The story was printed on Sept 11'th 2002. So it was only 5 months ago, I hadn't seen it until it was posted on another board.
As far as the WW2 thing I think it's still very applicable. Many of those vets are still alive. Many of the wives and family members have loved ones buried their and they remember the pain and they still miss tehm. And there are many French who lived through it that remember what life was like in occupied France. That's perhaps why they haven't "smacked us back with that" Becasue the revolutionary war was long ago and nobody is left alive, It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the help they gave, I do. I also wouldn't stand in the way of letting them rid the world of a thug. WW1 gets little mention nor does the cold war, nor Vietnam. It's not to say I think they ought to green stamp everything we are involved in because we helped. But in every occasion in the last century we've done plenty to help even when world opinion might not have been there.
There are many many reasons to look to history and that period. History does seem to be repeating itself in some ways. One thing that bothers me the most though is this notion that France, Germany and Russia are somehow not acting in their best interest. Of course they are as are we. It's understandable but people need to spare the moral awards when talking about France especially. Their is over 1200 contracts at stake worth billions of dollars.
The oil contracts they have as well are worth billions and are a HUGE part of it. They are worried about losing those and undserstandibly so. Why is it nobody accuses the French or Russians of allowing a madman to stay in power because of oil ?
Under the guise of trying to limit the war power of the president, these members of the House of Representatives would in reality unconstitutionally limit the war power of Congress.
Comments are posted to a user forum, which can be accessed by other users. It is not a private communication. Read the Talk user agreement
Talk and Feedback:
You can also have your say by starting a discussion in Talk, our discussion area, or by sending feedback directly to the staff of startribune.com
(February 18, 3:03 p.m. CST) - A British commentator wandered about London during the anti-war demonstrations there, and pronounced that what she failed to see was more striking than what she did: Nowhere did she find protesters asking that Saddam Hussein disarm and leave power. It was as if it never occurred to these people that the surest path to peace was for Saddam to hand over all weapons of mass murder and go into exile.
The United States would be mistaken to believe it can disregard world opinion, but there is too much at stake for this country to cave in to illogic, naivete, leftist ideology or knee-jerk anti-Americanism, all of which seemed to be at least somewhat at play in the protests in Europe. Thanks partly to the perfidy of Germany and France and the consequent easing of pressure against Saddam, he will likely try to tough it out. And that may make war inevitable, for all the alternatives threaten more loss of life, more horror, more terror, more havoc, more oppression than war could cause.
President Bush has spoken powerfully about the need to oust Saddam. Perhaps, he should have spoken out more and still should. Secretary of State Colin Powell spelled out a solid case that Saddam has not accounted for his weapons of mass destruction, although those basic facts have been known. Britain's brave prime minister, Tony Blair, cannot address the subject in language short of eloquence, it seems.
The facts are that prior inspections and sanctions and threats have failed to deter Saddam in his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and ambition to head a pan-Arab state in the Middle East. If peace at this moment is bought at the price of again allowing him to slip the noose, he will not of a sudden grow pacific and humble. He will become more of a menace, and sooner or later, thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands will pay with their lives.
There is a possible way to secure peace without that eventuality, and that is for the whole civilized world to stand up as one and to demand that Iraq disarm and Saddam's regime be replaced. Sadly, some political leaders see advantages in contrary tactics, and a great many demonstrators just don't get it.
Jay Ambrose is director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard Newspapers. Email him at AmbroseJ@shns.com.
Saddam's success would produce more war, not more peace D.J. TICE Editorial Writer
Before it's over, America may learn untold lessons from its latest confrontation with Iraq. But just now, facing stubborn international resistance to decisive action against a defiant enemy, U.S. leaders might draw one conclusion that isn't entirely what peace advocates have in mind.
The lesson, an old one, is that it's easier to get forgiveness than permission. So when you have an enemy cornered, finish him.
In 1991, in response to Iraq's aggression against Kuwait, America won wide international support for destroying the Iraqi military machine. But having accomplished that mission, the first President Bush stayed America's hand, leaving Saddam Hussein in power.
Bush I did this, according to most accounts, in part because he was mistakenly confident that internal rebellion would topple Saddam's humbled regime; in part because he feared a political backlash if he prolonged what was becoming an ugly bloodbath; and in part out of respect for the international coalition, which had signed on to liberate Kuwait, not necessarily to overthrow Saddam.
From the first, many argued it was a mistake to show quarter to Saddam. There is no longer much question about it.
Bush I didn't underestimate Saddam's wickedness; he overestimated the resolve of America's allies. It was folly to suppose that the United Nations would have the fortitude to enforce the conditions it demanded in the 1991 cease-fire.
This is what's most dangerous and frustrating about the current debate. That Iraq disarm and prove that it had done so — totally, immediately, meekly — was the condition upon which the guns fell silent in 1991, the condition upon which Saddam was left in power.
The very essence of a conditional cease-fire — if those imposing it are serious — is surely that war will not in the future be considered a "last resort," but rather that any violation of the conditions will instantly justify a resumption of the war. No questions, no excuses, no additional "last chances."
From the NYT These are uneasy, tense times for Americans living abroad. As the possibility of war against Iraq rises, especially a war that the United States may fight virtually alone, so does anti-Americanism in the streets, newspapers and cafes of foreign cities.
Even visiting abroad has its dangers.
``Our message to Washington will be clear,'' Sheen says in the ad. ``Don't invade Iraq. We can contain Saddam Hussein without killing innocent people, diverting us from the war on terrorism and putting us all at risk.''
Will take part in a phone in coming up next week.
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
``Our message to Washington will be clear,'' Sheen says in the ad. ``Don't invade Iraq. We can contain Saddam Hussein without killing innocent people, diverting us from the war on terrorism and putting us all at risk.''
Who cares what Sheen thinks? Does he get the same briefings that the President does?
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
You just lost any credibility you ever had with me.
A coalition of groups opposed to a U.S.-led war in Iraq will have supporters call, fax and e-mail the White House and Congress next week in an effort to overwhelm switchboards and catch the attention of political leaders.
I don't go to total's ever. I didn't know the frogs owned them though. But I never went there. Apparently out east there are some stations that have signs stating that they get no gas from M.E sources. I'd be happy to pay extra to do so.
What I was getting at is the way that France & Russia's tie to oil are overlooked.
the Forum you seem so anguished about is a break away Indian group. There is a regular India-Pak Forum under Burning Issues and the admins here banned the guys who started the Forum you visited and got bent out of shape over. Even I am banned in the Forum you referenced.
Much of the world has commenced thinking like these extremists. Compare this to the state of affairs after 911 when the whole globe was American. The unilateral despotism of little boy bush has made us the pariah of the world.
you bet! just ask the guys here about me - a normal Indian! They cannot get enough of me.
Where are you from originally - just curious. Immigrants are the backbone of this nation - in fact but for the Native Americans ( and they have been exterminated - oops done in!) everyone is an immigrant. Some people though think just because they came here a couple of generations earlier, they are special!!
Welcome, wherever you're from. Glad you're here and congrats on becoming a citizen. I find in many cases that our newest citizens perhaps know the history of this country better than some and take it less for granted that they live in a pretty great place.
you bet! just ask the guys here about me - a normal Indian! They cannot get enough of me.
You're welcome to post here. Disagreeing with you has nothing to do with your ethnicity. In fact Had you never brought it up nobody would know. You make good points from time to time even though I disagree with alot of what you say. You seem like an intelligent person and some days debate in a reasonable manner. Then their are other days where you are dispariging someone's religion or making sweeping generalizations that are seemingly meant to inflame or anger other people with no real purpose towards debate. Respect goes a along way and it's a 2 way street. Those who can't have simple decency or decorrum aren't welcome. O.K ?
Edward Hamm is peeved. He not only voted for George W. Bush, he gave half a million dollars to the Republican campaign—and now he wants a refund. On Jan. 13, Hamm and a group of Republican businessmen placed a full- page ad in the Wall Street Journal. Headlined “A Republican Dissent on Iraq,” it gave voice to their complaint: “The candidate we supported in 2000 promised a more humble nation in our dealings with the world. We gave him our votes and our campaign contributions. That candidate was you. We feel betrayed. We want our money back. We want our country back.”
You rabid right wingers should read this article and attempt to digest it. I make it a point to read the commentary of extremists so that I can fathom their deviant thought process, and occasionally I do find these guys have moments of lucidity.
here is another factual article on the mess we find ourselves in
It said that the United States had to be, as Colin Powell put it at the time, “the bully on the block.” This meant that other nations would have to understand that it’s our world, they’re just living in it; no other superpower could even think about emerging; collective action was rejected (NATO won a partial exemption here, but only partial) in favor of “ad hoc assemblies, often not lasting beyond the crisis being confronted”; preventive military action would prove necessary, somewhere, just to make the point that it was our prerogative to do so (the DPG mentioned Poland, Lithuania, the Philippines, North Korea, and Iraq); and more. The writing of the document was overseen by Paul Wolfowitz. When it was leaked, it was widely denounced as bellicose to the point of being unhinged.
The ugly American has been morphed into the repulsive and revolting American – thanks to the belligerence of little boy bush.
There is an underlying tone of condescension there – second nature to many Americans – and I have no time for such claptrap.
I go for the jugular when expressing the supremacy of my arguments – they are well thought out and arrived at with great deliberation. I manipulate race and religion that are the most divisive and at the same time the most cohesive pillars of American society. Your professed outrage means little since I know it is contrived and the affront of the reverse discrimination you appear sensitive to makes it all worthwhile.
Aggressive immigrants like me who will be in-your-face all the time are the norm now old chap. May not have permeated your neck of the woods yet and appears threatening to you since you have been hiding behind the cocoon of the armed forces for so long. Welcome to the new USA old chap – the old Caucasian enclaves are no longer significant!!
There is an underlying tone of condescension there – second nature to many Americans – and I have no time for such claptrap.
It wasn't meant to be, merely wanted to point out the obvious that apparently you can't see. But your claptrap is renowned.
I go for the jugular when expressing the supremacy of my arguments – they are well thought out and arrived at with great deliberation.
Well thought out ? Pfft. Yea, sure. LOL. Then again I'm sure it takes you a long time for you to make up racist and otherwise moronic statements. You end up cutting your own jugular in the process, it's fun to watch. No wonder so many threads have canned you. How long can one listen to your lies, b.s and barbs ?
Aggressive immigrants like me who will be in-your-face all the time are the norm now old chap. May not have permeated your neck of the woods yet and appears threatening to you since you have been hiding behind the cocoon of the armed forces for so long.
Ummm guess what genius. I worked with more cultures and diverse people than you can fathom. The difference between you and I is that I don't sit there and disparage them. And I loved that part of my job. I don't care where you're from or what color your skin is as long as you don't use it as a crutch like you do. Nobody would have known nor cared what nationality you are. You're the one who brings it into damn near every post. You attack and defile other cultures left and right and then whine if someone dares disagree with an issue about India. Get over yourself little girl.
I go for the jugular when expressing the supremacy of my arguments – they are well thought out and arrived at with great deliberation.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Best joke I read today! Well thought out? Arrived at with great deliberation? Like this one that you posted back in post 977?
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
"The reorganization of our press has truly been a success...divergancies of opinion between members of the government are no longer an occasion for public exhibitions and are not the newspaper's business. We've eliminated that conception of political freedom which holds that everbody has the right to say whatever comes into his head" - Adolph Hitler
this morning's US versus the rest of the world news - NYT
White House officials sounded pessimistic today that their offer of $26 billion in aid to Turkey would be enough to win the country's approval for the United States to open a northern front against Iraq if war comes.
a payola of 26 billionand the Turks will not bite?? And we were twisting NATO arms to pass a resolution saying they would defend Turkey ??
More from NYT
Their growing frustration with Turkey came as President Bush was dealing with a variety of recalcitrant allies at the United Nations and in capitals around the world, allies that are urging considerably more time for weapons inspections or a strategy of containment for Iraq. Even Italy, a stalwart ally, today urged that Mr. Bush not take military action unless he had explicit approval from the Security Council. It is far from clear that Mr. Bush can win that approval, and today he spent half an hour on the telephone with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain developing a strategy for introducing a brief resolution that might, in some form, set a deadline for Iraqi compliance.
it appears that this may seriously screw up plans
The Turkish decision also represents a military complication for Washington because it may force last-minute redeployments of American and British military units and could push the earliest starting date for any combat operations deeper into March, military experts said.
Christ - if we are going to go in - security council resolution or not, I hope the military planners can browbeat the goddamn turks into compliance. How much more do they want - 6 billion?? I guess that lying sack of shit little boy bush must see if American lives are worth this pocket change.
All this uncertainty is going to make the stock market tank and the already shitty economy even worse - look at gas proices.
watch this tonite
The War Behind Closed Doors, PBS, FrontLine, Feb 20, 9:00pm.
FRONTLINE examines the hidden story of what is really driving the Bush administration to war with Iraq. The investigation asks whether the publicly reported reasons--fear of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction or a desire to insure and protect America's access to oil--are only masking the real reason for the war. Through interviews with well-placed sources in and outside of the administration, FRONTLINE unravels a story known only to the Washington insiders.
But Bill Clinton, four years ago, took to the airwaves and explained his authorization of non-U.N.-approved missile strikes against Iraq, using the very same arguments now advanced by President Bush. Yet the silence was deafening.
if the missiles are found, send in the air force and take them out. Or get the goddamn Israelis to take them out - we subsidize them to blow up Palestinian women and children. Use them to remove the WMDs once found. Like Clinton did and like the Israelis themselves did when they took out the nuclear power plant.
keep the inspectors in Iraq permanently and disable so dumb insane's ability to produce any more WMDs. Let the UN do what little boy bush wants to do and reward the oil interests.
No need to ship 200,000 of our boys and expose them to chemical attacks and what not - which so dumb will be cornered into using when threatened with immediate extinction. Why start WW III when strategic attacks will suffice??
no there is no difference other than much more time is passed. It is time, in language that you should understand Naradar, to s*** or get off the pot. You can take the cowardly way out as you advocate or you do what has to be done. Bush is standing up for what has to be done and taking the political hits. People like you are using the situation to win political points. That is immoral but it is expected of the left.
kath f. 2/19/03 2:21am
That's good to hear Kath. I still haven't gotten around to taking up German classes yet, one of these days. :)
'Bill - Fold' 2/19/03 6:23am
Bill,
The story was printed on Sept 11'th 2002. So it was only 5 months ago, I hadn't seen it until it was posted on another board.
As far as the WW2 thing I think it's still very applicable. Many of those vets are still alive. Many of the wives and family members have loved ones buried their and they remember the pain and they still miss tehm. And there are many French who lived through it that remember what life was like in occupied France. That's perhaps why they haven't "smacked us back with that" Becasue the revolutionary war was long ago and nobody is left alive, It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the help they gave, I do. I also wouldn't stand in the way of letting them rid the world of a thug. WW1 gets little mention nor does the cold war, nor Vietnam. It's not to say I think they ought to green stamp everything we are involved in because we helped. But in every occasion in the last century we've done plenty to help even when world opinion might not have been there.
There are many many reasons to look to history and that period. History does seem to be repeating itself in some ways. One thing that bothers me the most though is this notion that France, Germany and Russia are somehow not acting in their best interest. Of course they are as are we. It's understandable but people need to spare the moral awards when talking about France especially. Their is over 1200 contracts at stake worth billions of dollars.
The oil contracts they have as well are worth billions and are a HUGE part of it. They are worried about losing those and undserstandibly so. Why is it nobody accuses the French or Russians of allowing a madman to stay in power because of oil ?
"Why is it nobody accuses the French or Russians of allowing a madman to stay in power because of oil ?"
That was my next question!
Good luck getting an honest answer on that one Muskwa.
Notice in any of the protests nobody was carrying signs decrying Saddam and calling for him to step down ?
Under the guise of trying to limit the war power of the president, these members of the House of Representatives would in reality unconstitutionally limit the war power of Congress.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/terencejeffrey/tj20030219.shtml
Actually, I have seen variations of that story for more than a year. It's still interesting, but it's old.
That's fricking strange, man. The story didn't even exist a year ago. You're some sort of clairvoyant or something.
JAY AMBROSE: They just don't get it
Scripps Howard News Service
Copyright © 2003 Nando Media
Copyright © 2003 Star Tribune
Please tell us your thoughts about this story:
Name:
E-mail:
Comments are posted to a user forum, which can be accessed by other users. It is not a private communication.
Read the Talk user agreement
Talk and Feedback:
You can also have your say by starting a discussion in Talk, our discussion area, or by sending feedback directly to the staff of startribune.com
(February 18, 3:03 p.m. CST) - A British commentator wandered about London during the anti-war demonstrations there, and pronounced that what she failed to see was more striking than what she did: Nowhere did she find protesters asking that Saddam Hussein disarm and leave power. It was as if it never occurred to these people that the surest path to peace was for Saddam to hand over all weapons of mass murder and go into exile.
The United States would be mistaken to believe it can disregard world opinion, but there is too much at stake for this country to cave in to illogic, naivete, leftist ideology or knee-jerk anti-Americanism, all of which seemed to be at least somewhat at play in the protests in Europe. Thanks partly to the perfidy of Germany and France and the consequent easing of pressure against Saddam, he will likely try to tough it out. And that may make war inevitable, for all the alternatives threaten more loss of life, more horror, more terror, more havoc, more oppression than war could cause.
President Bush has spoken powerfully about the need to oust Saddam. Perhaps, he should have spoken out more and still should. Secretary of State Colin Powell spelled out a solid case that Saddam has not accounted for his weapons of mass destruction, although those basic facts have been known. Britain's brave prime minister, Tony Blair, cannot address the subject in language short of eloquence, it seems.
The facts are that prior inspections and sanctions and threats have failed to deter Saddam in his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and ambition to head a pan-Arab state in the Middle East. If peace at this moment is bought at the price of again allowing him to slip the noose, he will not of a sudden grow pacific and humble. He will become more of a menace, and sooner or later, thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands will pay with their lives.
There is a possible way to secure peace without that eventuality, and that is for the whole civilized world to stand up as one and to demand that Iraq disarm and Saddam's regime be replaced. Sadly, some political leaders see advantages in contrary tactics, and a great many demonstrators just don't get it.
Jay Ambrose is director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard Newspapers. Email him at AmbroseJ@shns.com.
http://24hour.startribune.com/24hour/opinions/story/770029p-5542249c.html
It was as if it never occurred to these people that the surest path to peace was for Saddam to hand over all weapons of mass murder and go into exile.
Heck no. It's all about the US being evil and bullying poor Saddam.
Of course it never occured to them.
"Heck no. It's all about the US being evil and bullying poor Saddam."
I know
Poor Saddamm.
Saddam's success would produce more war, not more peace
D.J. TICE
Editorial Writer
Before it's over, America may learn untold lessons from its latest confrontation with Iraq. But just now, facing stubborn international resistance to decisive action against a defiant enemy, U.S. leaders might draw one conclusion that isn't entirely what peace advocates have in mind.
The lesson, an old one, is that it's easier to get forgiveness than permission. So when you have an enemy cornered, finish him.
In 1991, in response to Iraq's aggression against Kuwait, America won wide international support for destroying the Iraqi military machine. But having accomplished that mission, the first President Bush stayed America's hand, leaving Saddam Hussein in power.
Bush I did this, according to most accounts, in part because he was mistakenly confident that internal rebellion would topple Saddam's humbled regime; in part because he feared a political backlash if he prolonged what was becoming an ugly bloodbath; and in part out of respect for the international coalition, which had signed on to liberate Kuwait, not necessarily to overthrow Saddam.
From the first, many argued it was a mistake to show quarter to Saddam. There is no longer much question about it.
Bush I didn't underestimate Saddam's wickedness; he overestimated the resolve of America's allies. It was folly to suppose that the United Nations would have the fortitude to enforce the conditions it demanded in the 1991 cease-fire.
This is what's most dangerous and frustrating about the current debate. That Iraq disarm and prove that it had done so — totally, immediately, meekly — was the condition upon which the guns fell silent in 1991, the condition upon which Saddam was left in power.
The very essence of a conditional cease-fire — if those imposing it are serious — is surely that war will not in the future be considered a "last resort," but rather that any violation of the conditions will instantly justify a resumption of the war. No questions, no excuses, no additional "last chances."
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/opinion/5209366.htm
From the NYT These are uneasy, tense times for Americans living abroad. As the possibility of war against Iraq rises, especially a war that the United States may fight virtually alone, so does anti-Americanism in the streets, newspapers and cafes of foreign cities.
Even visiting abroad has its dangers.
``Our message to Washington will be clear,'' Sheen says in the ad. ``Don't invade Iraq. We can contain Saddam Hussein without killing innocent people, diverting us from the war on terrorism and putting us all at risk.''
Will take part in a phone in coming up next week.
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
Neville Naradar Chamberlain. Fortunately the number of cowards are few.
``Our message to Washington will be clear,'' Sheen says in the ad. ``Don't invade Iraq. We can contain Saddam Hussein without killing innocent people, diverting us from the war on terrorism and putting us all at risk.''
Who cares what Sheen thinks? Does he get the same briefings that the President does?
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
You just lost any credibility you ever had with me.
Bipolar
That's what I call it.
Naradar,
You're a write off. A racist and ignorant.
Another T-shirt ban.... it's probably not what you think.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Midwest/02/19/antibush.tshirt.ap/index.html
I see that freedom of speech is alive and well in government schools.
Funny, my kids can't even wear T-shirts to school.
Only uniforms allowed.
A coalition of groups opposed to a U.S.-led war in Iraq will have supporters call, fax and e-mail the White House and Congress next week in an effort to overwhelm switchboards and catch the attention of political leaders.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78983,00.html
I wonder if the Martin Sheen will disclose his e-mail so we can tell him where to go.
You can get fries with your burger at a restaurant here, but just don't ask for french fries.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/South/02/19/offbeat.freedom.fries.ap/index.html
I wonder if the Martin Sheen will disclose his e-mail so we can tell him where to go.
That would be fun as hell.
Dear Martin, you suck!
Here's a pic someone snuck into a protest last week. I got it from another poster.
Bill,
I don't go to total's ever. I didn't know the frogs owned them though. But I never went there. Apparently out east there are some stations that have signs stating that they get no gas from M.E sources. I'd be happy to pay extra to do so.
What I was getting at is the way that France & Russia's tie to oil are overlooked.
You will also have to e-mail half the people in this country, because that's how many agree with Sheen.
You overestimate the anti-war, or more precisely anti-American, supporters.
Belle Peppers "USA - A Global Bully?? Global Justice or Just USA?!?" 2/19/03 1:26pm
Yes I have seen the anti-American board.
jethro bodine 2/19/03 1:40pm
hi jethro, i wonder how those posters would feel if someone started an anti India board on the same lines :/
oops i'm just ticked off by the messages i read there....
Luv2Fly 2/19/03 1:09pm
think they are?
everybody is mentioning it at the moment, I find:-)
heh, heh - capsicum - Belle Peppers 2/19/03 1:53pm
the Forum you seem so anguished about is a break away Indian group. There is a regular India-Pak Forum under Burning Issues and the admins here banned the guys who started the Forum you visited and got bent out of shape over. Even I am banned in the Forum you referenced.
Much of the world has commenced thinking like these extremists. Compare this to the state of affairs after 911 when the whole globe was American. The unilateral despotism of little boy bush has made us the pariah of the world.
Naradar 2/19/03 2:20pm
hi Naradar, thx for clearing that. i've always liked people from India, atleast the ones i've met so far!
are you nice :)
try as much as you will, USA will never be a pariah....ummm dont know about the French though ;)
p.s : my English is not that good, so can you please use less complicated words :)
Belle Peppers 2/19/03 2:49pm
. i've always liked people from India
you bet! just ask the guys here about me - a normal Indian! They cannot get enough of me.
Where are you from originally - just curious. Immigrants are the backbone of this nation - in fact but for the Native Americans ( and they have been exterminated - oops done in!) everyone is an immigrant. Some people though think just because they came here a couple of generations earlier, they are special!!
Belle,
Welcome, wherever you're from. Glad you're here and congrats on becoming a citizen. I find in many cases that our newest citizens perhaps know the history of this country better than some and take it less for granted that they live in a pretty great place.
Naradar,
You're welcome to post here. Disagreeing with you has nothing to do with your ethnicity. In fact Had you never brought it up nobody would know. You make good points from time to time even though I disagree with alot of what you say. You seem like an intelligent person and some days debate in a reasonable manner. Then their are other days where you are dispariging someone's religion or making sweeping generalizations that are seemingly meant to inflame or anger other people with no real purpose towards debate. Respect goes a along way and it's a 2 way street. Those who can't have simple decency or decorrum aren't welcome. O.K ?
1K JOE ! :)
Belle Peppers "USA - A Global Bully?? Global Justice or Just USA?!?" 2/19/03 3:02pm
talk about not being able to face their own facts :/
Luv2Fly 2/19/03 3:15pm
thanks Luv :)
Just another Hoax.
Yeah, just a hoax: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12188969&method=full&siteid=50143
 Belle Peppers 2/19/03 3:37pm
You were banned for that?
Really?
THX 1138 2/19/03 3:52pm
yes i was. I have no access, you can still read my post.
Well, that's just stupid if you ask me.
I read the post and don't see any reason why you should be banned.
THX 1138 2/19/03 3:57pm
maybe they can't take criticism of their own country's foreign policies.
but that's ok....lots of more folders here to post on :)
nice to meet you THX....even though you dont want any damn vegetables :)
since this Forum is infested with the neo-conservative ideologues, here is a viewpoint from similar thinkers.
The neo-Conservative take on invading Iraq
Edward Hamm is peeved. He not only voted for George W. Bush, he gave half a million dollars to the Republican campaign—and now he wants a refund. On Jan. 13, Hamm and a group of Republican businessmen placed a full- page ad in the Wall Street Journal. Headlined “A Republican Dissent on Iraq,” it gave voice to their complaint: “The candidate we supported in 2000 promised a more humble nation in our dealings with the world. We gave him our votes and our campaign contributions. That candidate was you. We feel betrayed. We want our money back. We want our country back.”
You rabid right wingers should read this article and attempt to digest it. I make it a point to read the commentary of extremists so that I can fathom their deviant thought process, and occasionally I do find these guys have moments of lucidity.
here is another factual article on the mess we find ourselves in
The Cheney-Wolf man axis of evil
It said that the United States had to be, as Colin Powell put it at the time, “the bully on the block.” This meant that other nations would have to understand that it’s our world, they’re just living in it; no other superpower could even think about emerging; collective action was rejected (NATO won a partial exemption here, but only partial) in favor of “ad hoc assemblies, often not lasting beyond the crisis being confronted”; preventive military action would prove necessary, somewhere, just to make the point that it was our prerogative to do so (the DPG mentioned Poland, Lithuania, the Philippines, North Korea, and Iraq); and more. The writing of the document was overseen by Paul Wolfowitz. When it was leaked, it was widely denounced as bellicose to the point of being unhinged.
The ugly American has been morphed into the repulsive and revolting American – thanks to the belligerence of little boy bush.
well thank you - Luv2Fly 2/19/03 3:20pm
that was pretty white of you!!
There is an underlying tone of condescension there – second nature to many Americans – and I have no time for such claptrap.
I go for the jugular when expressing the supremacy of my arguments – they are well thought out and arrived at with great deliberation. I manipulate race and religion that are the most divisive and at the same time the most cohesive pillars of American society. Your professed outrage means little since I know it is contrived and the affront of the reverse discrimination you appear sensitive to makes it all worthwhile.
Aggressive immigrants like me who will be in-your-face all the time are the norm now old chap. May not have permeated your neck of the woods yet and appears threatening to you since you have been hiding behind the cocoon of the armed forces for so long. Welcome to the new USA old chap – the old Caucasian enclaves are no longer significant!!
You have no idea what color I am.
It wasn't meant to be, merely wanted to point out the obvious that apparently you can't see. But your claptrap is renowned.
Well thought out ? Pfft. Yea, sure. LOL. Then again I'm sure it takes you a long time for you to make up racist and otherwise moronic statements. You end up cutting your own jugular in the process, it's fun to watch. No wonder so many threads have canned you. How long can one listen to your lies, b.s and barbs ?
Ummm guess what genius. I worked with more cultures and diverse people than you can fathom. The difference between you and I is that I don't sit there and disparage them. And I loved that part of my job. I don't care where you're from or what color your skin is as long as you don't use it as a crutch like you do. Nobody would have known nor cared what nationality you are. You're the one who brings it into damn near every post. You attack and defile other cultures left and right and then whine if someone dares disagree with an issue about India. Get over yourself little girl.
nice to meet you THX....even though you dont want any damn vegetables :)
Nice to meet you too B.P.
btw: That line about vegetables is from The Simpsons
since this Forum is infested with the neo-conservative ideologues, here is a viewpoint from similar thinkers.
Come on Naradar, you don't really think that of us do you?
Sure, some of us are "Conservative", but it's not like we're extremists.
Anyway, remind me to read that article tomorrow, I don't have time right now.
I go for the jugular when expressing the supremacy of my arguments – they are well thought out and arrived at with great deliberation.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Best joke I read today! Well thought out? Arrived at with great deliberation? Like this one that you posted back in post 977?
You warmongers can of course sit at home and beat your wives or children as violence-prone Americans are wont to do.
Belle,
Welcome to the forum! Hope you hang around and post more with us.
"The reorganization of our press has truly been a success...divergancies of opinion between members of the government are no longer an occasion for public exhibitions and are not the newspaper's business. We've eliminated that conception of political freedom which holds that everbody has the right to say whatever comes into his head" - Adolph Hitler
this morning's US versus the rest of the world news - NYT
White House officials sounded pessimistic today that their offer of $26 billion in aid to Turkey would be enough to win the country's approval for the United States to open a northern front against Iraq if war comes.
a payola of 26 billionand the Turks will not bite?? And we were twisting NATO arms to pass a resolution saying they would defend Turkey ??
More from NYT
Their growing frustration with Turkey came as President Bush was dealing with a variety of recalcitrant allies at the United Nations and in capitals around the world, allies that are urging considerably more time for weapons inspections or a strategy of containment for Iraq. Even Italy, a stalwart ally, today urged that Mr. Bush not take military action unless he had explicit approval from the Security Council. It is far from clear that Mr. Bush can win that approval, and today he spent half an hour on the telephone with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain developing a strategy for introducing a brief resolution that might, in some form, set a deadline for Iraqi compliance.
it appears that this may seriously screw up plans
The Turkish decision also represents a military complication for Washington because it may force last-minute redeployments of American and British military units and could push the earliest starting date for any combat operations deeper into March, military experts said.
Christ - if we are going to go in - security council resolution or not, I hope the military planners can browbeat the goddamn turks into compliance. How much more do they want - 6 billion?? I guess that lying sack of shit little boy bush must see if American lives are worth this pocket change.
All this uncertainty is going to make the stock market tank and the already shitty economy even worse - look at gas proices.
watch this tonite
The War Behind Closed Doors, PBS, FrontLine, Feb 20, 9:00pm.
FRONTLINE examines the hidden story of what is really driving the Bush administration to war with Iraq. The investigation asks whether the publicly reported reasons--fear of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction or a desire to insure and protect America's access to oil--are only masking the real reason for the war. Through interviews with well-placed sources in and outside of the administration, FRONTLINE unravels a story known only to the Washington insiders.
But Bill Clinton, four years ago, took to the airwaves and explained his authorization of non-U.N.-approved missile strikes against Iraq, using the very same arguments now advanced by President Bush. Yet the silence was deafening.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/le20030220.shtml
the differences are stark jethro
if the missiles are found, send in the air force and take them out. Or get the goddamn Israelis to take them out - we subsidize them to blow up Palestinian women and children. Use them to remove the WMDs once found. Like Clinton did and like the Israelis themselves did when they took out the nuclear power plant.
keep the inspectors in Iraq permanently and disable so dumb insane's ability to produce any more WMDs. Let the UN do what little boy bush wants to do and reward the oil interests.
No need to ship 200,000 of our boys and expose them to chemical attacks and what not - which so dumb will be cornered into using when threatened with immediate extinction. Why start WW III when strategic attacks will suffice??
no there is no difference other than much more time is passed. It is time, in language that you should understand Naradar, to s*** or get off the pot. You can take the cowardly way out as you advocate or you do what has to be done. Bush is standing up for what has to be done and taking the political hits. People like you are using the situation to win political points. That is immoral but it is expected of the left.
And to think, some people get on MY case...for a lot LESS.
Well, that just plain fun to do! =)