Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Subject: Weapons of mass destruction - again
So where are they? And what's the body count (U.S. - they don't report the Iraqis, nor U.S. wounded) now? And the war is over - another lie. :'(
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
With the effect the sanctions had, I do not think Iraq could afford to produce any WMD considering there were inspectors running around all over the country looking for them, our spy planes were looking for them, our satelites were looking for them, the CIA was tapping phones listening for clues about them. Too many people were looking for WMD for Iraq to produce them. And where would they get the parts. Oh yeah, uranium from Africa. I think the sanctions were not that far off from having the desired final effect of forcing Saddam out of power without US troop casulties. But GW made it clear that Iraq was an immediate threat with his WPD's, so GW better find them. I think this may cost him the election.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I think this may cost him the election.
End Quote
I hope you are right.
Cat
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I hope you are right.
Cat
End Quote
Bush lost credibility with the world community. He will not be able to deal with Korea. We must have a president with credibility if we are to rejoin the world community; so for that reason alone Bush must lose the election. Who will believe the president "who cried wolf" when it comes time to deal with Korea's nuclear program? Plus, Bush's economic program sucks.
I know this may be off topic, but unless you have knowledge that an attack is comming, who cares if they have missiles that can reach Isreal? We have weapons that can reach any part of the world, and we are the only counrty to have used nuclear weapons. If prior use is the basis for deciding who to take weapons away from, the world community may show up at our doorstep one day. I dunno the facts, but I would bet we have fired off more missiles and weapons in the past 10 years than any other counrty in the world has.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Bush lost credibility with the world community. He will not be able to deal with Korea. We must have a president with credibility if we are to rejoin the world community; so for that reason alone Bush must lose the election. Who will believe the president "who cried wolf" when it comes time to deal with Korea's nuclear program? Plus, Bush's economic program sucks.
I know this may be off topic, but unless you have knowledge that an attack is comming, who cares if they have missiles that can reach Isreal? We have weapons that can reach any part of the world, and we are the only counrty to have used nuclear weapons. If prior use is the basis for deciding who to take weapons away from, the world community may show up at our doorstep one day. I dunno the facts, but I would bet we have fired off more missiles and weapons in the past 10 years than any other counrty in the world has.
End Quote
Yes, its call "pax americana" which equates to the peace of the grave for those who disagree with us, or those who's oil we want. Lucky for Fidel they don't have any (just been reading about Cuba, sorry). Good Lord, we need a revolution - to get back to our revolution.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
STILL no weapons, and more U.S. troops Killed over the past couple of days. Still no Saddam, and still no Osama. Just how inept ARE our "intelligence Expersts"? Do YOU feel safer?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Two days later, and more dead U.S. troops. Still no WMD, no Saddam, and no Bin Laden. And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Two days later, and more dead U.S. troops. Still no WMD, no Saddam, and no Bin Laden. And the beat goes on...
End Quote
Da dum da dum da da
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Also, still no ties to Al Quida, but Junior says he will be vindicated, although he now takes responsibility for the BIG LIE. And the beat goes on.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
I think it is also note worthy to add that since we started our war with Iraq, we have thinned out our presence in Afghanastan. As we look for these mysterious WPD which were such an immediate threat causing the USA to go to war in Iraq and not to wait for sanctions to work, the tribal leaders in Afghanastan, Taliban, Al Queada, and others who hate us are reorganizing and regrouping in Afghanastan. Why is it we only spend a little time in Afghanastan, and now we are not keeping the pressure up in the country Osama Bin Forgotten calls home? Maybe because it was embarrasing to Bush that we could not find him? Bush should have got the job done right, otherwise we did all this for nothing. We will leave, and things will go back to the way they were. Maybe someone told Bush that Russia spent a decade in that country and the end result was the war lords still kept control.
I guess that must just be the way GW is. He has the attention span of a cockroach and does not think things through fully.
And what will be GW's legacy in foriegn policy? We went to a Afghanastan and Iraq, killed alot of people, had a few of ours killed, and the moment we left things went back to the way they were. It is happening in Afghanastan right now, and I bet it will happen in Iraq. As soon as we pull out our military and intelligence assets, some dictator will start building power. That is how they have always lived.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
As one article said that the only significant rebuilding and reform that is coming to Afghanistan is being provided by rich religious zealots. We haven't helped at all and we've allowed the fanatics to start creeping back into power. (I can't remember where I read it. I think it was a National Geographic article on Afghanistan.)
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
As one article said that the only significant rebuilding and reform that is coming to Afghanistan is being provided by rich religious zealots. We haven't helped at all and we've allowed the fanatics to start creeping back into power. (I can't remember where I read it. I think it was a National Geographic article on Afghanistan.)
End Quote
All too true, as are John Semial's observations. If you go back to the posts I made before we got into this Iraq thing, you will see that this is JUST what I predicted.
AS to Afganistan, an international, U.N. sanctioned and supported response would have been much better for all concerned.
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
As one article said that the only significant rebuilding and reform that is coming to Afghanistan is being provided by rich religious zealots. We haven't helped at all and we've allowed the fanatics to start creeping back into power. (I can't remember where I read it. I think it was a National Geographic article on Afghanistan.)
End Quote
One thing's changed!
The proposed oil pipeline across the country is being built, by an American company (previously the contract was awarded to an Argentinian company) and will certainly be under American control.
Keep drivin' those SUVs
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
One thing's changed!
The proposed oil pipeline across the country is being built, by an American company (previously the contract was awarded to an Argentinian company) and will certainly be under American control.
Keep drivin' those SUVs
End Quote
Oh, and I thought it was all for nothing! Whew, I'm glad I was wrong. ;D
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
One thing's changed!
The proposed oil pipeline across the country is being built, by an American company (previously the contract was awarded to an Argentinian company) and will certainly be under American control.
Keep drivin' those SUVs
End Quote
But, you do understand that this war was NOT about oil. The U.S. really had to make sure that those oilfields..er..Iraqis were safe from the likes of Suddam who had oil..er..weapons of mass distruction.
Cat
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
They are not afraid of us.
End Quote
If this is true then beware. This is what helped end the British empire (and probably others in history).
Much of British control 100 years ago came from the fact that many of the native people believed in the superiority of the British and their apparent invincibility. After WWII, these people saw the British beaten by the Japanese (Singapore, etc.)
Once they understood that the British could be beaten, the Empire lost India and other territories.
Neither the British (100 years ago) or America can control the world by force alone. It won't matter what the media spins in the West, if the people on the ground learn they can defeat the forces, the word will spread and the people will rise up.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
As Che put it back in the '60s, "two, three, many Vietnams". But the lessons are hard for the neo-fascists to learn because they win most of the battles - at first. And their world view gets them into denial on the ones they lose. But in the long run, they do lose. The cost is very high though. How many Nicaraguan peasants died so that the Sandinistas could be defeated?
I really hate revolutions, but G.D., they are necessary. People will only take it for so long. Then, as Jackson Brown put it, "they can't take any more, so they pick up a rock, or a stone" and end their oppression.
At my school we have a program that brings various "events" to our rural and out of the way campus. We had a speaker who was a doctor, and had spent time with the Salvadoran rebels in the 80's. He reported asking on peasant why he had joined the rebels. The guy said "on the hacienda my job was to care for the bosses dogs. I fed them meat every day, and I fed my kids tortillas. When his dogs got sick I took them to the vet. When my kids got sick, I buried them. So senior, do you now understand why I am a rebel?" :'(
I n other news, more dead U.S. troops, still no Saddam or Bin Laden, and still no WMD.
And the beat goes on
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
How many Iraqi civilians died?
It appears the esitimares are between 5,000 and 10,000 civilians killed by the US military.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0522/p01s02-woiq.html
How did they die?
They say they have found evidence of "massive use of cluster bombs in densely populated areas," according to Human Rights Watch researcher Marc Galasco, contradicting coalition claims that such munitions were used only in deserted areas.
Dispersing thousands of bomblets that shoot out shards of shrapnel over an area the size of a football field, such weapons become indiscriminate and thus illegal under the laws of war, if used in civilian neighborhoods, Human Rights Watch has argued during past conflicts.
What about US Troops, is morale rising?
http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters08-01-071811.asp?reg=MIDEAST
American soldiers, led to expect only gratitude from Iraqis glad to be rid of their iron-fisted ruler, now say they are homesick and scared. Some chainsmoke. Some can't sleep. Some rely on superstition, wearing pendants and crosses for safety.
''I think we've got it too good. I am just waiting for something to happen. I feel like something is going to happen,'' said Sergeant Kenny Raynor, adding that he frequently rubs his wedding ring to make him feel close to home.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
How many Iraqi civilians died?
It appears the esitimares are between 5,000 and 10,000 civilians killed by the US military.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0522/p01s02-woiq.html
How did they die?
They say they have found evidence of "massive use of cluster bombs in densely populated areas," according to Human Rights Watch researcher Marc Galasco, contradicting coalition claims that such munitions were used only in deserted areas.
Dispersing thousands of bomblets that shoot out shards of shrapnel over an area the size of a football field, such weapons become indiscriminate and thus illegal under the laws of war, if used in civilian neighborhoods, Human Rights Watch has argued during past conflicts.
What about US Troops, is morale rising?
http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters08-01-071811.asp?reg=MIDEAST
American soldiers, led to expect only gratitude from Iraqis glad to be rid of their iron-fisted ruler, now say they are homesick and scared. Some chainsmoke. Some can't sleep. Some rely on superstition, wearing pendants and crosses for safety.
''I think we've got it too good. I am just waiting for something to happen. I feel like something is going to happen,'' said Sergeant Kenny Raynor, adding that he frequently rubs his wedding ring to make him feel close to home.
End Quote
I was once upbraided for calling these brave troops "grunts", but in truth, they, like the Iraqis killed by OUR weapons of mass destruction, are victims. I wonder what the racial composition of these troops is. In Vietnam, a disproportionate % were blacks and hispanics. True now? Anyone want to do the research?
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
According to CNN, the WTC death toll is at 2,801. If we killed 5,000- 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilians as reported, what do we think their families feel? I bet they probably feel the same way families who lost people in the WTC feel. What if those 5,000-10,000 families want revenge? Did GW start a cycle here?? Did we blindly attack a country which was not connected to Al Queada or Osama? I think Saudi Arabia has more connections to terror than Iraq. Why don't we attack them, because they give us oil?
And oh, the cost of blind revenge is at 1 billion dollars a week. I say blind because the reasons we were told we went to Iraq appear to be lies. I find it so amazing that we can blow 1 billion dollars a week fighting Iraq, where we have found no WPD, but yet we have homeless people in the USA.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I was once upbraided for calling these brave troops "grunts", but in truth, they, like the Iraqis killed by OUR weapons of mass destruction, are victims. I wonder what the racial composition of these troops is. In Vietnam, a disproportionate % were blacks and hispanics. True now? Anyone want to do the research?
And the beat goes on...
End Quote
What do they all share in common? Poverty. Maybe that is why the USA does nothing about homlesness or free education. Leave poverty as something to compell the very poor to enlist.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
And the beat goes on :'(
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
http://www.suntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-iraq03s2.html
Saddam's sons buried as martyrs
August 3, 2003
BY STEVEN R. HURST
BAGHDAD, Iraq--Saddam Hussein's two elder sons and a grandson were buried as martyrs Saturday near the deposed leader's hometown, where insurgents afterward attacked U.S. troops with three remote-controlled bombs.
Despite the violence in Tikrit--a center of anti-American guerrilla resistance--the U.S. administrator for Iraq declared he had not seen hatred of American troops among the country's people.
Instead, L. Paul Bremer, chief of the American occupation administration, blamed incessant attacks against U.S. forces on foreign terrorists and three groups aligned with the ousted Saddam regime.
He implied that those fighters did not represent the larger Iraqi population. ''I have not noticed any hatred among the Iraqi people for the American soldiers,'' Bremer said at a news conference.
Yet in dozens of interviews, Iraqi citizens voiced a desire for revenge against U.S. soldiers for the way they allegedly have treated the population while attempting to pacify the country.
At least two American soldiers were injured in the remote-controlled explosions in Tikrit after elders of Saddam's tribe buried the ousted dictator's sons Odai and Qusai, along with Qusai's 14-year-old son, in an outlying village.
Tribal leaders chanted prayers over three adjacent graves in the family plot in al-Uja, where the Iraqi leader was born. The family wrapped the three bodies in the nation's flag, designating them as martyrs for the Iraqi cause.
They were killed in a gun battle with U.S. forces in the northern city of Mosul on July 22, after being on the run for more than three months. Their betrayer, thought to have been the owner of the villa where they were gunned down, received a $30 million reward from the United States and was spirited out of Iraq under U.S. protection.
Lt. Col. Steve Russell, of the Tikrit-based 4th Infantry Division, said villagers wanted the funeral to be peaceful. ''The people of al-Uja just wanted it over with, they didn't want to make a big deal about it,'' Russell said.
The Army flew the bodies to an airfield just north of Tikrit and sent them in Iraqi Red Crescent Society ambulances to the cemetery, Russell said.
The Red Crescent acted as intermediary between Saddam's family and the military, which had kept the bodies in refrigerated storage at Baghdad International Airport.
Still, many Iraqis complained the treatment of the bodies--the autopsies and reconstruction of the brothers' faces--was deeply contrary to Muslim practice that demands corpses be buried untouched and before sundown on the day of death.
Meanwhile Saturday, the military said a U.S. soldier was killed and three were wounded Friday in a rocket-propelled grenade attack on their convoy east of Baghdad.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Finally some good news. Two days and no new U.S. trroop deaths. Can it last? Or will the beat go on?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Did you hear that Bush is taking a 35 day vacation. He must be working very hard to need that much time off.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Did you hear that Bush is taking a 35 day vacation. He must be working very hard to need that much time off.
End Quote
Well...let's see...let's for the sake of this exercise assume that Dubya hasn't taken a vacation for the past year. Now over the course of the year there are 12 months, and during each month one accrues 8 hours of sick leave and 10 hours of vacation time, which means if he averages a 40 hour work week (that's 8 hours over 5 days per week) then it'll take 4 months to take a week off (assuming he doesn't work weekends). Soooooooo, over this 12 month period he'll have accrued 3 weeks of vacation and 96 hours of sick leave, with translates to 12 days...so that's 27 days of paid leave, not including weekends.
Seeing as he's been zipping all over the planet and this country for the past year doing all kinds of Presidently stuff, I'd say he deserved it ;)
The nice thing is that if he's too sick to work, Dick Cheney can cover his shift ;D
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Hey, I think he gets Labor Day off as a paid holiday too. Cool, huh? ;D
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Well...let's see...let's for the sake of this exercise assume that Dubya hasn't taken a vacation for the past year. Now over the course of the year there are 12 months, and during each month one accrues 8 hours of sick leave and 10 hours of vacation time, which means if he averages a 40 hour work week (that's 8 hours over 5 days per week) then it'll take 4 months to take a week off (assuming he doesn't work weekends). Soooooooo, over this 12 month period he'll have accrued 3 weeks of vacation and 96 hours of sick leave, with translates to 12 days...so that's 27 days of paid leave, not including weekends.
Seeing as he's been zipping all over the planet and this country for the past year doing all kinds of Presidently stuff, I'd say he deserved it ;)
The nice thing is that if he's too sick to work, Dick Cheney can cover his shift ;D
End Quote
Weeell, I may be wrong, but I seem to remember a number of other vacations out to the ranch. And may I point out that lots of his recent travel has been to fund raising events (got a grand for a berger Rice?). And most, if not all of these trips have been funded by use, the tax payers (oh yeah, he delivered a "policy speech" along the way).
But I must say, I agree that he deserves a vacation, a VERY LONG vacation, like impeachment.
Again, good news, no new U.S. Combat deaths.
But the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:But the beat goes on...
End Quote
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
Overkill, anyone? ::) Don, we heard it the first time you typed it.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
Overkill, anyone? ::) Don, we heard it the first time you typed it.
End Quote
Snooze away dude, with your head in the sand looking for cold war era jets.
Meanwhile, several G.I.'s have died of pnumonia, more have been evacuated, there is still no water or electricty in Bagdad, not to mention that our own troops are complaining about not enough H2O, and, although thankfully no fatalities, still more attacks. And polls show that we are increasingly seen as an army of occupation, not liberation.
So, having failed in Afganistan, and now about to fail in Iraq, and Junior's numbers going down ( ;D), who'se next? Saudi Arabia (not likely), Syria? Iran? North Korea (no, they could already HAVE WMD's, and China is so close). Gotta get those numbers up though. How many dead U.S. soildiers equals a percent in Junior's approval ratings?
And 80's, like it or not,
The beat goes on.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Been away for a few days. The Tull concert was great, but the acustics at Mohegan Sun SUCK rrreally bad. And in the mean time, more guys killed, more gurilla warfare. Less control. Still no water or electricity. U.S. troops increasingly nervious and "shooting from the hip".
AND THE BEAT GOES ON.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=6&u=/ap/20030814/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
And, several more U.S. troops killed in the last two days. And STILL no WMDs, no Saddam, no Bin Laden.
And the beat goes on
even if you don't like it 80's. As a matter of fact, I don't like it either.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Well...let's see...let's for the sake of this exercise assume that Dubya hasn't taken a vacation for the past year. Now over the course of the year there are 12 months, and during each month one accrues 8 hours of sick leave and 10 hours of vacation time, which means if he averages a 40 hour work week (that's 8 hours over 5 days per week) then it'll take 4 months to take a week off (assuming he doesn't work weekends). Soooooooo, over this 12 month period he'll have accrued 3 weeks of vacation and 96 hours of sick leave, with translates to 12 days...so that's 27 days of paid leave, not including weekends.
Seeing as he's been zipping all over the planet and this country for the past year doing all kinds of Presidently stuff, I'd say he deserved it ;)
The nice thing is that if he's too sick to work, Dick Cheney can cover his shift ;D
End Quote
He seems to be at his Crawford Ranch an awful lot lately.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quick question. Why were we so quick to invade Iraq when NOBODY wanted us to do it, but we were so slow to intervene in Liberia when we were ASKED to come in.
Come on, Bush! It's not every day a country begs you to use military force! It's a free pass to use big guns and be praised at the same time! It's win-win!
I know we sent a few troops there, but our presence there is not going to be effective without more men. Thanks again, Bush for tying up our forces in a contraversial bid to rid Iraq of imaginary WMD's
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
What resources does Liberia have? Anything that's due, by some predictions, to run out in the next 50-100 years?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
What resources does Liberia have? Anything that's due, by some predictions, to run out in the next 50-100 years?
End Quote
Liberia makes those coin thingies that they sell on TV for $19.95 each. They're all minted by the government of Liberia for some reason.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
So now we're taking down religious flags with Black Hawk helicopters and antagoinizing the Shiite majority in the process. And more troops killed.
And the beat goes on.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
I heard today that a Reuters journalist and a Danish souldier were killed in Iraq, don't know exactly when - went sailing.
And the BEAT GOES ON...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I heard today that a Reuters journalist and a Danish souldier were killed in Iraq, don't know exactly when - went sailing.
And the BEAT GOES ON...
End Quote
I saw it too. They thought his camera was a rocket launcher, so an American soldier on a tank gunned him down. :'(
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I saw it too. They thought his camera was a rocket launcher, so an American soldier on a tank gunned him down. :'(
End Quote
The sabotage has extended to water pipelines in Bagdad and an oil pipeline to the Med.
AND THE BEAT GOES ON
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
The sabotage has extended to water pipelines in Bagdad and an oil pipeline to the Med.
AND THE BEAT GOES ON
End Quote
How many Americans have died since "major combat" ended?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
How many Americans have died since "major combat" ended?
End Quote
I am fairly certain it is well over 100 americans. It feels like every day when I turn on the news, there are one or two more Americans who are killed.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Is this what they mean by "Support Our Troops"?
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/14/MN94780.DTL
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Is this what they mean by "Support Our Troops"?
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/14/MN94780.DTL
End Quote
Figures.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
From the article:
"Unless Congress and President Bush take quick action when Congress returns after Labor Day, the uniformed Americans in Iraq and the 9,000 in Afghanistan will lose a pay increase approved last April of $75 a month in "imminent danger pay" and $150 a month in "family separation allowances.""
So, life is worth $75 dollars???????
Bush is a major @sshole! $75 could not buy him a decent high in 1979! And he thinks it is enough to pay someone to kill Iraq's, without any court review. And kill journalists too. I hope Bush burns in hell.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Is this what they mean by "Support Our Troops"?
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/14/MN94780.DTL
End Quote
I was once uprraided for calling our troops "grunts", which is what our administration apparently considers them. I meant no respect, just to imply that THEY were never consulted about what they were asked to do, they just did it. My guess is that there are no kids of government officials (Reps or Dems) in Iraq, and that the majority of those there are minorities (and remember, Junior served out Vietnam in the National Guard, and AWOL most of the time - doing his community service for his drug bust). So yeah, I support out troops, but at this point, we can't just bring them home. The oil that we went for is still there, and we need it. So (I say sarcastically) what's a few soldier's live for billions of barrals of oil?
And today, U.N. headquarters in Bagdad were bombed. At least 14 killed and 45 wounded. And Islamic fundamentalists are encouraging popential martyrs to go and fight (read kill US troops) in Iraq. Told you so. Qaugmire anyone?
AND THE BEAT GOES ON
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Another funeral, the 3rd I think, for a Vermonter killed in Iraq. As in the Civil War, Vermonters do their full duty. And Junior wants to support out troops by stopping theit hazardous duty pay, since we already won the war. Supporting our troops you see.
AND THE BEAT GOES ON...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
And today, more depressing news. The Islamic fundamentaists are ralying to the anti-US forces in Iraq. Again, not to say "I told you so" but this is just what I predicted several months ago. And the Bushies can't even get the electricity turned on in the :-X capital.
And the beat goes on.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
http://www.rutlandherald.com/Columns/Article/70469.html
THis EDITORIAL appeared in my local paper today.
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Finally something optimistic. My local paper reported today that at least some Shiites are at least mildly receptive to the U.S. occupation, and that violence against our troops is relatively minor in Shiite areas.
On the other hand, STILL no WMDs, still no Saddam, and more dead US troops. It's going to be a quagmire folks.
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
A little Dissention among the Republicans (not the Dems!?)
McCain wants us to commit more troops to Iraq to secure peace and stability in the region. Bush says 'no'. I still say we shouldn't be there in the first place.
U.S. weapons inspectors have just debunked another Bush public claim. Bush (and Powell) asserted that Iraq was rigging up unmanned flying drones with chemical and biological weapons. Apparently, they were only used for reconnaissance work. The weapons inspectors said they were only capable of carrying a camera and recorder, nothing heavier.
Oh, boy! I get to say it this time! And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
And now, with some group attacking a Shiite fundamentalist, and with the attackes against the Turkoman people, supposedly by the Kurds, the situation in Iraq gets more and more like what I predicted before we invaded. Given the amorality of our leaders, my guess is that the day will come when Junior, if is is in office long enough, will settle for another oppressive, but pro-western regime that will restore order by killing his own people. Sadly, that might be the best we can hope for. With so many tribal, religious, and cultural divisions is democracy really a possibility? I would hope so, but what is happening in this country makes me doubt it.
Quagmire folks?
John, now it's my turn
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
I heard this morning that the death toll among US troops since the war was declared over has now surpassed the total killed during the actual conflict.
The beat goes ever on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Two more killed yesterday. Still no WMD's, still no saddam, and they don't even mention Osama any more. AND, increasing violence in Afganistan.
The beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
You know what else I find hysterical in a completely depressing way?
That Bush actually tried a few "peace talks" in the Mid-East.
Bush. Discussing peace. Gives you a headache just trying to comprehend it.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
You know what else I find hysterical in a completely depressing way?
That Bush actually tried a few "peace talks" in the Mid-East.
Bush. Discussing peace. Gives you a headache just trying to comprehend it.
End Quote
Several more dead in Iraq, including a +/- friendly Shiia cleric. No one is even mentioning WMDs any more. And in Afganistan, the Taliban are regrouping and reemerging. Not just a quagmire, it's looking more and more like armaggedon.
And the beat goes on...
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Hmm, the USA are now pleading to the United Nations to share the burden in Iraq. Um, I don't think so Powell and Bush!
Didn't the USA call the U.N. a failure like 7 months ago and acted against the U.N.'s purpose to promote peace? Why would any country want to join the USA and the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq where 1) Troops are dying everyday and 2) If a country decided to send troops to Iraq, they would be under American control.
I hope my country (Canada) continues to stand firm and not offer any troops or money to aid the US.
The world said "No!", but the USA didn't listen. Now why should we clean up after them?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
Now why should we clean up after them?
End Quote
Because the situation would just be exacerbated if the US were not aided in stabilizing Iraq. Why should innocents suffer even more because of Bush's idiocy?
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
If other countries send "peacekeepers", it will only free up the American forces to go attack some other country. Before you know it, Powell will be looking for more peacekeepers to share the burden in this newly capture country that they can't bring under control.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
I understand your point Jesuis, but do you have any other solution? Duyba and his cronies has really made a mess of things. They invaded a country for no other reason than to get the oil that lies under the sand. Now, they have the tiger by the tail. They can't let go and they can't control the tiger.
I remember a few years ago, Duyba didn't want to send troops into North Korea because that will be spreading the troops too thin. (The U.S. was in Afganistan by this time). So he sends troops into Iraq instead and then in Liberia. He also said that the U.S. was not into nation building. Aint that the truth but they are really good at nation distruction. People forget that the U.S. is still in Afganistan and losing that battle too. The Taliban that the U.S. so efficently unseated is now on the rise again. Iraq is a mess at the moment. If the purpose of this illegal invasion was to topple a dicatorship, something really needs to be done before Saddam or someone even worse comes to power. What the U.S. is doing is setting the stage for these regemes to take hold once again. All this for oil. And what what price? The $$ is too much for Dubya's little venture but the human cost is even worse.
Cat
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
I would agree to sending more multinational forces into Iraq ONLY if the United States (maybe England) agree and include in the new UN resolution that they will not attack another country without the UN's backing first. If the US breaks this resolution later, serious consequences will be given to them.
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction - again
Quoting:
I would agree to sending more multinational forces into Iraq ONLY if the United States (maybe England) agree and include in the new UN resolution that they will not attack another country without the UN's backing first. If the US breaks this resolution later, serious consequences will be given to them.
End Quote
That makes sense to me but I doubt that Dubya & Co. will go for it.
Cat