peace rally in San Diego this weekend

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

And then there's the draft, the ultimate loss of personal control. Kids still have to register for it.

Can't one claim CO status and stay out of the draft?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

And then there's the draft, the ultimate loss of personal control. Kids still have to register for it.

Can't one claim CO status and stay out of the draft?

-
Jim

There's lots of ways of avoid going in harm's way, but it sure helps to have a well connected family.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

What is the punishment for mutiny in the US military?

I don't know. I was in the Army. We didn't have many ships.

What have ships got to do with mutiny?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gemini 0]

Quote

I was glad that we had at least gotten together with other San Diegans to voice our opinion in a very public way. I doubt it will have any effect but at least we tried.

Ummhh, I think it will have an effect, but not necessarily the one you want. Providing encouragement to Iraq to continue their practices because the US does not have a backbone! Tsk, tsk be careful what you ask for.

Blue skies,

Jim

[wmw999 2,588]

How does a protest whose main message appears to have been:

"It's not time to go to war with Iraq, but keep the inspectors in getting rid of WMD, and by the way, Saddam sucks"

support Iraq?

Will a simple attack suffice, or will anything less than an all-out invasion, killing as many civilians (after all, some children will grow up to be soldiers, and some women will have more boys) as possible along with the soldiers, be considered "support" for Iraq.

It's not a black or white issue where anything less than all-out war indicates support of Saddam Hussein. The time for war may well come; but if it's a world decision rather than a unilateral US one, then the downstream impacts to the US are likely to be much smaller. I really care about those downstream impacts. They're MUCH more likely than an all-out attack by Iraq (9,000 miles away) on American soil.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 3,116]

> Providing encouragement to Iraq to continue their practices because
> the US does not have a backbone!

Not all of us equate having a backbone with killing hundreds of thousands of civilians.

>Tsk, tsk be careful what you ask for.

I will continue to ask for war as a last resort instead of an easy out. Feel free to show up at the next rally to voice your view; you might even push the pro-war demonstrators into the double digits.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

I was glad that we had at least gotten together with other San Diegans to voice our opinion in a very public way. I doubt it will have any effect but at least we tried.

Ummhh, I think it will have an effect, but not necessarily the one you want. Providing encouragement to Iraq to continue their practices because the US does not have a backbone! Tsk, tsk be careful what you ask for.

False dichotomy - a Carl Sagan "baloney" argument. (thanks, Andy, for the web site link).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Shark 0]

Quote

I will continue to ask for war as a last resort instead of an easy out.

See?! We agree on some things!

[kallend 2,148]

Let's summarize. We should invade Iraq because:

1. They have WMDs
... but so do India, Pakistan and N. Korea, France, Britain, Russia, China, and the US

2. They have a despot in charge who kills thousands of his own people
... but so do half the countries in Africa

3. They have a history of invading their neighbors
... but so do India and Pakistan and N. Korea (among many others).

4. They are in violation of UN resolutions
... as is Israel

5. They provide material support to terrorists
... as has the USA, Saudi Arabia, N. Korea, Iran, and a long list of other nations.

6. They have oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia
... ummmmm

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

1. They have WMDs
... but so do India, Pakistan and N. Korea, France, Britain, Russia, China, and the US

well none of the others has currently used it on their own people.

Quote

2. They have a despot in charge who kills thousands of his own people
... but so do half the countries in Africa.
what's different is the active support of groups seeking to destroy the US.

3. They have a history of invading their neighbors
... but so do India and Pakistan and N. Korea (among many others).

Quote

if we don't act know Iraq could become as powerful as N. korea

4. They are in violation of UN resolutions
... as is Israel

Quote

Israel never invaded the surrounding nations unless attacked 1st. They have shown great restraint

5. They provide material support to terrorists
... as has the USA, Saudi Arabia, N. Korea, Iran, and a long list of other nations.
We, the 20 nations tire of waiting for the french and maybe the germans (I think they will come on board next week). One thing at a time.

Quote

6. They have oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia

if it was about oil for us we could take over Kuwait with out firing a shot.


It is about oil and money for the French and the Germans.

[DivaSkyChick 0]

Quote

if it was about oil for us we could take over Kuwait with out firing a shot.

I imagine Kuwait might take issue with that. Of course, if we could connect them to Osama... lol

---
www.facebook.com/mandyhamptonfitch

[nitrodan 0]

There once was a guy named Adolf who was building alot of weapons and doing very bad things to alot of people. No one stepped up and nipped it in the bud and it bit the world in the ass a few years later.
HISTORY HAS A STRANGE WAY OF REPEATING ITS SELF!! I'm not saying it will but it can and does.
just a thought.
DAN SMITH
WWW.SKYDIVEWICHITA.COM

DAN SMITH
www.skydivewichita.com

[kiltboy 0]

It would be nice to get away from the historical references.

Adolf also annexed countries, same as Saddam tried with Kuwait. But there are a few other differences such as the population in Iraq is different to the population in germany at that time. More access to media.

I would like it if the discussion stayed to the present. There are historical similarities but the world has moved on so I'd like to keep the discussion towards what is current.

There remains plenty to debate on what has been discovered.

David

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

There are historical similarities but the world has moved on so I'd like to keep the discussion towards what is current.

That's the reasoning that lets history repeat its self. History is very relivant.

If you want some homework, research the historical similarities of Saddam to King Nebekanezzar. You'll be surprised.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[kiltboy 0]

I can see history repeating itself if you let certain actions stand.

The point I tried to make (poorly) is that I've heard sound bites from Oliver North equating Saddam to Hitler.

What I would like to hear is less of the comparison and more on the breaches of the UN resolutions. I don't disagree with the similarity but what will win the case for action in Iraq are the details of the current breaches.

David

[jerry81 10]

Quote

Quote

1. They have WMDs
... but so do India, Pakistan and N. Korea, France, Britain, Russia, China, and the US

well none of the others has currently used it on their own people.

Just to set things straight, Saddam used those weapons on the Kurds, who, although they may be citizens of Iraq, are a nation all for themselves. Turkey has a history of doing nasty things to its Kurdish population, but few people seem to complain, or even know about it.

Quote

4. They are in violation of UN resolutions
... as is Israel

Quote

Israel never invaded the surrounding nations unless attacked 1st. They have shown great restraint

Israel was formed half a century ago by invasion and occupation of the countries that now surround it. I personally consider the way Israel as a country came into existence as of the worst things that happened in the aftermath of WW2.

Quote

5. They provide material support to terrorists
... as has the USA, Saudi Arabia, N. Korea, Iran, and a long list of other nations.
We, the 20 nations tire of waiting for the french and maybe the germans (I think they will come on board next week). One thing at a time.

So in the end, can we expect the USA to declare war on USA for its past support of terrorist organizations?

Quote

Quote

6. They have oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia

if it was about oil for us we could take over Kuwait with out firing a shot.

Kuwait cooperates. Iraq doesn't.

---

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

I would like it if the discussion stayed to the present. There are historical similarities but the world has moved on so I'd like to keep the discussion towards what is current.

Na you need history to keep from repeating past mistakes aka League of Nations and Nazi Germany

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

Just to set things straight, Saddam used those weapons on the Kurds, who, although they may be citizens of Iraq, are a nation all for themselves. Turkey has a history of doing nasty things to its Kurdish population, but few people seem to complain, or even know about it.

oh so it's different if we (the Us)gas say the american Indian then Blacks I don't get it

[nitrodan 0]

By the time you learn from anything its history!!! If England had listened to Churchill earlier they might have been able to rally the rest of the world against Hitler years before they were forced to by the military might of Germany. Bush is no Churchill and Saddam is no Hitler (and if grasshoppers had machine guns birds wouldn't f*#k with them) there are reasons that Saddam has become what he has, look at the Iran Iraq war his army was outnumbered 100 to 1 and they still managed to survive but that is no excuse for his later actions but every countrie has done things that they are not proud of.
I just think if we had taken care of this the first time it would have saved alot of trouble.

DAN SMITH
www.skydivewichita.com

[kiltboy 0]

PULLING HAIR IN FRUSTRATION

I'm all for not repeating the mistakes of the past. I understand history repeating itself etc.

What I was tring to do was get away from the ww2 rants of a few posts ago. They get people angry and don't help the discussion. I'm also trying to say that while there are similarities between Saddam and Hitler. Saddam is not Hitler, Iraq isn't Germany and the world is different. There are now more informed people with mass communication, better weaponry, changes in the world order, different trade strengths and economy the list goes on. This is not 1939.

Therefore saying that Saddam is another Hitler isn't an effective argument for taking him out as far as I am concerned.

That he has told the UN to go and whistle is an effective argument. Saying that we've found VX he shouldn't have is an effective argument. Invading another country is an effective argument.

Please can we keep it current. There are enough holes in the Iraq story that a veryu good case can be made but I think the main players are presenting it in a piss poor fashion. Tony Blair plaigarising a 12 year old thesis as his intelligence brief really hasn't helped his case.

SIGH (takes hands from head)

Oh crap now I'm going bald.

David

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

What have ships got to do with mutiny?

In non-lawyer speak it is normally called sedition. Mutiny normally refers to ships. I know what the UCMJ says w/o looking at your hyperlink.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[kiltboy 0]

I agree that it should have been taken care of the first time round.

I remember my brother packing his NBC gear when they went to set up the first of the no fly zones. That was when they thought it would kick off again.

I once gave a seminar on the analytical chemistry of UNSCOM during my grad studies. I read the stories from the inspectors and I saw the UN resolving to be kept aware of the situation. The situation was a mess yet sod all was done hell I could see that and I didn't have all the gen. I'm not about to point fingers at who's to blame for getting to where we are. A case can be made for military action I just think that those trying to make their case are doing a shite job of it.

And so you know Saddams moustache is much more 70s porn star than Hitler's ever was.

David

[kmcguffee 0]

Quote

Let's summarize. We should invade Iraq because:

1. They have WMDs
... but so do India, Pakistan and N. Korea, France, Britain, Russia, China, and the US

2. They have a despot in charge who kills thousands of his own people
... but so do half the countries in Africa

3. They have a history of invading their neighbors
... but so do India and Pakistan and N. Korea (among many others).

4. They are in violation of UN resolutions
... as is Israel

5. They provide material support to terrorists
... as has the USA, Saudi Arabia, N. Korea, Iran, and a long list of other nations.

6. They have oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia
... ummmmm

Well damn! Since other countries have done things wrong in the past we can't punish anyone for them. I guess since people have gotten away with murder in the past we will have to let all future murderers go. Man that ruins all of my plans.

"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

[nitrodan 0]

I said Saddam was no Hitler and yes it has a Ron Jeremy look to it.

DAN SMITH
www.skydivewichita.com

[kiltboy 0]

The grasshopper thing threw me.

David