have died, public opinion of the US is at an all time low globally, and this war has resulted in the biggest demonstrations world wide since Vietnam. This war has put the US on the road to global isolation. This is something we all should be concerned about.
BTW the British also told the American Colonists to STFU, be be loyal servants to England, and keep their opinions regarding unfair taxes to themselves. If they listened to your "STFU" advice we would be living in the United States of Britain right now
you tell em
Posting Permissions 