I also think that NO Religion should EVER dictate national policies.
And the reverse should also be true - in the case of Islam, policies adopted by so dumb insane and the Iranian mullahs for political purposes have intruded into the faith and bastardized its values.
Beneath all that bluster, you are a bleeding liberal Fold!!
Islam is a noble religion that has been victimized by the excesses of its followers. Monsters like so dumb insane, the Iranian mullahs and the Pukistani religious bigots have destroyed Islam.
I would agree with that. Fortunatly I think some leaders in the Muslim community are starting to emerge. I read recently that young people in Iran of all places have it figured out and are calling for an end to the extremist rule. In my opinion it will take movements like that to correct and start to fix their problems, we can't nor will ever be able to solve it.
I have to admit, it was pretty funny to see Sean Penn sitting at a photo-op with Iraq minister Tariq Aziz. I thought now here's something I never thought I'd see. A leader of a country getting advice from Spicoli. I was waiting for Mr. Hand to show up and start lecturing him on the complex issues of geopolitical conflict and the impact it's had on the middle east.
Too bad Penn didn't..........Stick around for a while.
Must be nice for the Hollywierd types not to have to live in the real world.
He does look a bit like Groucho now that you mention it. LOL !
Groucho and Spicoli eating pizza and takin about Iraq.
"Duude' those are some narly chemicals ya got there, I'm sure maaay countries claims are totally bogus and not as righteous as you. Got any chips bro ?
A classic for sure. I just found it funny to see him and as Bill calls him "Groucho" talking policy. I'll be waiting for the duck to drop next time I see Aziz if a reporter says the majic word. :)
Islam is a noble religion that has been victimized by the excesses of its followers. Monsters like so dumb insane, the Iranian mullahs and the Pukistani religious bigots have destroyed Islam. ---- Naradar
Naradar! stop peeing on your pants and look into your fanatic country, secularism and democracy have been buried by Hindu fanatic in Gujrate, india is about to dismembered again after 1947 and Hindu fanatics will agian be the main couse of it! there is a total chaos in your country secular foeces are continously defeated by Hindutva followers and country is heading towards a bloody civil war.
there's very little anyone could say --- Rick
The fact is that you have nothing concrete to say BUT YOU DID mentioned in YOUR OWN WAY that US is converting to a Colonialist power :-)
Last week brought yet another terrifying headline from an American newspaper: "US suspects al-Qaida got nerve agent from Iraqis".
The 1,800-word story in the Washington Post last Thursday got off to a reasonably promising start by saying: "The Bush administration has received a credible report that Islamic extremists affiliated with al-Qaida took possession of a chemical weapon in Iraq last month or late in October, according to two officials with firsthand knowledge of the report and its source."
Less promisingly, the second paragraph begins: "If the report proves true ... " The remaining 28 paragraphs offer little to suggest that it actually is true, and several reasons for thinking it may not be. Paragraph six tells us: "Like most intelligence, the reported chemical weapon transfer is not backed by definitive evidence."
Paragraph eight says: "Even authorised spokesmen, with one exception, addressed the report on the condition of anonymity. They said the principal source on the chemical transfer was uncorroborated, and that indications it involved a nerve agent were open to interpretation."
In paragraph 12, we are told that the report may be connected to a warning message circulated to American forces overseas and an unnamed official is cited as saying that the message resulted only from an analyst's hypothetical concern.
As one would expect from the Washington Post, the story is carefully written and meticulously researched.But it's basically worthless.
Still waiting for the evidence that little boy bush has on his desk.
If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq. If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq. If the terrorists are Saudi, And your alibi is shoddy, And your tastes remain quite gaudy, Bomb Iraq.
If you never were elected, bomb Iraq. If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq. If you think that SUVs, Are the best thing since sliced cheese, And your father you must please, Bomb Iraq.
If the globe is quickly warming, bomb Iraq. If the poor will soon be storming, bomb Iraq. We assert that might makes right, Burning oil is a delight, For the empire we will fight, Bomb Iraq.
If we have no allies with us, bomb Iraq. If we think that someone's dissed us, bomb Iraq. So to hell with the inspections, Let's look tough for the elections, Close your mind and take directions, Bomb Iraq.
If corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq. If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq. If your politics are sleazy, And hiding that ain’t easy, And your manhood’s getting queasy, Bomb Iraq.
Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq. For our might now knows no borders, bomb Iraq. Disagree? We’ll call it treason, It's the make war not love season, Even if we have no reason, Bomb Iraq.
...But unaccounted for were 550 mustard-gas shells, 150 aerial bombs that at one time were filled with either anthrax or other biological agents and 200 tons of chemicals for the nerve agent VX as well as some warheads with traces of VX...
Has anyone ever been to Superior, WI? Now there's a place that should be bombed.
LOL. Where did that come from? Funny, last time I was there it already looked as if it was bombed. What a hole. It reminded me of a small Gary, Indiana. Both cities are dumps but are fixed up by their shoreline.
Come to think of it, I'm usually bombed when I'm in Superior.
As far as the FBI screw up story above, hindsight is always 20/20 of course. But one of the few positive things to come of 9/11 is hopefully the new level of security checks and balances. That, of course, is if this more detailed level of investigating is managed close enough as to not infringe on our right to privacy. It's a fine line that's between a rock and a hard place. I wouldn't want the job.
Hick paper mill towns - Superior, Beloit, Peshtigo, Appleton. Have worked in every one of them. Full of bubbas with hairy, smelly armpits, trucks with gun racks - unionized and hence overpaid and underworked. My process control systems will soon replace most of them.
The war in Iraq will unfold soon - and will be an opportunity for testing those new high tech weapons. Rather than missile defence, the money should perhaps be spent on robot fighting soldiers. We can run the war from DC. And we will not have any veterans issues - maybe.
and how many of these bubbas with bellies spilling out of their belts do you interact with in your glass house??
I was in the former Consolidated paper recently – now Stora Enso a Finnish mega corp – and teaching a bunch of bubbas how not to chlorinate themselves. Bubbas have a good rapport with me – they are fascinated by this Brown pony-tailed Indian who can be as nationalistic and jingoistic as any of them. And to boot the niggah is not Arabic and hates Osama as much as us they feel!
They all own guns, live for hunting season, own trucks with gleaming gun racks, beat their wives, abuse alcohol and smell like a sewer. I have come to think all gun owners fit this mold!!
And all these bubbas want the US to go and kick Iraqi arse.
heh, heh - looks like little boy bush has his testicles caught in the North Korean lemon squeezer. And Condi Rice has her tit caught in the Kim wringer.
hey THX - start a folder on North Korea blackmail will you.
Not much use owning a gun rack if it's illegal to carry guns on them.
I believe it's illegal to have a loaded or uncased gun in a vehicle in Wisconsin. I could be wrong but I don't think so. I'll check with the guys in the gun thread.
As a matter of fact, I think it's illegal to even load a gun in a parked car when hunting.
Too bad you live in Ohio naradar, I'd taking you to the range and prove to you that not all gun owners are wife beating, beer drinking, smelly rednecks.
24 U.S. firms, including giants like Hewlett-Packard and Unisys, were listed in the foregoing report. But subsequent disinformation has reduced them to 2, which are now defunct!
The United States edited out more than 8000 crucial pages of Iraq's 11,800-page dossier on weapons, before passing on a sanitized version to the 10 non-permanent members of the United Nations security council.
The full extent of Washington's complete control over who sees what in the crucial Iraqi dossier calls into question the allegations made by US Secretary of State Colin Powell that 'omissions' in the document constituted a 'material breach' of the latest UN resolution on Iraq.
Last week, Secretary General of the UN Kofi Annan accepted that it was 'unfortunate' that his organization had allowed the US to take the only complete dossier and edit it. He admitted 'the approach and style were wrong' and Norway, a member of the security council, says it is being treated like a 'second-class country'.
Although Powell called the Iraqi dossier a 'catalogue of recycled information and flagrant omissions', the non-permanent members of the security council will have no way of testing the US claims for themselves...
The full extent of Washington's complete control over who sees what in the crucial Iraqi dossier calls into question the allegations made by US Secretary of State Colin Powell that 'omissions' in the document constituted a 'material breach' of the latest UN resolution on Iraq.
Yes, there was much information on the details of their biological and nuclear weapons taken out so that other nations won't learn how it is done. If they have any questions, they can talk to the permanent members of the UN Security Council, Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, who all received copies of the full 12,000-page report of Iraq's weapons programs that Iraq handed over to the United Nations on December 7.
Washington, DC (Neuters) – Concerned that messages of love and peace may be hampering its War on Terrorism, the Bush Administration is calling on Americans during this holiday season to think "Piece Of Earth" instead of "Peace On Earth."
According to U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "Peace is so elusive, especially when you're not looking for it. So why not promote something that you actually want – a piece of the Earth? Right now the piece of Earth is Iraq, but it could apply nicely to any prime real estate worth fighting for. Heck, I've got visions of Venezuela's oil fields playing in my head even as we speak."
Mr. Rumsfeld also urged family members of US troops not to mail cards and letters that mention peace.
"We don't want to confuse our soldiers about what their main mission is out in the field. If you send cards, use a Sharpie to cross out love, peace, and any other offending or unpatriotic words or phrases. If you must mention Jesus, don't refer to him as the "Prince of Peace." Try the "The Rocking Redeemer" or "Subcomandante J" instead."
Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, who is likely to replace Trent Lott as the Senate's Republican leader, claims to have the votes to amend the U.S. Patriot Act to punish as treason the waging of peace during Christmas.
According to Senator Frist, "Now that we're at war with Saddam, oops, I mean, IF we go to war with Saddam, we can't think of peace. While peace is a nice thought, it should be an afterthought. We should think about it after we win the never-ending War on Terrorism. We can address peace after we've killed all our enemies."
Civil rights groups criticized the Bush Administration's policy, but took great pains to make it clear that they were not attacking the President. One prominent civil rights advocate said, "Doing away with the First Amendment does concerns us somewhat, but we don't mean any disrespect toward President Bush. We can and do distinguish between the man and his policies. We think George Bush is adorable and that his every command, however quirky and bizarre, should be obeyed without pause. However, we do think his policies are a little Nazi-like – er, you did say this was off the record, right?"
Polls reveal that 30 percent of Americans believe that the difference between peace and piece is pure semantics. Fifty-five percent believe that the Augusta National Golf Club should invite Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Ladin before allowing any women to join. And 73 percent think that buying holiday greeting cards that say "Peace on Earth," especially those featuring Snoopy and Woodstock, are the best way to achieve world peace.
--Oscar Gonzalez is a lawyer and writer of satire who lives in Dallas, Texas.
If partisans like you would be honest about it you would declare that the US can't possibly eradicate every vestige of al queada in Afghanistan. We should get out and leave them to their own devices. If al queada reasserts control we should go back in but there is no need to stay there. Until Afghanistan is Americanized people like you, fold, will claim our actions have been total failures.
You idiot. I have called for GETTING OUT of there more than once, and I have long asked what the f*ck our policy IS over there and I have also said that we will NEVER make them into something WE like, or want to call "Americanized".
Your extremist liberal buddies seem to think we should "nation build." In fact they demand it. If you disagree then I was mistaken as to your position.
I disagreed with the tactic employed in Afghanistan. In that I think they should have gone in with a much larger force to seal the borders. That being said and already done, the small number of forces did an excellent job and had a dramatic impact, the opposistion already in place helped that no doubt. But they did a great job especiially with the numbers of troops. There were many doomsday predictions based on what happened to the Russians. Some called it Vietstan. It's a totally different situation and was fought differently. The casualty level has been fortunatley very low and it was done with precision and lightning quick fighting and hasn't been the quagmire predicted. We've become so impatient as a nation in our drive through microwave mentality that says we should have everyone rounded up and Afghanistan should be a vacation spot by now. It takes time, years, and money to do so and in a little over a year a pretty stunning result.
Will a Marshall type plan work ? Tough to say, I guess you can't win. Some say it never would have become a breeding ground for terrorists if we hadn't left after the USSR pulled out. If we hadn't we then would have been imperialist and trying to "Americanize" them or force our lifestyle upon them. It's the classic example of the mushy.
Should we stay ? Tough to say, we still have some work to do there but it's hard to know what would happen if we stayed or left. The Afghan people have been fighting amongst the different tribal factions for decades. That instability is one thing that made it possible for AQ to set up shop. So leaving again could produce the same result 15 years from now. It's a daunting task considering all the factions and warlords who want to keep power then be ruled by one central govt. Leaving would definately be easier and in the immeidate future a seemingly good idea, fast forward 10 or 15 years and it might not be. So we're dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. We're imperialist if we stay and we've abandoned them if we leave.
We did not do the same in Germany - we had a Marshall plan for the Nazis and forcefully Americanized them.
Yes and it was good that we did. It was to their and our benefit to have a stable Germany and a message to the communists. So we rebuilt their country after they declared war on us and bacame allies. The difference between then and now is that in Afghanistan it's many factions who don't want to unite or be ruled by a central govt. The German people were disillusioned, embarrased and chose to take the path.
As for the Japanese we nuked them into submission.
Yep, then we rebuilt their country as well and became allies with them after THEY attacked us.
We are using a less lethal form for the browns in Afghanistan.
Yes, there should be consistency in our racism.
Are you suggesting nukes ? Well you are at least consistently racist.
The Caucasian is known for decimating those he conquers - ask the Native American.
Hmm, how are things in Kashmir ? People have been fighting since the beginning of time. It's a matter of how they are treated after the battle as well over time.
I think the main reason was the ideological duality with the soviet union and the "west" both "standing" in Germany.
the SU dealt differently with the GDR, and at first did take what was left from that part of the country.
the cities were badly destroyed due to the bomb warfare. the death-%-age was higher than Nagasaki in a number of german towns, too. so the means(nuke or firebomb) doesnt say a lot about the fatal nature of an operation.
Im not sure what the US did in Japan, after the end of war, and to what extent. Here though the rivalry vis-a-vis the SU explains how "old animosity" counted less than the current one.
what many do forget is that in this country, the Cold War was palpable. military bases and a "death strip" (Todesstreifen) showed that clearly. the country, towns, villages and families experienced the "iron curtain" in a way that is remarkable, Id say.
however, while the Marshall Plan was crucial to Germanys post-war development, it was the german population too, who rebuilt this country with the aid of that Program. it should not be forgotten that it took tremendous effort on the part of the german population after the war, to rebuild, to deal with the psychological cost of what it had done, what had happened to it and what changes it had to go through.
Travelling in Germany one can see houses looking quite strange today. Their variegated walls resemble a patchwork. Looking closer, one understands why: they are made of bricks differing in color. These are the first post-war buildings. They look modest today but still they are solid and well-groomed, and serve their owners honestly.
When it became clear that the war was over, Germans started to dismantle blockages in the streets of towns destroyed by bombing. Mostly these were German women because the majority of able-bodied German men were constructing houses elsewhere: behind the Ural and in other remote places. These women, who were at once called Trümmerfrauen ("women of the ruins"), were dismantling the blockages brick by brick. They were sorting everything out carefully so that part of the material could be immediately put to use. As a result, in a short space of time they not only did away with the ruins but also proceeded to restoration works. The role of these women in what was later called "the economic miracle" was considerable.
I would agree with your post as you did a much better job at pointing out detail than I did. My point was that a marshall type plan can only work if the populace is either willing to accept it, is similar in philosiphy or percieves it to being a key to rebuilding a nation. So I don't think Marshall type plans work in every scenario. From what I can tell the German people embraced it and rebuilt thier own nation and economy and today we are allies and did so in a short amount of time. So in short the people have to want change.
Same with Japan. Odd how people fail to realize that the death toll from bombings were higher in many German cities than they were in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Perhaps due to it being spread out vs. one bomb. I digress.
The same blueprint was used for Japan to rebuild itself. And I beleive a similar dollar amount went to Japan eventually. In fact McArthur was pivitol in getting it done. Many wanted Japan to suffer or wallow in their defeat and did not want to give Japan one cent since many were understandibly very bitter about being attacked and the high cost of lives to defeat them. McArthur knew what could happen and that's one of the reasons that when a surrender was worked out that the Emporer was made to essentially dethrone himself or deny his deity as a god. That's where there's some similarities now with the new wave of fanatics.
So in both cases you had a fanatical group who did things for their "God" as a motivation. That's why it will be harder to make a marshall type plan work in many of these nations because nobody of leadership in their religious heirarchy will be telling the Muslim extremists that they were wrong. So unless you take out the "Emporer" factor that strain of fervor of fanatacism will be more quiet but it will remain to boil over again one day.
Does it mean once a nation is defeated you simply leave ? I don't know for sure but leaving all together wouldn't help at all. A year later the extremists would simply resurface. I think if you're going to it's going to have to be long term because it will take years to overcome the religious zealotry and fanatacism and hatred that's implanted even in the youth. It's a daunting task no doubt and it's tempting to leave, that argument has some merits. But if we do I fear we'd be doing this all over again in 20 years if we simply leave to let the fanatasicm incubate.
BTW, good to see you, Hope you had a great Christmas :) And a Good New Year !
The main obstacle to "staying" in Iraq, for example, is that you cant be sure what happens. we have that debate in Germany. due to the No to military participation, some argue, germany wil be part of the longterm comittment after the war itself, and that is seen as extremely hard, especially in an environment that is already ideologically opposed to "the West", in that case. Guerrilla warfare, terrorism, all capable of making the support at home disappear and maybe costly in terms of soldiers lives and of course financially too.
I cant say what its like in Iraq. After all, the UN-Inspectors werent harassed too much, it seems, and while being kept from doing what they were sent to do, not physically endangered.
In Germany the entire place was bombed to rubble. Refugees were everywhere, more than 11 mio men were prisoners of war, a couple million were dead and their wives and widows had to find a way to support themselves and their children. They had endured dictatorship and war and while the "total defeat" was not seen as a liberation by all, I havent heard of anyone who wasnt glad the war was over, one way or the other. in some towns 16 year olds had fought allied troops until they really couldnt anymore(dead or ran out of munition or even saw by themselves they had no chance).
These people were demoralized and had enough problems fighting for their daily lives. the allied forces had ended the most horrible time in their lives, and while they at first were starving, after a while things got better. what they ddnt have was a sort of "terrorist tradition" and what they didnt have anymore either were allied states around them.
a war against Iraq would mean that some western states fought Iraq and tried to change things there. thats the main problem about it altogether-to me. makes arab and probably other mainly muslim nations feel solidary with Iraq, no matter what Saddam did, wanted to do or was capable of (to international community AND his own society).
I think Kanan Makiya is right when he says that it would be necessary to have arab states in the boat(coalition). not only might it be in their own interest(however the only directly affected ones as far as I see are Kuwait(weak) and Iran(not likely to join a western coalition). not sure right now about Saudi Arabia, but there the government it too weak as well.
(not sure where he says that, its either in "Republic of Fear" or in "Cruelty and Silence". interesting read about Iraq btw, no matter what E. Said says about Makiya.)
yes, the death toll in some german towns was high. its not only forgotten in the international debate at times, but also here. recently a new book came out, about the firestorms. it shows what it is like to be in such a place, when the developing storm sucks people into the fire(big fire>needs oxigen>sucks air into direction of fire). of course germany had started the war and Coventry etc had happened too(also said in that book). it however makes me very reluctant about any kind of bomb warfare. however, todays weapon systems dont make that particular kind of horror necessary at all anymore, I think.
I think however that the past Iraq policies were wrong. I think that through the embargo(antibiotics for example) the people were chased TOWARDS Saddam instead of away. I think the embargo- policy makes it hard to sell that the "West" doesnt want the iraqi people to suffer. they have suffered from not only the consequences of war and dictatorship but also from embargo and a paralized economy. my thesis is that only arms control and disarmament without blocking Iraqs economy would have brought about more change for the people themselves(exchange through trade, an OK economy) that eventually the iraqui people would have brought about change. when Gulf War 2 ended, there were several attempts to end Saddams rule. things could be said that werent possible to say previously. (says Makiya). if then, the world had had contact to Iraq through trade and science, etc, that could have been more productive than what we have now. my opinion only, of course:)
as it is, a war in Iraq, too, would end a dictatorship(only one that went on for decades, not "only" 12 years like Hitlers rule was), probably poverty, need, suffering and constant state of war. but if thats positive for what the west wants, I dont know. especially with parts of the arab etc world being on Iraqs side, not so much because Saddam was loved(Ba 'thism wasnt exactly popular everywhere in the arab world), but because a) most governments have a problem as far as legitimacy is concerned and b) because in the population Saddam has achieved some martyrlike status, it seems. I guess the more the admirers were away from iraqs intelligence and Saddams way to deal with opponents:)
the iraqi opposition doesnt look to great to me, yet. not sure how they can deal with the responsibility in such a country, so run down and with so many problems(ethinicities, religious groups, religion vs. ba'thism, ...).
I dont know.....the entire Iraq question is one big mess. and hats due to a variety of factors. Saddam being only one of them. others being the arab states, the western world, the allies in Gulf War 2 and so on and so on....
my favourite "solution" would be to control the iraqi armed forces and work at disarmament(granting Iraqs safety for as long as that takes) and encourage economic development there. not oil for food, but real trade, scientific exchange and through all that, contact between Iraq and the world. a world isolating a people is naturally seen as hostile, after all.
and more freedom to the population would mean more pressure on an authoritarian/dictatorial regime, too. its not that iaqis dont want to participate in political processes, I think they simply are busy enough trying to survive as it is, to think about any of that.
well.....I can dream..cant I? :)
A GOOOOOOD New Year to you as well:) Hope all is well, that Christmas, New Years Eve were great :) til later:)
in early summer 1945, more than 11 million germans were prisoners of war of the allies. about 7,745 Millions on the side of the western powers, and 3,349 millions on the soviet side.
the US were the first to let POWs go back, especially those who were trained for jobs needed in rebuilding the country, the other allies needed the workforce of the POWs themselves and waitet til later, to let them go.
the fate of about 1 million is still unclear, most of them supposedly were prisoners of the soviets.
(SU: 25 Million; China: about 15 Million ;Poland: almost 6 million; US: about 300.000; Japan: about 2 millions. worlwide, estimates say that about 60 million people died)
after the war, thus, quite a number of women were without their husbands, some stayed without. POW-marriages broke apart to a high percentage. dont see what figures of mine were off, deliberately or not.
Ive not said that Iraqi troops were strong, Ive said that guerilla warfare and terrorism can cause a lot of grief. overwhelming Iraq at first will not be the huge problem, especially not to US military. its any LONGTERM stay in the country that might prove really difficult and dangerous. even more so than a short operation.
I also think that NO Religion should EVER dictate national policies.
And the reverse should also be true - in the case of Islam, policies adopted by so dumb insane and the Iranian mullahs for political purposes have intruded into the faith and bastardized its values.
Beneath all that bluster, you are a bleeding liberal Fold!!
Naradar,
I would agree with that. Fortunatly I think some leaders in the Muslim community are starting to emerge. I read recently that young people in Iran of all places have it figured out and are calling for an end to the extremist rule. In my opinion it will take movements like that to correct and start to fix their problems, we can't nor will ever be able to solve it.
I have to admit, it was pretty funny to see Sean Penn sitting at a photo-op with Iraq minister Tariq Aziz. I thought now here's something I never thought I'd see. A leader of a country getting advice from Spicoli. I was waiting for Mr. Hand to show up and start lecturing him on the complex issues of geopolitical conflict and the impact it's had on the middle east.
Too bad Penn didn't..........Stick around for a while.
Must be nice for the Hollywierd types not to have to live in the real world.
He does look a bit like Groucho now that you mention it. LOL !
Groucho and Spicoli eating pizza and takin about Iraq.
"Duude' those are some narly chemicals ya got there, I'm sure maaay countries claims are totally bogus and not as righteous as you. Got any chips bro ?
I gotta get that movie on DVD. That's one of the good ones from the 80's.
A classic for sure. I just found it funny to see him and as Bill calls him "Groucho" talking policy. I'll be waiting for the duck to drop next time I see Aziz if a reporter says the majic word. :)
Islam is a noble religion that has been victimized by the excesses of its followers. Monsters like so dumb insane, the Iranian mullahs and the Pukistani religious bigots have destroyed Islam. ---- Naradar
Naradar! stop peeing on your pants and look into your fanatic country, secularism and democracy have been buried by Hindu fanatic in Gujrate, india is about to dismembered again after 1947 and Hindu fanatics will agian be the main couse of it! there is a total chaos in your country secular foeces are continously defeated by Hindutva followers and country is heading towards a bloody civil war.
there's very little anyone could say --- Rick
The fact is that you have nothing concrete to say BUT YOU DID mentioned in YOUR OWN WAY that US is converting to a Colonialist power :-)
From today's Guardian
Last week brought yet another terrifying headline from an American newspaper: "US suspects al-Qaida got nerve agent from Iraqis".
The 1,800-word story in the Washington Post last Thursday got off to a reasonably promising start by saying: "The Bush administration has received a credible report that Islamic extremists affiliated with al-Qaida took possession of a chemical weapon in Iraq last month or late in October, according to two officials with firsthand knowledge of the report and its source."
Less promisingly, the second paragraph begins: "If the report proves true ... " The remaining 28 paragraphs offer little to suggest that it actually is true, and several reasons for thinking it may not be. Paragraph six tells us: "Like most intelligence, the reported chemical weapon transfer is not backed by definitive evidence."
Paragraph eight says: "Even authorised spokesmen, with one exception, addressed the report on the condition of anonymity. They said the principal source on the chemical transfer was uncorroborated, and that indications it involved a nerve agent were open to interpretation."
In paragraph 12, we are told that the report may be connected to a warning message circulated to American forces overseas and an unnamed official is cited as saying that the message resulted only from an analyst's hypothetical concern.
As one would expect from the Washington Post, the story is carefully written and meticulously researched. But it's basically worthless.
Still waiting for the evidence that little boy bush has on his desk.
IF YOU'RE HAPPY AND YOU KNOW IT BOMB IRAQ
If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are Saudi,
And your alibi is shoddy,
And your tastes remain quite gaudy,
Bomb Iraq.
If you never were elected, bomb Iraq.
If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq.
If you think that SUVs,
Are the best thing since sliced cheese,
And your father you must please,
Bomb Iraq.
If the globe is quickly warming, bomb Iraq.
If the poor will soon be storming, bomb Iraq.
We assert that might makes right,
Burning oil is a delight,
For the empire we will fight,
Bomb Iraq.
If we have no allies with us, bomb Iraq.
If we think that someone's dissed us, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with the inspections,
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions,
Bomb Iraq.
If corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq.
If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq.
If your politics are sleazy,
And hiding that ain’t easy,
And your manhood’s getting queasy,
Bomb Iraq.
Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq.
For our might now knows no borders, bomb Iraq.
Disagree? We’ll call it treason,
It's the make war not love season,
Even if we have no reason,
Bomb Iraq.
--John Robbins
What a hoot.
here i have something more to insert in your poem :-)
Mrs. Laura Bush is pragnent
Sadam must be behind it
Bomb Iraq.
Has anyone ever been to Superior, WI? Now there's a place that should be bombed.
Has anyone ever been to Superior, WI? Now there's a place that should be bombed.
Hey! not if it takes out Duluth with it!
U.N.'s Blix Says Iraqi Arms Declaration Has Gaps
...But unaccounted for were 550 mustard-gas shells, 150 aerial bombs that at one time were filled with either anthrax or other biological agents and 200 tons of chemicals for the nerve agent VX as well as some warheads with traces of VX...
Has anyone ever been to Superior, WI? Now there's a place that should be bombed.
LOL. Where did that come from? Funny, last time I was there it already looked as if it was bombed. What a hole. It reminded me of a small Gary, Indiana. Both cities are dumps but are fixed up by their shoreline.
Come to think of it, I'm usually bombed when I'm in Superior.
As far as the FBI screw up story above, hindsight is always 20/20 of course. But one of the few positive things to come of 9/11 is hopefully the new level of security checks and balances. That, of course, is if this more detailed level of investigating is managed close enough as to not infringe on our right to privacy. It's a fine line that's between a rock and a hard place. I wouldn't want the job.
Speaking of being bombed: Terrorist camp in Afghanistan being bombed:
http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/files/ac130-gunship-afghanistan.wmv
For those with dialup, I wouldn't bother. It's a big file, almost 6MB
Before you start feeling too superior about Superior check the border cities up north.
Fargo is nice (as nice as it gets in North Dakota), while Moorhead is a dump.
Same is true for Breckenridge and Wahpeton.
I haven't been to Grand Forks in years, but I'm guessing the trend is much the same with East Grand Forks.
People will tell you it's taxes, and I suppose that's part of the reason.
Has anyone ever been to Superior, WI?
Hick paper mill towns - Superior, Beloit, Peshtigo, Appleton. Have worked in every one of them. Full of bubbas with hairy, smelly armpits, trucks with gun racks - unionized and hence overpaid and underworked. My process control systems will soon replace most of them.
The war in Iraq will unfold soon - and will be an opportunity for testing those new high tech weapons. Rather than missile defence, the money should perhaps be spent on robot fighting soldiers. We can run the war from DC. And we will not have any veterans issues - maybe.
Joe .30
Peace on Earth. Good will toward men.
Full of bubbas with hairy, smelly armpits, trucks with gun racks
You're full of crap, Naradar. At least about the gun rack part.
my, my - THX 1138 12/23/02 10:33am
and how many of these bubbas with bellies spilling out of their belts do you interact with in your glass house??
I was in the former Consolidated paper recently – now Stora Enso a Finnish mega corp – and teaching a bunch of bubbas how not to chlorinate themselves. Bubbas have a good rapport with me – they are fascinated by this Brown pony-tailed Indian who can be as nationalistic and jingoistic as any of them. And to boot the niggah is not Arabic and hates Osama as much as us they feel!
They all own guns, live for hunting season, own trucks with gleaming gun racks, beat their wives, abuse alcohol and smell like a sewer. I have come to think all gun owners fit this mold!!
And all these bubbas want the US to go and kick Iraqi arse.
heh, heh - looks like little boy bush has his testicles caught in the North Korean lemon squeezer. And Condi Rice has her tit caught in the Kim wringer.
hey THX - start a folder on North Korea blackmail will you.
own trucks with gleaming gun racks
Not much use owning a gun rack if it's illegal to carry guns on them.
I believe it's illegal to have a loaded or uncased gun in a vehicle in Wisconsin. I could be wrong but I don't think so. I'll check with the guys in the gun thread.
As a matter of fact, I think it's illegal to even load a gun in a parked car when hunting.
Too bad you live in Ohio naradar, I'd taking you to the range and prove to you that not all gun owners are wife beating, beer drinking, smelly rednecks.
:-)
http://www.democracynow.org/Zumach.htm
LEAKED REPORT SHOWS U.S. FIRMS, AGENCIES ILLEGALLY
ASSISTED IRAQ'S BIO-CHEM WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT...
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/2002/12/000204.html
24 U.S. firms, including giants like Hewlett-Packard and Unisys, were listed in the foregoing report. But subsequent disinformation has reduced them to 2, which are now defunct!
America Tore Out 8000 Pages of Iraq Dossier
By James Cusick and Felicity Arbuthnot
The United States edited out more than 8000 crucial pages of Iraq's 11,800-page dossier on weapons, before passing on a sanitized version to the 10 non-permanent members of the United Nations security council.
The full extent of Washington's complete control over who sees what in the crucial Iraqi dossier calls into question the allegations made by US Secretary of State Colin Powell that 'omissions' in the document constituted a 'material breach' of the latest UN resolution on Iraq.
Last week, Secretary General of the UN Kofi Annan accepted that it was 'unfortunate' that his organization had allowed the US to take the only complete dossier and edit it. He admitted 'the approach and style were wrong' and Norway, a member of the security council, says it is being treated like a 'second-class country'.
Although Powell called the Iraqi dossier a 'catalogue of recycled information and flagrant omissions', the non-permanent members of the security council will have no way of testing the US claims for themselves...
--The Sunday Herald, Dec. 22, 2002
Yeah, or just in case they ran out of targets...?
No, no, no! That's not what I was saying.
Just how does a person know that a guy has hairy, smelly armpits?
I was behind a guy in the skyway yesterday that reaked from 10 feet away. I have no doubts he had smelly armpits.
Smelly armpits aside, may visions of sugar plums dance through your heads.
Merry Christmas, everyone!
Right back at ya, big guy!
The full extent of Washington's complete control over who sees what in the crucial Iraqi dossier calls into question the allegations made by US Secretary of State Colin Powell that 'omissions' in the document constituted a 'material breach' of the latest UN resolution on Iraq.
Yes, there was much information on the details of their biological and nuclear weapons taken out so that other nations won't learn how it is done. If they have any questions, they can talk to the permanent members of the UN Security Council, Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, who all received copies of the full 12,000-page report of Iraq's weapons programs that Iraq handed over to the United Nations on December 7.
I asked the Chinese.
But the guy at the other end of the phone just wanted to know if I'd like eggrolls with that.
Did you get the egg rolls? Love egg rolls with duck sauce!
PIECE OF EARTH
By Oscar Gonzalez, AlterNet, December 23, 2002
Washington, DC (Neuters) – Concerned that messages of love and peace may be hampering its War on Terrorism, the Bush Administration is calling on Americans during this holiday season to think "Piece Of Earth" instead of "Peace On Earth."
According to U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "Peace is so elusive, especially when you're not looking for it. So why not promote something that you actually want – a piece of the Earth? Right now the piece of Earth is Iraq, but it could apply nicely to any prime real estate worth fighting for. Heck, I've got visions of Venezuela's oil fields playing in my head even as we speak."
Mr. Rumsfeld also urged family members of US troops not to mail cards and letters that mention peace.
"We don't want to confuse our soldiers about what their main mission is out in the field. If you send cards, use a Sharpie to cross out love, peace, and any other offending or unpatriotic words or phrases. If you must mention Jesus, don't refer to him as the "Prince of Peace." Try the "The Rocking Redeemer" or "Subcomandante J" instead."
Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, who is likely to replace Trent Lott as the Senate's Republican leader, claims to have the votes to amend the U.S. Patriot Act to punish as treason the waging of peace during Christmas.
According to Senator Frist, "Now that we're at war with Saddam, oops, I mean, IF we go to war with Saddam, we can't think of peace. While peace is a nice thought, it should be an afterthought. We should think about it after we win the never-ending War on Terrorism. We can address peace after we've killed all our enemies."
Civil rights groups criticized the Bush Administration's policy, but took great pains to make it clear that they were not attacking the President. One prominent civil rights advocate said, "Doing away with the First Amendment does concerns us somewhat, but we don't mean any disrespect toward President Bush. We can and do distinguish between the man and his policies. We think George Bush is adorable and that his every command, however quirky and bizarre, should be obeyed without pause. However, we do think his policies are a little Nazi-like – er, you did say this was off the record, right?"
Polls reveal that 30 percent of Americans believe that the difference between peace and piece is pure semantics. Fifty-five percent believe that the Augusta National Golf Club should invite Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Ladin before allowing any women to join. And 73 percent think that buying holiday greeting cards that say "Peace on Earth," especially those featuring Snoopy and Woodstock, are the best way to achieve world peace.
--Oscar Gonzalez is a lawyer and writer of satire who lives in Dallas, Texas.
http://startribune.com/stories/484/3554338.html
Antiwar voices rapidly becoming a chorus...
With a failing policy in Afghanistan,..
It's hardly failing.
If partisans like you would be honest about it you would declare that the US can't possibly eradicate every vestige of al queada in Afghanistan. We should get out and leave them to their own devices. If al queada reasserts control we should go back in but there is no need to stay there. Until Afghanistan is Americanized people like you, fold, will claim our actions have been total failures.
We did not do the same in Germany - we had a Marshall plan for the Nazis and forcefully Americanized them.
As for the Japanese we nuked them into submission.
We are using a less lethal form for the browns in Afghanistan.
Yes, there should be consistency in our racism.
We did not do the same in Germany - we had a Marshall plan for the Nazis and forcefully Americanized them.
Because we feared the commies. It was in the US interest to do rebuild.
You idiot. I have called for GETTING OUT of there more than once, and I have long asked what the f*ck our policy IS over there and I have also said that we will NEVER make them into something WE like, or want to call "Americanized".
Your extremist liberal buddies seem to think we should "nation build." In fact they demand it. If you disagree then I was mistaken as to your position.
More ignorence. We helped ALL of Europe rebuild, and rightfully so, with funding from "The Marshall Plan".
But why, you dumbs**t?
Come on fold, why did we help rebuild Europe? You said we did it and "rightfully so." Why?
Because it was in Everyone's interest to do so
oh puhleez - bring on the violins. The Caucasian is known for decimating those he conquers - ask the Native American.
because it was the right thing to do.
more plausible - but probable??
I disagreed with the tactic employed in Afghanistan. In that I think they should have gone in with a much larger force to seal the borders. That being said and already done, the small number of forces did an excellent job and had a dramatic impact, the opposistion already in place helped that no doubt. But they did a great job especiially with the numbers of troops. There were many doomsday predictions based on what happened to the Russians. Some called it Vietstan. It's a totally different situation and was fought differently. The casualty level has been fortunatley very low and it was done with precision and lightning quick fighting and hasn't been the quagmire predicted. We've become so impatient as a nation in our drive through microwave mentality that says we should have everyone rounded up and Afghanistan should be a vacation spot by now. It takes time, years, and money to do so and in a little over a year a pretty stunning result.
Will a Marshall type plan work ? Tough to say, I guess you can't win. Some say it never would have become a breeding ground for terrorists if we hadn't left after the USSR pulled out. If we hadn't we then would have been imperialist and trying to "Americanize" them or force our lifestyle upon them. It's the classic example of the mushy.
Should we stay ? Tough to say, we still have some work to do there but it's hard to know what would happen if we stayed or left. The Afghan people have been fighting amongst the different tribal factions for decades. That instability is one thing that made it possible for AQ to set up shop. So leaving again could produce the same result 15 years from now. It's a daunting task considering all the factions and warlords who want to keep power then be ruled by one central govt. Leaving would definately be easier and in the immeidate future a seemingly good idea, fast forward 10 or 15 years and it might not be. So we're dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. We're imperialist if we stay and we've abandoned them if we leave.
Naradar,
Yes and it was good that we did. It was to their and our benefit to have a stable Germany and a message to the communists. So we rebuilt their country after they declared war on us and bacame allies.
The difference between then and now is that in Afghanistan it's many factions who don't want to unite or be ruled by a central govt. The German people were disillusioned, embarrased and chose to take the path.
Yep, then we rebuilt their country as well and became allies with them after THEY attacked us.
Are you suggesting nukes ? Well you are at least consistently racist.
Hmm, how are things in Kashmir ? People have been fighting since the beginning of time. It's a matter of how they are treated after the battle as well over time.
Yea, we sure are, see above.
Luv2Fly 12/30/02 4:47pm
I think the main reason was the ideological duality with the soviet union and the "west" both "standing" in Germany.
the SU dealt differently with the GDR, and at first did take what was left from that part of the country.
the cities were badly destroyed due to the bomb warfare. the death-%-age was higher than Nagasaki in a number of german towns, too. so the means(nuke or firebomb) doesnt say a lot about the fatal nature of an operation.
Im not sure what the US did in Japan, after the end of war, and to what extent. Here though the rivalry vis-a-vis the SU explains how "old animosity" counted less than the current one.
what many do forget is that in this country, the Cold War was palpable. military bases and a "death strip" (Todesstreifen) showed that clearly. the country, towns, villages and families experienced the "iron curtain" in a way that is remarkable, Id say.
however, while the Marshall Plan was crucial to Germanys post-war development, it was the german population too, who rebuilt this country with the aid of that Program. it should not be forgotten that it took tremendous effort on the part of the german population after the war, to rebuild, to deal with the psychological cost of what it had done, what had happened to it and what changes it had to go through.
http://english.russ.ru/ist_sovr/20010117.html(sorry, was the first site I hit that had something about it in english:))
Kath,
I would agree with your post as you did a much better job at pointing out detail than I did. My point was that a marshall type plan can only work if the populace is either willing to accept it, is similar in philosiphy or percieves it to being a key to rebuilding a nation. So I don't think Marshall type plans work in every scenario. From what I can tell the German people embraced it and rebuilt thier own nation and economy and today we are allies and did so in a short amount of time. So in short the people have to want change.
Same with Japan. Odd how people fail to realize that the death toll from bombings were higher in many German cities than they were in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Perhaps due to it being spread out vs. one bomb. I digress.
The same blueprint was used for Japan to rebuild itself. And I beleive a similar dollar amount went to Japan eventually. In fact McArthur was pivitol in getting it done. Many wanted Japan to suffer or wallow in their defeat and did not want to give Japan one cent since many were understandibly very bitter about being attacked and the high cost of lives to defeat them. McArthur knew what could happen and that's one of the reasons that when a surrender was worked out that the Emporer was made to essentially dethrone himself or deny his deity as a god. That's where there's some similarities now with the new wave of fanatics.
So in both cases you had a fanatical group who did things for their "God" as a motivation. That's why it will be harder to make a marshall type plan work in many of these nations because nobody of leadership in their religious heirarchy will be telling the Muslim extremists that they were wrong. So unless you take out the "Emporer" factor that strain of fervor of fanatacism will be more quiet but it will remain to boil over again one day.
Does it mean once a nation is defeated you simply leave ? I don't know for sure but leaving all together wouldn't help at all. A year later the extremists would simply resurface. I think if you're going to it's going to have to be long term because it will take years to overcome the religious zealotry and fanatacism and hatred that's implanted even in the youth. It's a daunting task no doubt and it's tempting to leave, that argument has some merits. But if we do I fear we'd be doing this all over again in 20 years if we simply leave to let the fanatasicm incubate.
BTW, good to see you, Hope you had a great Christmas :) And a Good New Year !
Luv2Fly 1/2/03 1:49pm
:) Hi Luv' ;)
good to see you too:)
The main obstacle to "staying" in Iraq, for example, is that you cant be sure what happens. we have that debate in Germany. due to the No to military participation, some argue, germany wil be part of the longterm comittment after the war itself, and that is seen as extremely hard, especially in an environment that is already ideologically opposed to "the West", in that case. Guerrilla warfare, terrorism, all capable of making the support at home disappear and maybe costly in terms of soldiers lives and of course financially too.
I cant say what its like in Iraq. After all, the UN-Inspectors werent harassed too much, it seems, and while being kept from doing what they were sent to do, not physically endangered.
In Germany the entire place was bombed to rubble. Refugees were everywhere, more than 11 mio men were prisoners of war, a couple million were dead and their wives and widows had to find a way to support themselves and their children. They had endured dictatorship and war and while the "total defeat" was not seen as a liberation by all, I havent heard of anyone who wasnt glad the war was over, one way or the other. in some towns 16 year olds had fought allied troops until they really couldnt anymore(dead or ran out of munition or even saw by themselves they had no chance).
These people were demoralized and had enough problems fighting for their daily lives. the allied forces had ended the most horrible time in their lives, and while they at first were starving, after a while things got better. what they ddnt have was a sort of "terrorist tradition" and what they didnt have anymore either were allied states around them.
a war against Iraq would mean that some western states fought Iraq and tried to change things there. thats the main problem about it altogether-to me. makes arab and probably other mainly muslim nations feel solidary with Iraq, no matter what Saddam did, wanted to do or was capable of (to international community AND his own society).
I think Kanan Makiya is right when he says that it would be necessary to have arab states in the boat(coalition). not only might it be in their own interest(however the only directly affected ones as far as I see are Kuwait(weak) and Iran(not likely to join a western coalition). not sure right now about Saudi Arabia, but there the government it too weak as well.
(not sure where he says that, its either in "Republic of Fear" or in "Cruelty and Silence". interesting read about Iraq btw, no matter what E. Said says about Makiya.)
yes, the death toll in some german towns was high. its not only forgotten in the international debate at times, but also here. recently a new book came out, about the firestorms. it shows what it is like to be in such a place, when the developing storm sucks people into the fire(big fire>needs oxigen>sucks air into direction of fire). of course germany had started the war and Coventry etc had happened too(also said in that book). it however makes me very reluctant about any kind of bomb warfare. however, todays weapon systems dont make that particular kind of horror necessary at all anymore, I think.
I think however that the past Iraq policies were wrong. I think that through the embargo(antibiotics for example) the people were chased TOWARDS Saddam instead of away. I think the embargo- policy makes it hard to sell that the "West" doesnt want the iraqi people to suffer. they have suffered from not only the consequences of war and dictatorship but also from embargo and a paralized economy. my thesis is that only arms control and disarmament without blocking Iraqs economy would have brought about more change for the people themselves(exchange through trade, an OK economy) that eventually the iraqui people would have brought about change. when Gulf War 2 ended, there were several attempts to end Saddams rule. things could be said that werent possible to say previously. (says Makiya). if then, the world had had contact to Iraq through trade and science, etc, that could have been more productive than what we have now. my opinion only, of course:)
as it is, a war in Iraq, too, would end a dictatorship(only one that went on for decades, not "only" 12 years like Hitlers rule was), probably poverty, need, suffering and constant state of war. but if thats positive for what the west wants, I dont know. especially with parts of the arab etc world being on Iraqs side, not so much because Saddam was loved(Ba 'thism wasnt exactly popular everywhere in the arab world), but because a) most governments have a problem as far as legitimacy is concerned and b) because in the population Saddam has achieved some martyrlike status, it seems. I guess the more the admirers were away from iraqs intelligence and Saddams way to deal with opponents:)
the iraqi opposition doesnt look to great to me, yet. not sure how they can deal with the responsibility in such a country, so run down and with so many problems(ethinicities, religious groups, religion vs. ba'thism, ...).
I dont know.....the entire Iraq question is one big mess. and hats due to a variety of factors. Saddam being only one of them. others being the arab states, the western world, the allies in Gulf War 2 and so on and so on....
my favourite "solution" would be to control the iraqi armed forces and work at disarmament(granting Iraqs safety for as long as that takes) and encourage economic development there. not oil for food, but real trade, scientific exchange and through all that, contact between Iraq and the world. a world isolating a people is naturally seen as hostile, after all.
and more freedom to the population would mean more pressure on an authoritarian/dictatorial regime, too. its not that iaqis dont want to participate in political processes, I think they simply are busy enough trying to survive as it is, to think about any of that.
well.....I can dream..cant I? :)
A GOOOOOOD New Year to you as well:) Hope all is well, that Christmas, New Years Eve were great :) til later:)
'Bill - Fold' 1/3/03 4:37am
if you are talking to me...
in early summer 1945, more than 11 million germans were prisoners of war of the allies.
about 7,745 Millions on the side of the western powers, and 3,349 millions on the soviet side.
the US were the first to let POWs go back, especially those who were trained for jobs needed in rebuilding the country, the other allies needed the workforce of the POWs themselves and waitet til later, to let them go.
the fate of about 1 million is still unclear, most of them supposedly were prisoners of the soviets.
http://www.nachkriegsdeutschland.de/demographische_verschiebungen.htm
Germany: 4 million victims of the war
(SU: 25 Million; China: about 15 Million ;Poland: almost 6 million; US: about 300.000; Japan: about 2 millions. worlwide, estimates say that about 60 million people died)
after the war, thus, quite a number of women were without their husbands, some stayed without. POW-marriages broke apart to a high percentage. dont see what figures of mine were off, deliberately or not.
Ive not said that Iraqi troops were strong, Ive said that guerilla warfare and terrorism can cause a lot of grief. overwhelming Iraq at first will not be the huge problem, especially not to US military. its any LONGTERM stay in the country that might prove really difficult and dangerous. even more so than a short operation.
Winning the war would not be as difficult as winning the peace.