kallend 2,118 #126 February 9, 2003 QuoteQuoteYeah ... it attitudes like yours that earn a great deal of disrespect for your country from others around the world. Are you referring to the British woman who said "it's about time something like this happened to the US" when you refer to "others around the world". I'm not sure I want her respect. Forgotten the IRA? A terrorist group that got the bulk of its funding from the USA. Maybe the British woman you refer to detects an element of hypocrisy here.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyhi 24 #127 February 9, 2003 QuoteNo. Politicians decide when we've won; then the war stops. In the meantime it means killing as many people as possible, and destroying as much of the country as possible. The two greatest advantages this country has in times of war are its youth and its technology. IMO, if you go into a war limiting the use of one (short of nukes), you will needlessly waste the other. If you are not ready to engage in a war using every advantage on your side, you shouldn't go. The youth of America, who will be fighting this war, deserve nothing less than that support. We didn't do that in Viet Nam, and look how that turned out. As the man said, "The job of the Army is to break things and hurt people." If you cannot stomach them doing their job, don't use them. Anything less is unfair to them and will cause unwarranted casualties. War is never an appealing prospect, and to fight it in half measures should be considered a criminal act.Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #128 February 9, 2003 Quote You claim to know Hussein's mind and say that we should believe you. My question is, WHY should we believe you. Do you have some direct link to his thoughts? Ask anyone that knows me.. I don't give a damn if you believe me or not.. And don't insinuate that I am saying things that I am not..Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #129 February 9, 2003 >War is never an appealing prospect, and to fight it in half measures > should be considered a criminal act. I agree, actually. Half measures give us Vietnam; 'real war' (i.e. the popular kind, the kind that's generally fought by countries other than superpowers) gives you Dresden, Hiroshima, and concentration camps (the ones in the US, not the ones in Germany.) Those are examples of what war is. If there is no other choice than to subject a large percentage of 22 million people to slow painful deaths, dismemberment, watching their families die, if war is neccessary to protect our country from an imminent threat, then so be it. Fortunately we still have other choices. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,118 #130 February 9, 2003 Quote Quote You claim to know Hussein's mind and say that we should believe you. My question is, WHY should we believe you. Do you have some direct link to his thoughts? Ask anyone that knows me.. I don't give a damn if you believe me or not.. And don't insinuate that I am saying things that I am not.. What you wrote was: "Believe me.. At the rate he was building his weapons program he would have used WMD's more and won.. Rhino" If you don't give a damn, why ask us to believe you in the first place? I do not need to insinuate anything. You stated what he would have done, as fact, and you asked us to believe you. I am STILL waiting to hear how you KNOW what he would have done, and why I should believe you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #131 February 10, 2003 Do I get a prize?Really?? I hope its a new rig. Oh boy! When is the presentation of awards? JJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #132 February 10, 2003 If the bulk of funding of the IRA came from the US how did this happen? By people of Irish decent living here and being sympathetic to them? In Boston once I saw a charity box in a bar, like the ones in 7/11 for Jerry's Kids. But this one was to help the poor children in Ireland. I was later told that money placed into these boxes was channeled to the IRA. If so it was a misleading way to get cash from the American public. However I was unaware of official U.S. support of the IRA. Is this true? Please explain.JJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #133 February 10, 2003 We can split the fine hairs forever. The problem is that we see things differently. The only place I see you being wrong is the time given Iraq to disarm. If resolutions are to be made, we need to see some results ASAP. It shouldn't take longer to disarm than it did to build the weapons in the first place. You are right that we have not exhausted all avenues, but Iraq ain't exactly giving us access to all the avenues either. We shouldn't have to fight to get them to live up to 100% of what they agreed to. My mortgage analogy is pretty accurate. If you default and make no feasible arrangements to comply or pacify those you owe to, you can expect a pretty swift settlement in their favor. In the paperwork you signed for the loan, the conditions were there. Same here. My problem in giving Iraq another 10 years to achieve their 300-way is that they are looking at all their avenues for building up more weapons to keep us out. They have stalled for a long time and possibly hidden things. They can continue to do so and pay lip service to the U.N. to keep us off their backs. Half way complying is not complying. You guys didn't do the 300 way as punishment for jumping through clouds, and nobody was going to ban skydiving in the U.S. if you failed to get the 300 way. Peace.JJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,118 #134 February 10, 2003 Quote If the bulk of funding of the IRA came from the US how did this happen? By people of Irish decent living here and being sympathetic to them? In Boston once I saw a charity box in a bar, like the ones in 7/11 for Jerry's Kids. But this one was to help the poor children in Ireland. I was later told that money placed into these boxes was channeled to the IRA. If so it was a misleading way to get cash from the American public. However I was unaware of official U.S. support of the IRA. Is this true? Please explain. Because it was well known as far back as the 1970's that Noraid was channeling $$ to the IRA for buying weapons. The FBI knew, the CIA knew, and the US government knew, and did precisely nothing about it. However, organizations giving $$ to Islamic "charities" are having assets seized and principals arrested in Chicago these days. It's just a double standard. Now, every country should put its own interests above those of others, but in this case the preachy hypocracy is galling.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #135 February 10, 2003 QuoteIf you don't give a damn, why ask us to believe you in the first place? I do not need to insinuate anything. You stated what he would have done, as fact, and you asked us to believe you. I am STILL waiting to hear how you KNOW what he would have done, and why I should believe you. You don't have to believe me genious.. Believe what he DID. He DID use the weapons at hand. And HIS TRACK RECORD shows that he produces them to use them.. LOLOLOLOLOL bwahahahahahahaha... lol Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #136 February 10, 2003 Did you happen to catch the intriquing piece that a former CIA analyst put together to show that maybe it was'nt Iraqi chemical weapons used on kurds? Thought provoking if it turns out that they were actually imported to be used against the Iraqi soldiers but were accidently released on in the kurdush settlements... In the first Gulf war were any chemical agents used?Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #137 February 10, 2003 >If resolutions are to be made, we need to see some results ASAP. We have; inspectors have been allowed back in, and they are reporting some success. We just have not seen all results ASAP, which I think is to be expected. We killed around 100,000 Iraqis in the last gulf war, and we admitted to putting spies on the last UNSCOM inspection team. I would be amazed if they trusted the inspectors 100% until they prove that they're not just spying for an american preemptive strike. As time goes on, and we prove that we're after disarmament and not espionage, that will improve. From CNN today: "With Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei leaving Baghdad more convinced than ever that the inspections would accomplish Iraq's disarmament peacefully, a Security Council showdown over the next steps appeared unavoidable." We're not there and our president is not there. Blix and ElBaradei _are_ there, so I think they might be worth listening to. >We shouldn't have to fight to get them to live up to 100% of what they agreed to. If you mean we don't need to fight them to disarm them you are exactly right. Inspections are better than fighting; if we don't have to fight to get them disarmed, even if it takes a while, we will come out ahead in terms of american lives, iraqi lives and world unity. It will even be cheaper. If you need we shouldn't have to argue to get them to comply, keep in mind that we are pretty bad about living up to our UN obligations. We owe them billions that we just keep not paying. We reject things like Kyoto and international justice measures because we just can't be bothered. Why do we hold Iraq to a higher standard than we hold ourselves? > My problem in giving Iraq another 10 years to achieve their 300-way >is that they are looking at all their avenues for building up more > weapons to keep us out. Of course. We would do the same; we did the same during the cold war, where we would push the limits of every arms-control treaty we signed. So did the USSR. Yet we avoided war, we even 'won' in the end. We can do so again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #138 February 10, 2003 QuoteIs that a serious question? If it takes you 10 years to finally achieve the 300-way, did you really achieve it? So as a serious answer, yes, if he complies that means he complies, whether it's in ten minutes, a year or ten years. If there is a way to make that happen, even if it takes a long time, then it's worth the effort. If it can never happen even after you exhaust all avenues towards disarmament, then you would have a good argument for war. We have not yet exhausted all avenues. You're forgetting that there is a time issue here. We need him not to just disarm in some distant future, we need those weapons gone now, and for good reason. The real concern is not that he will use them, but that he will give them to someone who will. Those terrorists arrested in London, where did they get the ricin from? I do, however, agree that the US must wait for the inspectors to give up before attacking. I'm hoping that what will happen will not compare with Dresden, but I can't help but think back to the bombing of Beirut by Israel. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #139 February 10, 2003 Forgive me for poking my nose in here... QuoteThose terrorists arrested in London, where did they get the ricin from? From my (admittedly quite limited) understanding, ricin is made from castor beans, and is considered "basic" to make. In other words, it's fairly easy to make and distribute, as it is not volatile. Ricin is a nasty nasty poison, but still easy to manufacture. It is more like Al Queda cells to develop and implement the ricin plan independently of a "direct" communique from someone, and we know that the cells have been developed to be independent operations, and maintain the secrecy that way. The whole ricin episode in Britain smacks of AQ and/or independent cell work (such as the Bali incident, and so forth). Saddam H. is more likely to use different CB weapons... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #140 February 10, 2003 Definitely true. I remember a friend told me that he asked his highschool chemistry teacher how to make TNT(tri-nitro toluene, I believe) in the kitchen. The chemistry teacher came back with a page of handwriting. At the top it said in big red letters "DO NOT DO THIS". And then it explained, in detail, how to make TNT in your kitchen.I was using that more as an example than anything. Also, I believe Powell mentioned it in his speech. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #141 February 10, 2003 QuoteForgotten the IRA? A terrorist group that got the bulk of its funding from the USA. First off, I think you will be hard pressed to prove that the IRA got the "bulk of its funding" from the USA. The Kennedy's probably contributed some as a private group. At any rate, none of it came from the US government proper. Secondly, it does not excuse her remarks in the least bit, hypocrisy or not. Thirdly, the UK funded an insurgent group within the US a little while ago. They did it openly too. It was called the US Civil War. Should I start hoping that "something like this" will happen to the UK. Even if I disliked the UK (which I don't) I wouldn't wish something like that on them. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #142 February 10, 2003 QuoteI was using that more as an example than anything. Also, I believe Powell mentioned it in his speech. Here is a link to the whole speech: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-5-2003-34991.asp I read it, and then searched it for "ricin", but didn't find it. He has spoken about it recently, but unless it was an editorial/off-the-cuff comment, it wasn't at the UN last week. Lest you think I am poking you, I am strongly in favor of going into Iraq and taking out Saddam. I am sure that is anathema for many, and surprises a few...but I think it's long overdue. I also believe that war sucks. I want the inspections to work. I also want it to not take an additional 10 years. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,118 #143 February 10, 2003 QuoteQuoteIf you don't give a damn, why ask us to believe you in the first place? I do not need to insinuate anything. You stated what he would have done, as fact, and you asked us to believe you. I am STILL waiting to hear how you KNOW what he would have done, and why I should believe you. You don't have to believe me genious.. Believe what he DID. He DID use the weapons at hand. And HIS TRACK RECORD shows that he produces them to use them.. LOLOLOLOLOL bwahahahahahahaha... lol Rhino Well, I don't believe you have any special insight into his behavior that the intelligence community doesn't have. P.S., it's "genius".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #144 February 10, 2003 QuoteThe FBI knew, the CIA knew, and the US government knew, and did precisely nothing about it. I'm really wanting to see where you are getting this information from. QuoteHowever, organizations giving $$ to Islamic "charities" are having assets seized and principals arrested in Chicago these days. There is a reason for this. It was not illegal to fund terrorist groups overseas in the US until the mid 90's. It didn't matter if they were Irish, Arab, or martian. It just wasn't illegal and the FBI, CIA, and anyone else you name couldn't do anything about it. (BTW, the CIA and the FBI work very closely with MI5 and do a lot of things together that you are unaware of.) The Congress had to enact a law to make it illegal. Now it is illegal to fund terrorism overseas and it is illegal no matter what the ethnic origin of the terrorists. There have been arrests concerning funding of the IRA. It just doesn't get the press that Arab terrorists get. The FBI has a squad investigating domestic (or bubba) terrorism that is just as large as the squad that investigates international terrorism. It is not "preachy hypocracy". It seems to be willfull ignorance. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #145 February 10, 2003 Quote read it, and then searched it for "ricin", but didn't find it. He has spoken about it recently, but unless it was an editorial/off-the-cuff comment, it wasn't at the UN last week. It's more than likely that I'm wrong. I didn't see/read the whole speech, I just read the key points on CNN as Powell was delivering it. Ever since the "18 times the speed of light" comment... Still, I believe my main point about the urgency of his disarmament still stands. QuoteLest you think I am poking you, I am strongly in favor of going into Iraq and taking out Saddam. I am sure that is anathema for many, and surprises a few...but I think it's long overdue. I also believe that war sucks. I want the inspections to work. I also want it to not take an additional 10 years. I hear you. And feel free to poke me, I don't mind. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,118 #146 February 10, 2003 QuoteQuoteForgotten the IRA? A terrorist group that got the bulk of its funding from the USA. First off, I think you will be hard pressed to prove that the IRA got the "bulk of its funding" from the USA. The Kennedy's probably contributed some as a private group. At any rate, none of it came from the US government proper. Secondly, it does not excuse her remarks in the least bit, hypocrisy or not. Agreed on your second point. And I cannot "prove" anything, any more than you can, given that our information is always second hand or worse. However, in the 80s the US media reported frequently that the FBI knew what was going on with Noraid and the IRA but couldn't do anything about it on account of political pressure. That's as good a "proof" as any of us here have about the goings on in Iraq.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #147 February 10, 2003 Quote>A PORTION? WTF? Why should I support a UN program which is not feeding these starving children? It's not a UN program. It's an Iraqi program. This is wholly incorrect. "Oil for food" is a United Nations Humanitarian program. The restriction is due to UN trade sanctions. QuoteWe are simply allowing the Iraqis to sell oil to buy food Now, if you really believe that Iraq is buying food with this revenue then we are not living in same world. Saddam has hi-jacked these revenues. QuoteYou think that's a lot for a whole country to run on? We GIVE more than that to american oil companies over the course of a few years. There are 22 million people in Iraq. That's about $250 per person per year to feed them. Could you feed yourself all year for $250? There's a key difference there Bill. Iraq is not a helpless entity. It has an agricultural infrastructure with which the leadership could use this aid to feed its people. It chooses to do otherwise, rendering the UN program ineffective and I don't support it.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #148 February 10, 2003 >This is wholly incorrect. "Oil for food" is a United Nations Humanitarian > program. The restriction is due to UN trade sanctions. That's like claiming that Microsoft is a branch of the US government because they gave Microsoft a business license. The oil for food program simply allows Iraq to sell oil and use that money, the money Iraq receives for Iraqi oil, to buy goods from a UN-monitored list. These things go towards feeding their people, fixing their generators, or doing anything else the UN thinks is OK. No money comes from the UN for that program. No money comes from the US for that program, other than what the oil companies spend to buy Iraqi oil. >Now, if you really believe that Iraq is buying food with this revenue then > we are not living in same world. Saddam has hi-jacked these revenues. Uh, he's not getting the money, he's getting food. Don't forget, the UN essentially controls what goes in and out of his ports, and they regulate what he can and can't buy. That list includes things like food, medicine, parts for his electrical, sanitary and water infrastuctres etc. If you want to read more about it check out this. And while I'm sure Hussein and his cronies are eating all the good stuff, child starvation and malnutrition rates are down by about half since the program started. Number of surgeries are up. That's a good thing. >Iraq is not a helpless entity. You might have a point if we had not spent the past decade trying to destroy its economy and _make_ it a helpless entity. Claiming they have the economic infrastructure feed themselves while continuing sanctions is somewhat contradictory. If you cut off Saudi Arabia's oil exports they would fare no better. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #149 February 10, 2003 You kretin, the we (the US) buy 10% of our oil from Iraq while we could be purchasing it elswhere. Go brush your teeth child. Va fangulo!jraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #150 February 10, 2003 Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We are simply allowing the Iraqis to sell oil to buy food -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you really believe that Iraq is buying food with this revenue then we are not living in same world. Saddam has hi-jacked these revenues. you are so rigth,but who is then the stuppied?I would say UN..We should pay whith controled food.To be sure the rigth people get it.. Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
