mikkey

As mentioned before - it comes down to the difference between what is "smart" politically and what is "right" morally. It might be right to kill a guy but it might not be "smart" if you want to achieve your goal. We are seeing the same in Iraq - going into Fallujah might be "right" but it is not "smart" if you want to win the "peace' in Iraq. Have a look at the article from the BBC and think about what the collateral damage will do in winning the "hearts and minds".... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3653223.stm --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Saddam had learned from Stalin. The internal security apparatus was brutal and efficient. Everybody was spying on everybody. SH was absolutely ruthless and murdered anyone who was getting too powerful and was not blood or tribal related to him. That was how he ensured no one would threaten him and there was nobody any opposition could rally around. He even murdered his own son in laws when they dared to oppose him. There is a chilling black and white video tape that shows the first party meeting in the 70's after Saddam came to power. He calls the name of every power broker in the party who could threaten him and accuses him of treason. They are then marched out of the meeting room and shot. Very Stalin like. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I only seen extracts from the 60 minutes thing down here. I was not surprised. More then a year ago there was a documentary on Australian TV explaining the thinking and strategy of the neo-Conservatives. People like Wolverwitz (spelling?) and Pearl were interviewed amongst others. I was at the time very surprised how “simple” the thinking was and thought the program surely was “doctored” to give this impression. More then a year later I know it was not. The strategy was to go into Iraq and secure a strategic foothold in the Middle East from where the US can control the most strategic region in the world (oil, geography, religion). It came clearly across that these guys really believed that the Iraqis would welcome them with open arms, Wolverwitz’ pal Chelvi (spelling?) would be put into power and everything else would fall into place. With basis in Iraq the regimes in Syria and Iran would then be overthrown later. It is now becoming clear that the current US administration really believed this crap. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Why an international court, but not the US, and only perhaps the Iraqis? - Jim A case could be made to say that Saddam should be tried by the Iraqis for crimes committed against Iraqis but that he should be tried at the international court for breach of international law and war crimes during the Iran and Kuwait wars. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I think you are wrong here. At least in Nato, US forces have been under non-US command (AFAIK). Example you had a lot of non-US regional commanders in Europe and in these regions you had US troops. I also think that during the Balkan interventions (Bosnia and Kosovo) US forces at times were reporting to non-US commanders. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I think many Americans do not understand which role the monarchy plays in most western countries where it still exists. The constitutional roles vary with the UK monarchy probably having the strongest formal powers, but if you investigate the issue you will find that modern monarchies only hold ceremonial roles and no real power regarding legislation what so ever. In certain cases their roles are defined even as a kind of “trustee” of democracy by only interfering if there is a constitutional crisis. Spain is a good example. The only time the Spanish King interfered in politics was when some military tried to overthrow the democratically elected government some 20 years ago. The power to legislate and run the country are in the hand of the elected parliaments in these countries – not the monarch. The Monarch might sign the laws but that is purely ceremonial and if they started to interfere in politics the constitution in those countries would be quickly changed to a republic. The only “un-democratic” issue in those countries with a monarchy is that the ceremonial head of state is not elected. It has however no practical influence on the democratic process (decision making). You will find that the huge majority of people in (nearly all) of those monarchies want to keep them in place because they like the tradition and history of it. If they don’t, they can change their constitution and convert to a republic if they want to (which will happen in Australia at some stage). The crux is that you don’t have an un-democratic system just because you still have a King or Queen. In some countries the mornarchy has actually helped stabilising the democratic system (eg. Spain and Belgium). I actually think that many Americans would love to have a Royal family – or they would not be so obsessed with the British Royal family…. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Well, only that you did put a major spin on things. For most people a system where parliament and government are elected by the people in free elections with constitutionally secured freedom rights is a democratic system. Saying that systems that do not exactly match the original definitions are not democratic is just shit stirring. It is also important to note that Head of States in most democratic countries have very little influence (which is very different from the US). In most western countries (except e.g. France) the President or the Monarch have mostly a ceremonial role. The power lies with a chief minister / prime minister, his cabinet and parliament. Those prime ministers can very often do littel without parliamentary approval comapred to the US President. You were mixing issues and implying some UK control over Australian matters in an previous post, but that does not really matter. I see you have looked up some facts…. Well done. Again it is important to understand that in countries like Australia the role of Head (not Chief) of State is ceremonial. This also applies to the UK. Difference in Australia is that the Queen has even less practical influence here because the role is "delegated" to the Governor General. The Governor General is in reality appointed ("recommended") by the Prime Minister. Prime Ministers (under the Westminster model) are appointed by the majority party in Parliament and can be changed between elections by the party. Anyway we are way off topic. Key point is that Spain is as democratic as any other western European country and they are proud of it. They had a very difficult time under Franco and the current King had a major role in converting to democracy 25 or so years ago. Saying "Spain is not a democracy" is misleading - really. Whilst I am against the Spanish pull out from Iraq, it is clearly the will of the Spanish people as expressed in the elections - and that is called democracy. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

?? If I remember right about 10 US soldiers got killed this week-end and the total number since beginning of April (or was it March?) is higher then during the "major combat phase" last year. There is an uneasy truce in Fallujah, there are more then 40 foreign hostages and you can see large numbers of armed militias parading their weapons in Najaf.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

How do the legal rights and privacy laws in the UK compare to the US post Patriot Act? If you look at the size of the US intelligence organisations and the technology available - how do you know that you are not much more "watched" in the US then in the UK? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

The term "representative democracy" is quite accepted and when people talk about democracies they talk about a system where the people elect their government. We can have a long philosophical discussion about what democracy is and which type of representation has most merit but that is off topic. I reacted to a statement that was really inferring that Spain is not as democratic then other western countries and that is definitely not true. Agree, good point. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Good post. The point is that most reasonable people define democracy as being a system where the people through free elections choose their Government and where freedom of expression and political association is guaranteed by the constitution. Trying to make the point that a country is not democratic if it does not ask all its citizens to decide every question (the original Greek concept behind the word democracy) – is stupid in a discussion like this. Also, having a constitutional monarchy does not mean you don’t have a democracy. The Scandinavians, Dutch and the UK have very robust democracies I would think. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

This is why a lot of people don't like Americans - especially in Europe. BTW it would then be fair to say that the US is Saudi Arabia's Bitch? They support Al Qaeda and you still bent over for the oil.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Could you enlighten people why Spain is not a democracy? (I am really looking forward to your answer as you seem to be very well informed - some time ago you told us that Australia was ruled by the UK) --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

They have looked for a year using huge resources. The head of the investigation resigned and reported there are no WMD's in the country. Time to wake up to reality. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Telephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included? The result that Northern Ireland would be safest place in the UK, probably tells you something about the credibility of the study. It is difficult enough to compare official crime stats as it is (due to different definitions of crime, differences in the legal system and differences in data collection) – this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. On another point, I notice the “outrage” from the Americans here. How many cameras in urban areas in the US? What about privacy in regard to your personal information post “Patriots”? I think the increase in “surveillance” of the public is a wide spread phenomenon in the western world – not just in the UK. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

What I think the critics of the killing believe is that it will not curtail but strengthen Hamas and the radicals, which again will not help achieve peace. This is a real dilemma. On the one hand most people have no problem to see these propagators of terror killed – the same way you would like OBL killed. On the other hand, it seems clear that the action will strengthens Hamas standing within the Palestinian community and help them recruit. We need less not more radicals in the region. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I also saw a documentary that claimed NASA never landed on the moon. An amazing amount of "evidence" and it sounded quite credible.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Not true. There are better ways achieving the overall objective then getting into urban warfare and turning the majority of Iraqis against you. Notice the smart tactics used by the US during the “proper” war last year. They bypassed Sunni “hot beds” and isolated them instead of getting dragged into urban warfare. In many ways that is exactly what they should have done instead of the current action. The alternative IMO would be: · Isolate places like Fallujah until the Iraqi security forces are strong enough. (I think it would be more acceptable for Iraqis if it is their own troops taking the militias on). · Try to keep the country as calm as possible while you are rebuilding infrastructure and create jobs. The best recruiting grounds for militias and insurgents are unemployed disillusioned young men. · Use clandestine and targeted actions against the radicals instead of sending a whole division of Marines in. I believe it would work better. · The worst result of the current escalation is the hostage taking. Foreign contractors are fleeing the country, which is putting rebuilding efforts on hold. This again stops job creation and improvement of basic services. Ideal situation for the radicals to recruit in. · I would try to get more clerics (both Sunni and Shiite) on my side. The influence of clerics and what they say during prayer cannot be under estimated. · Listen to what many allies and pro-US Iraqis are saying. From what I have seen they do agree with the above. The heavy handed approach does not work and might lead to a Lebanon type of situation. If the US goes into street fighting in the holy city of Najaf in order to get Sadr, they will turn the whole Shiite population against them. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

The key question is "do you want to be right or do you want to win?" The trigger for action in Fallujah was the killing and mutilation of 4 US civilian contractors. The actions in other cities was triggered by the occupation of public buildings by al-Sadr supporters. While the actions taken by the US are understandable and justified it might be the wrong choice. By getting into urban warfare, which is killing civilians and further destabilising the country, the US might be choosing the wrong course of action if it wants to achieve the major objective of being able to leave (soon) and to leave a democratic pro-US Iraq behind. · Taking a hard-nosed approach is stirring anti-US feelings amongst both Sunnis and Shi'ites and helping radicals like Sadr. · The escalation has resulted in many foreigners (mostly contractors) taken hostage, which will bring the rebuilding efforts to a halt, which again stops conditions being improved, which again helps the radicals. · Even members of the US appointed governing council are upset and threatening to resign. · Part of the new hard line is to go after Sadr. In doing so the US is helping Sadr gaining more influence (there is a power struggle amongst Shi'ite clerics for leadership in a situation where for the first time they have a chance for real political power in Iraq). This makes it difficult for the more moderate senior cleric Ali H.Sistani. If the coalition loses support from the majority Shi'ites then there is real trouble. · Members of the new Iraqi security apparatus have refused to help in many cases, as they are deterred by the more heavy-handed approach. This is undermining the efforts of building a security framework that can sustain security without US military. · Key issue is that “Baghdad is not Dallas” – the culture and mentality is so very different and local issues are old and complex. Whilst a majority of Iraqis were happy to see SH and the Baath party removed by the US, they can turn very quickly against them. And in a country that is flooded with arms and explosives you can have a quagmire in no time. So whilst it is understandable and justified to shoot back and going after the perpetrators when attacked, it might not always be the best reaction if you actually want to be able to leave the place soon with stable institutions in place. A heavy handed approach might be very counter productive in both Iraq and the middle East as a whole. Pictures of dead Iraqi children are a great tool for the recruiters of Al Qaeda in the Middle East. And it really does not matter if they were able to carry an AK47 or not. I can recommend the latest edition of Time Magazine, which contains a number of articles with some pretty good analysis in regard to Iraq. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

So what was it in the word "latest" you don't understand? It is clear that you need to get things explained as you dont seem to be able to understand what is written and not able to rise above smart ass comments. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

The one thing that has not changed from TB is that guys like you and Gawain always try to attack the man not the ball. Notice the word "latest". Insurgent activities by Sunni Baath supporters in places like Fallujah have gone on for a long time. The latest uprising are the followers of Sadr who is a Shia cleric. This is a new development and a very problematic one for the coalition. So don't accuse people of untrue statements - ever heard of glass houses? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Currently they do not supply much due to a smashed infrastructure and sabotage, but they sit on one of the largest oil reserves and they sit very close to Kuwait and Saudi. In oil terms Iraq is a very strategic place. Hold on, Iraq was about WMD's - the terror issue was not used because Iraq was not really supporting OBL (that is Saudi Arabia and others). Terror has become an issue after the occupation. I thought you guys would finally start to understand that things in the middle east are a little more complex then "good guys vs. bad guys". The latest uprising is by Shia's not Suni's. A lot of people warned that invading Iraq without a good plan and broad support would cause all kinds of problems because the country and the region is so complex. And now there is a mess that will cost a lot lives and take a long time to resolve (if ever). --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Don't have a link, but actually saw an interview tonight on Aussie TV with a Pakistani journalist (Hamid Mir) who has very good Al-Qaeda connection who has interviewed OBL 3 times. The last time in November 2001 i.e. the only interview post 9/11. The interview was very interesting. Mir claimed amongst other things: - The real “brain” in Al-Qaeda is not OBL but Ayman al-Zawahri. AZ speaks English, is well educated and traveled the world in the early to mid-90’s recruiting for Al-Qaeda. - OBL was “chosen” as the head figure, not because of his leadership skills in an organizational or political sense, but because of his battlefield performance against the Soviets which gave him “cult status” in that part of the world. The real “brain” is Ayman al-Zawahri. - When the journalist asked OBL and AZ if they had nuclear weapons (in 2001). They claimed they had purchased 100 suitcase nuclear bombs in the former soviet republics in central Asia. This is probably where the story comes from. If it is true or just posturing we don’t know. The number seems very high, but the way the former USSR is “leaking” weapons for $, it is probably possible they got something. - The journalist is also claiming that a very powerful faction in Saudi Arabia is actively supporting Al-Qaeda and OBL (partly for internal reasons, trying to destabilize the current regime). He also claimed that OBL several times during the past 2 years has been hiding in Iran and that the Iranian government has been (or is) supporting Al-Qaeda. I found the interview very interesting. The guy seemed to be very well connected. Edit: Post above has the link to the story at Sky --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

1. Whats your name? Michael 2. How old are you? 46 3. Why did you decide to start jumping out of airplanes? As a young boy I watched the TV series “Ripcord” on TV in the 1960’s. 4. Are you single or taken? Married. 5. Do you have kids? 4 year old son 6. What do you drive? Saab Convertible 7. Have you ever done a kisspass? yes 8. Where do you live? Melbourne, Australia 9. Do you have any pets? 2 Bouvier des Flandres (Belgium Cattle Dogs) 10. How many jumps do you have? ~ 300 11. What color eyes do you have? Blue 12. What is your nationality? Danish 13. Have you ever dated someone you met off the internet? No 14. Favorite Movie? Godfather 1 & 2 15. What do you do when you arent skydiving? Hobbies: Cooking and SCUBA. 16. Have you ever BASE jumped? No 17. If not... do you want to? No 18. Do you have siblings? 2 brothers and 3 sisters 19. Where do you want to travel to the most? Any SCUBA destination in the Pacific or Indian Ocean 20. What's your favorite color? Red 21. Where was the last place you flew to ( not skydiving )? (non-work): Borneo --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

And you believe that it should be applied to prisoners during a time of war? Wow! I'm going to become a lawyer and instigate the next war. I'll be rich representing all of the prisoners! The prisoners do not have POW status -they have a "special" status - only created for Gitmo. IF they were charged they would have less chance of a fair trial then anybody in the US civilian or military justice system. Have a look what an American Military lawyer from the USMC has to say about the fairness of the system: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3418905.stm Samples: "Major Mori said those who had created the tribunals process had a "vested interest" in securing convictions. " ""The military commissions will not provide a full and fair trial," Mori told the news conference " "But Major Mori warned the tribunals could establish "a dangerous precedent. "The reality is, we wouldn't tolerate these rules if they were applied to US citizens," he said. " That is what a Major in the USMC says about the system... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.