your assumption is safe that i don't believe space aliens control the world. that said, i'm not sure a belief that aliens do control the world automatically disqualifies someone as unreasonable. they'd certainly make me question their sanity, but having a flawed view of the world doesn't disqualify reasonableness. but when the debate about whether aliens control the world turns into a detroit rap battle, thats unreasonable. and that's a line that you cross on a very regular basis, though i must say it hasn't happened recently.
i'm not sure a belief that aliens do control the world automatically disqualifies someone as unreasonable.
I think that unless the believer in aliens can come up with some basis in fact for their belief, a reasonable person conclude that the believer in space aliens controlling the world was not reasonable.
but when the debate about whether aliens control the world turns into a detroit rap battle, thats unreasonable. and that's a line that you cross on a very regular basis, though i must say it hasn't happened recently.
well then I guess it just about time to cross that line again.
Unbelieveable. What a maroon. He'll then turn around and say "but I support the troops" Thanks for the support Charlie. I'd hate to hear what you'd say if he didn't support them. So according to Charlie's logic we must be intentionally killing other troops in freindly fire incedents. I mean after all Charlie it's not like they're shooting themselves. I can't wait to hear the defense of this baffoon.
NEW YORK (AP)--A Columbia University professor told an anti-war gathering that he would like to see ``a million Mogadishus'' _ referring to the 1993 ambush in Somalia that killed 18 American servicemen.
At Wednesday night's ``teach-in'' on the Columbia campus, Nicholas De Genova also called for the defeat of U.S. forces in Iraq and said, ``The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military.'' And he asserted that Americans who call themselves ``patriots'' are white supremacists.
De Genova's comments about defeating the United States in Iraq were cheered by the crowd of 3,000, Newsday reported. But his mention of the Somali ambush--``I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus''--was largely met with silence.
The Fieldsboro Borough Council approved the ban last week, but Mayor Edward "Buddy" Tyler said it does not prohibit residents from placing memorials on their own property.
A couple of nights ago a local tv station in Duluth had an interview with a female Army recruiter who was spit on while walking in downtown Duluth.
That same night, there was another story where a Marine in uniform was refused service at the Blue Note Cafe, also in Duluth. The quote from an employee was "we don't serve your kind here".
Wonder if I would be classified as reasonable in these hallowed circles.
Suicide bombers, Viet Cong tactics, elevated expectations deflated, propganda wars being lost, the best of war plans going awry - and Baghdad still looms.
Gripping footage from the front lines - great entertainment. The 3rd world perspective is that Americans are too cowardly to fight man to man and rely on the debilitating power of remote controlled arsenal and high tech methods of obliteration. When these methods fail to produce results, the strength of character and gumption is lacking in the American soldier to revert to conventional good ole human to human combat. The soft Yankee soldier cannot always rely on a sanitized war.
Sigh - it is spring time here and my favorite season. Spring break beckons and Naradar and family are off to beaches of Mexico. Hopefully far from the carnage and the spin and the image-making of a nation consumed with fear and loathing.
Gripping footage from the front lines - great entertainment. The 3rd world perspective is that Americans are too cowardly to fight man to man and rely on the debilitating power of remote controlled arsenal and high tech methods of obliteration.
Yea, because I'm sure they wouldn't use them if they had them. Naw they'd stick to false surrenders and brave shit like that. It's going to be fun to feed you your idiotic drivel.
When these methods fail to produce results, the strength of character and gumption is lacking in the American soldier to revert to conventional good ole human to human combat. The soft Yankee soldier cannot always rely on a sanitized war.
Take a look at the Urban fighting, we aren't using massive air because of the civilians. In good ol' human to human combat as you put it the other side usually doesn't put women and kids on the front lines. Or fire on fleeing civilians. Yes, they are so brave. Then again you'd know zip about charachter and courage. I mean after all you left your country instead of trying to improve it. Not that there's anything wrong with that though.
Sigh - it is spring time here and my favorite season. Spring break beckons and Naradar and family are off to beaches of Mexico. Hopefully far from the carnage and the spin and the image-making of a nation consumed with fear and loathing.
Vacation in Mexico, another sign of opression no doubt. You old chap are the only one right now who seems to be filled with fear. Actually you're filled with hate.
But do have a good vacation, drink plenty of water.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq (news - web sites)'s vice president on Saturday threatened more suicide bombings against coalition troops, saying a bomber who killed four U.S. soldiers outside the Iraqi city of Najaf was a noncommissioned army officer.
Coalition forces in Iraq have found no smoking gun Hans Blix told Swedish radio, the Associated Press reported.
How about a "smoking missile," Mr., Blix, one like that long range Chinese Silkworm missile the Iraqi's just fired at a shopping mall in Kuwait City - isn't that smoke thick enough for even you to see?
Moreover, Blix nixed the idea that finding all those chemical weapons protective suits and gas masks left behind by retreating Iraqi soldiers might suggest that Saddam may really has all those chemical and biological weapons he didn't believe he had.
"One must ask how old these clothes are. They may have been there for a long time," Blix said. "In any case, they haven't found any weapons yet."
To prove that Iraq possess weapons of mass destruction "one has to find what the Americans call a smoking gun, or at least a gun," he said.
Go hug a tree, Hans. That, unlike great big smoking guns like Chinese missiles, you should be able to find.
Kuwait City is not outside the range of the missiles Iraq is allowed, under the Cease Fire Agreement, to have for it's own self defense.
I would say being invaded by a foreign army is provocation enough to defend oneself.
About those suits: How do you know that these aren't protective suits worn by oil field workers? I hadn't heard that there were also gas masks. Where did you hear about that?
You are probably aware that reports of Scuds being used turned out to be false, a propaganda story?
About those suits: How do you know that these aren't protective suits worn by oil field workers? I hadn't heard that there were also gas masks. Where did you hear about that?
What was the atrophine injectors for ? There's only one reason you need that. It's the antecdote for nerve gas, Last time I checked, nerve gas didn't come from oil wells.
all packed and set for the beaches - dang it has turned cold here today in Ohio. Snow flurries expected tomorrow.
Being a fighting man yourself , I wonder if you folks ever compared yourself to other fighting forces? The general opinion appears to be that the US soldier is a soft pansy who relies too much on technology and is far too soft for the all knuckles bared warfare of the guerrilla warrior. There is contempt from their peers for the fighting spirit of the American soldier. They need to be backed with air and auxillary power that can rescue them - they are not sent into combat if this is not possible.
In Nam for sure this was proved - the Viet Cong ran circles around a cowardly Yankee soldier. The enemy instilled the fear of God in the poor sodding GI. In Korea, I can personally vouch for the deep fear the American GI held for the crazed North Koreans drunk on Soju.
Superior and hi-tech arms and methods were devised because the US military brass realized that the average American soldier could not be depended upon - the laundry bills from soiled underpants would be overwhelming.
I frequent at least one Indian site related to Indian forces where there is nothing but derisive contempt for the bravery of the American soldier. This site has Indian armed forces personnel who cite experience from the US/Indian war games recently held ( the US wanted to learn about the new SU30 Soviet aircraft that India has).
So tell me - is the American soldier an innate coward who exhibits bravado when backed with superior firepower but who is reduced to a blithering idiot when confronted with fierce resistance from a far less equipped but immensely more dedicated opponent??
You seem to be equating brutality with bravery, Naradar.
And if that is the case, to what level does the US soldier have to sink to impress you?
It's hard to find people with the, well, capabilityof outfitting themselves with explosives and walking into a crowd, like maybe a pizza parlor of disco. People you've equated to warriors.
That's impressive, in some way, I guess.
Where are you going in Mexico? We have a week in Hawaii coming up soon.
This is a little girl that your heroes were using for a human shield while fighting American soldiers. She got caught in the crossfire. That sure isn't Iraqi soldiers you see helping her. They just left her there to die as they ran away.
Hmm, Americans are pansies huh? Is it that we are pansies, or we fight honorably? We don't fake surrender. We don't use civilians, especially women and children, as human shields. We don't kill or injure those who won't help us. Yeah, we do have superior technology. Perhaps the Iraqis might have had better technology if their people were not treated like crap. Those individuals who have been killed, who knows if they could have contributed to bettering the society? They won't know because they're all dead.
Well fold, if those stories in Duluth were bullshit, why did the people in uniform go on tv in uniform to tell their stories? Then the man and woman in uniform were lying?
So tell me - is the American soldier an innate coward who exhibits bravado when backed with superior firepower but who is reduced to a blithering idiot when confronted with fierce resistance from a far less equipped but immensely more dedicated opponent??
I thought you had to learn American history to become a citizen?
Uranium is a naturally occurring, chemically toxic, and radioactive element composed of three isotopes. Relative to other radionuclides, natural uranium is only slightly radioactive because of its low specific activity.288 When the uranium isotope used for nuclear reactors and weapons is extracted from natural uranium, DU is the byproduct.
DU is nearly twice as dense as lead-a property used to improve the performance of both armor and armor penetrating munitions. During the Gulf War, some U.S. tanks and U.S. aircraft fired DU munitions, which produced shrapnel and an aerosolized dust on impact with armor or on ignition in accidental munitions fires. DU retains natural uranium's toxicological properties and approximately half its radiological activity.267 Most of DU's radiation cannot penetrate skin, and DU poses little threat to human health while it is external to the body.288
Because it is slightly radioactive, natural uranium is considered to be a potential carcinogen-albeit with a small cancer risk relative to other radionuclides.288 Taken together, human and animal studies do not indicate conclusively that natural uranium causes cancer in humans. Epidemiologic studies of uranium miners experiencing extremely high, lifetime, occupational exposures to uranium show an increase in mortality due to lung cancer, but such cancers are thought to be caused by miners' concurrent exposures to radioactive radon gas and its decay products, tobacco smoke, silica and other dusts, or exhaust fumes from diesel engines.172,321 Animal studies conclude that exposure to uranium for long periods of time does not result in increased incidence of cancer, except in the case of one study. This study found prolonged (more than five years) inhalation of high levels of uranium dioxide led to lung neoplasms in dogs.130,131
The chemical toxicity of uranium as a heavy metal is well characterized. In fact, the kidney is the most sensitive organ affected by exposure to uranium and is the critical target organ for risk assessment.133,218,322,341 For this reason, uranium exposure is regulated based on its chemicaltoxicity and not its radiological properties.129,156 Even so, more than 50 years of occupational health data from uranium miners reveal little epidemiologic evidence of excess kidney disease among workers exposed for years or decades.322
The health risks of internalized uranium or DU particles depend on dose, exposure pathway, and solubility of the ingested particle. Ingestion of insoluble uranium compounds poses little health hazard because they pass rapidly through the body and are eliminated in the feces. However, animal studies have shown that ingestion of large doses of relatively soluble uranium compounds are associated with kidney toxicity.129,288 Inhaled uranium particles that are nonrespirable are cleared from the respiratory tract and either expelled from the body (cough) or swallowed and passed to the GI tract. Respirable and relatively soluble particles are cleared to blood and can affect kidney toxicity.14,129 Less soluble particles can remain in the lung longer and in theory could pose a radiological hazard.
"For instance, we were taken to the Saddam Children's Hospital in Baghdad. Here, many patients are suffering from leukemia and other diseases that the Iraqi government asserts are caused by the depleted uranium from U.S. missiles that rained down on Iraq in 1991. The government also maintains that the U.N.-imposed embargo against Iraq means there aren't enough medications available for treatment. Dr. Shafik Khodora is one of the senior staffers here. He's worked at the hospital for 18 months, and expressed anguish about the difficulties, which the facility faces."
Now, I saw the Nova program, the entire marathon of Frontline programs listed on the Frontline page, and this Newshour report. My own assertion that the US used dirty bombs in the 1991 Gulf War is a cross reference of all of these sources.
Here, many patients are suffering from leukemia and other diseases thatthe Iraqi government asserts are caused by the depleted uranium from U.S. missiles that rained down on Iraq in 1991.
There is your whole problem, you are listening to the Iraqi government and not looking at the facts. If this stuff is so bad, then why is it used in aprons to protect patients in hospitals and dentists' offices from excessive x-rays, and as ballast in 747 planes and in the keels of large sailboats? This stuff is forty percent less radioactive than the natural "background" uranium that is prevalent in the earth's air, water and soil.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) did a study after the bombing in Kosovo (link). Their conclusions were "The implications for people's health are that they are not at risk from DU, unless the drinking water in the future will become contaminated."
The Defense Department is monitoring about 90 Gulf War veterans who were exposed to high levels of DU. Most have DU fragments in their bodies as a result of friendly fire incidents. No ill effects have been found so far.(link)
Also from the same link:
"Taking into account the pathways and realistic scenarios of human exposure, radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not cause a detectable effect on human health," a European Union study concluded in 2001.
A 2001 WHO study found that DU's hazards are "likely to be very small." A RAND Corporation study in 1999 and another 2001 project funded by the European Parliament concurred.
The problems in Iraq's hospitals is probably from military use of chemical and nerve agents in the 1980's and 1990's by Iraq itself.
JT, how long is it going to take you to pull this ignorant shitbag "Noradar"'s PLUG?
I will not pull the plug.
Naradar has every right to his opinion, as much as I disagree with him.
You seem to agree in different threads.
Bill Fold: The civil WAR some right-wingers want to start against those who do not support the war or who speak-out Against it,as it is their RIGHT to do, is more Anti-American and unpatriotic than anything Rangle has said, ever.
Bill Fold: which is once again, an attempt to demonize someone, for their freedom to DISSENT.
That's what this is all about, isn't it?
"It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protestors are marching to defend a government which stops it's people exercising that freedom." - Daniel Pepper (Formerly naive human shield in Iraq)
By DAVID BAUDER The Associated Press Sunday, March 30, 2003; 9:11 PM
Journalist Peter Arnett, covering the war from Baghdad, told state-run Iraqi TV in an interview aired Sunday that the American-led coalition's first war plan had failed because of Iraq's resistanceand said strategists are "trying to write another war plan."
Arnett, who won a Pulitzer Prize reporting in Vietnam for The Associated Press, garnered much of his prominence from covering the 1991 Gulf War for CNN. He is reporting from the Iraqi capital now for NBC and its cable stations.
The interview could make Arnett a target of the war's supporters. The first Bush administration was unhappy with Arnett's reporting in 1991 for CNN, suggesting he had become a conveyor of propaganda.
He was denounced for his reporting about an allied bombing of a baby milk factory in Baghdad that the military said was a biological weapons plant. The American military responded vigorously to the suggestion it had targeted a civilian facility, but Arnett stood by his reporting that the plant's sole purpose was to make baby formula.
NBC, in a statement Sunday, praised Arnett's "outstanding" reporting from Iraq and said he was trying nothing more than to give an analytical response to an interviewer's questions.
In the interview, Arnett said his Iraqi friends tell him there is a growing sense of nationalism and resistance to what the United States and Britain are doing.
He said the United States is reappraising the battlefield and delaying the war, maybe for a week, "and rewriting the war plan. The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance. Now they are trying to write another war plan."
"Clearly, the American war plans misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces," Arnett said during the interview broadcast by Iraq's satellite television station and monitored by The Associated Press in Egypt.
Arnett said it is clear that within the United States there is growing opposition to the war and a growing challenge to President Bush about the war's conduct.
"Our reports about civilian casualties here, about the resistance of the Iraqi forces, are going back to the United States," he said. "It helps those who oppose the war when you challenge the policy to develop their arguments."
The interview was broadcast in English and translated by a green military uniform-wearing Iraqi anchor.
Is this common practice in Iraq?
Hey, is that Sadam interviewing him? Pink helmet?
NBC said Arnett gave the interview when asked shortly after he attended an Iraqi government briefing.
"His impromptu interview with Iraqi TV was done as a professional courtesy and was similar to other interviews he has done with media outlets from around the world," NBC News spokeswoman Allison Gollust said. "His remarks were analytical in nature and were not intended to be anything more. His outstanding reporting on the war speaks for itself."
Arnett was the on-air reporter of the 1998 CNN report that accused American forces of using sarin gas on a Laotian village in 1970 to kill U.S. defectors. Two CNN employees were sacked and Arnett was reprimanded over the report, which the station later retracted. Arnett ultimately left the network.
He went to Iraq this year not as an NBC News reporter but as an employee of the MSNBC show, "National Geographic Explorer." When other NBC reporters left Baghdad for safety reasons, the network began airing his reports.
A group of Ohio college students who wanted to hang U.S. flags on a school building were told they couldn't because the flags might hurt the feelings of anti-war folks, reports the Ohio News Network.
Melissa Paxton, a student at Muskingum College in New Concord, Ohio, wanted to show support for the troops. "I was raised to be a firm believer in my country and you know, support what's going on," she said.
But Vice President of the Administration Ransom Clark feared the flags could cause problems. "I was afraid that a major display of American flags would represent a signal if done by the college to those people who are opposing the war that we're coming down against them," he said.
The students say they will hang flags outside of their homes instead.
Maybe Jethro needs glasses. Or maybe he needs to look at Ares' avatar closer.
So that is actually ares in the photo. hmmmmmm Then maybe he needs to get a check-up.
That's only in his medical opinion though, Ares.
just had one a couple weeks ago thanks.
your assumption is safe that i don't believe space aliens control the world. that said, i'm not sure a belief that aliens do control the world automatically disqualifies someone as unreasonable. they'd certainly make me question their sanity, but having a flawed view of the world doesn't disqualify reasonableness. but when the debate about whether aliens control the world turns into a detroit rap battle, thats unreasonable. and that's a line that you cross on a very regular basis, though i must say it hasn't happened recently.
i'm not sure a belief that aliens do control the world automatically disqualifies someone as unreasonable.
I think that unless the believer in aliens can come up with some basis in fact for their belief, a reasonable person conclude that the believer in space aliens controlling the world was not reasonable.
but when the debate about whether aliens control the world turns into a detroit rap battle, thats unreasonable. and that's a line that you cross on a very regular basis, though i must say it hasn't happened recently.
well then I guess it just about time to cross that line again.
why am i not surprised?
Wolvie 3/28/03 11:58am
Unbelieveable. What a maroon. He'll then turn around and say "but I support the troops" Thanks for the support Charlie. I'd hate to hear what you'd say if he didn't support them. So according to Charlie's logic we must be intentionally killing other troops in freindly fire incedents. I mean after all Charlie it's not like they're shooting themselves. I can't wait to hear the defense of this baffoon.
Must have been Rangle's professor.
Well as long as they only cheered our defeat.
http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V6507.AP-Professor-Somal.html
The Fieldsboro Borough Council approved the ban last week, but Mayor Edward "Buddy" Tyler said it does not prohibit residents from placing memorials on their own property.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82478,00.html
Mighty big of the borough not to ban displays on private property.
That would be Publicproperty Jethro. Not that it makes it any better.
KEEP IT TO YOURSELF
A couple of nights ago a local tv station in Duluth had an interview with a female Army recruiter who was spit on while walking in downtown Duluth.
That same night, there was another story where a Marine in uniform was refused service at the Blue Note Cafe, also in Duluth. The quote from an employee was "we don't serve your kind here".
Overall, how does the current president Bush's poll numbers compare to Clinton's, who many were trying to claim was the best president ever?
Howdy warmongers.
Wonder if I would be classified as reasonable in these hallowed circles.
Suicide bombers, Viet Cong tactics, elevated expectations deflated, propganda wars being lost, the best of war plans going awry - and Baghdad still looms.
Gripping footage from the front lines - great entertainment. The 3rd world perspective is that Americans are too cowardly to fight man to man and rely on the debilitating power of remote controlled arsenal and high tech methods of obliteration. When these methods fail to produce results, the strength of character and gumption is lacking in the American soldier to revert to conventional good ole human to human combat. The soft Yankee soldier cannot always rely on a sanitized war.
Sigh - it is spring time here and my favorite season. Spring break beckons and Naradar and family are off to beaches of Mexico. Hopefully far from the carnage and the spin and the image-making of a nation consumed with fear and loathing.
Well, where was Dubbya's Daddy in the POLLS, right after his Gulf-War?
Yeah but you had Clinton back then. Currently the Democrats have no one that can beat Dubya.
Naradar 3/29/03 5:54am
LOL!
You work for the Iraqi Propoganda Ministry?
Naradar,
Yea, because I'm sure they wouldn't use them if they had them. Naw they'd stick to false surrenders and brave shit like that. It's going to be fun to feed you your idiotic drivel.
Take a look at the Urban fighting, we aren't using massive air because of the civilians. In good ol' human to human combat as you put it the other side usually doesn't put women and kids on the front lines. Or fire on fleeing civilians. Yes, they are so brave. Then again you'd know zip about charachter and courage. I mean after all you left your country instead of trying to improve it. Not that there's anything wrong with that though.
Vacation in Mexico, another sign of opression no doubt.
You old chap are the only one right now who seems to be filled with fear. Actually you're filled with hate.
But do have a good vacation, drink plenty of water.
Naradar's heroes threaten more suicide bombings
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq (news - web sites)'s vice president on Saturday threatened more suicide bombings against coalition troops, saying a bomber who killed four U.S. soldiers outside the Iraqi city of Najaf was a noncommissioned army officer.
Coalition forces in Iraq have found no smoking gun Hans Blix told Swedish radio, the Associated Press reported.
How about a "smoking missile," Mr., Blix, one like that long range Chinese Silkworm missile the Iraqi's just fired at a shopping mall in Kuwait City - isn't that smoke thick enough for even you to see?
Moreover, Blix nixed the idea that finding all those chemical weapons protective suits and gas masks left behind by retreating Iraqi soldiers might suggest that Saddam may really has all those chemical and biological weapons he didn't believe he had.
"One must ask how old these clothes are. They may have been there for a long time," Blix said. "In any case, they haven't found any weapons yet."
To prove that Iraq possess weapons of mass destruction "one has to find what the Americans call a smoking gun, or at least a gun," he said.
Go hug a tree, Hans. That, unlike great big smoking guns like Chinese missiles, you should be able to find.
OK, where did you hear about Chinese Missiles?
Kuwait City is not outside the range of the missiles Iraq is allowed, under the Cease Fire Agreement, to have for it's own self defense.
I would say being invaded by a foreign army is provocation enough to defend oneself.
About those suits: How do you know that these aren't protective suits worn by oil field workers? I hadn't heard that there were also gas masks. Where did you hear about that?
You are probably aware that reports of Scuds being used turned out to be false, a propaganda story?
What was the atrophine injectors for ? There's only one reason you need that. It's the antecdote for nerve gas, Last time I checked, nerve gas didn't come from oil wells.
I don't think its unlawful for the regime to have atropine. It's often used to treat poisoning.
But while we are on the subject of WMD, are you aware that the US dropped dirty bombs on Baghdad in the last Gulf War? Check out the Frontline site.
hey L2f - Luv2Fly 3/29/03 8:02am
all packed and set for the beaches - dang it has turned cold here today in Ohio. Snow flurries expected tomorrow.
Being a fighting man yourself , I wonder if you folks ever compared yourself to other fighting forces? The general opinion appears to be that the US soldier is a soft pansy who relies too much on technology and is far too soft for the all knuckles bared warfare of the guerrilla warrior. There is contempt from their peers for the fighting spirit of the American soldier. They need to be backed with air and auxillary power that can rescue them - they are not sent into combat if this is not possible.
In Nam for sure this was proved - the Viet Cong ran circles around a cowardly Yankee soldier. The enemy instilled the fear of God in the poor sodding GI. In Korea, I can personally vouch for the deep fear the American GI held for the crazed North Koreans drunk on Soju.
Superior and hi-tech arms and methods were devised because the US military brass realized that the average American soldier could not be depended upon - the laundry bills from soiled underpants would be overwhelming.
I frequent at least one Indian site related to Indian forces where there is nothing but derisive contempt for the bravery of the American soldier. This site has Indian armed forces personnel who cite experience from the US/Indian war games recently held ( the US wanted to learn about the new SU30 Soviet aircraft that India has).
So tell me - is the American soldier an innate coward who exhibits bravado when backed with superior firepower but who is reduced to a blithering idiot when confronted with fierce resistance from a far less equipped but immensely more dedicated opponent??
You seem to be equating brutality with bravery, Naradar.
And if that is the case, to what level does the US soldier have to sink to impress you?
It's hard to find people with the, well, capabilityof outfitting themselves with explosives and walking into a crowd, like maybe a pizza parlor of disco. People you've equated to warriors.
That's impressive, in some way, I guess.
Where are you going in Mexico? We have a week in Hawaii coming up soon.
This is a little girl that your heroes were using for a human shield while fighting American soldiers. She got caught in the crossfire. That sure isn't Iraqi soldiers you see helping her. They just left her there to die as they ran away.
Take a good look at her, Naradar. Her mother is dead and her father is shot in the leg due to the actions of your heroes.
Hmm, Americans are pansies huh? Is it that we are pansies, or we fight honorably? We don't fake surrender. We don't use civilians, especially women and children, as human shields. We don't kill or injure those who won't help us. Yeah, we do have superior technology. Perhaps the Iraqis might have had better technology if their people were not treated like crap. Those individuals who have been killed, who knows if they could have contributed to bettering the society? They won't know because they're all dead.
Naradar is an idiot trying to bait you guys.
Well fold, if those stories in Duluth were bullshit, why did the people in uniform go on tv in uniform to tell their stories? Then the man and woman in uniform were lying?
So tell me - is the American soldier an innate coward who exhibits bravado when backed with superior firepower but who is reduced to a blithering idiot when confronted with fierce resistance from a far less equipped but immensely more dedicated opponent??
I thought you had to learn American history to become a citizen?
Our history proves us to be anything but cowards.
the US dropped dirty bombs on Baghdad in the last Gulf War? Check out the Frontline site.
I couldn't find anything. Could you provide a link?
Naradar is an idiot trying to bait you guys.
His comments are simply asinine.
I think I may have referenced the wrong show: Check out the Nova series episode called "Dirty Bomb". However it looks like the use of depleted uranium munitions has gotten a lot of attention from PBS. Check out this link:
http://www.pbs.org/search/search_results.html?q=depleted+uranium&btnG=Search+PBS
Hmmm. well, please type it in your search box. The Nova link is on that page.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/syndrome/analysis/uranium.html
Uranium is a naturally occurring, chemically toxic, and radioactive element composed of three isotopes. Relative to other radionuclides, natural uranium is only slightly radioactive because of its low specific activity.288 When the uranium isotope used for nuclear reactors and weapons is extracted from natural uranium, DU is the byproduct.
DU is nearly twice as dense as lead-a property used to improve the performance of both armor and armor penetrating munitions. During the Gulf War, some U.S. tanks and U.S. aircraft fired DU munitions, which produced shrapnel and an aerosolized dust on impact with armor or on ignition in accidental munitions fires. DU retains natural uranium's toxicological properties and approximately half its radiological activity.267 Most of DU's radiation cannot penetrate skin, and DU poses little threat to human health while it is external to the body.288
Because it is slightly radioactive, natural uranium is considered to be a potential carcinogen-albeit with a small cancer risk relative to other radionuclides.288 Taken together, human and animal studies do not indicate conclusively that natural uranium causes cancer in humans. Epidemiologic studies of uranium miners experiencing extremely high, lifetime, occupational exposures to uranium show an increase in mortality due to lung cancer, but such cancers are thought to be caused by miners' concurrent exposures to radioactive radon gas and its decay products, tobacco smoke, silica and other dusts, or exhaust fumes from diesel engines.172,321 Animal studies conclude that exposure to uranium for long periods of time does not result in increased incidence of cancer, except in the case of one study. This study found prolonged (more than five years) inhalation of high levels of uranium dioxide led to lung neoplasms in dogs.130,131
The chemical toxicity of uranium as a heavy metal is well characterized. In fact, the kidney is the most sensitive organ affected by exposure to uranium and is the critical target organ for risk assessment.133,218,322,341 For this reason, uranium exposure is regulated based on its chemicaltoxicity and not its radiological properties.129,156 Even so, more than 50 years of occupational health data from uranium miners reveal little epidemiologic evidence of excess kidney disease among workers exposed for years or decades.322
The health risks of internalized uranium or DU particles depend on dose, exposure pathway, and solubility of the ingested particle. Ingestion of insoluble uranium compounds poses little health hazard because they pass rapidly through the body and are eliminated in the feces. However, animal studies have shown that ingestion of large doses of relatively soluble uranium compounds are associated with kidney toxicity.129,288 Inhaled uranium particles that are nonrespirable are cleared from the respiratory tract and either expelled from the body (cough) or swallowed and passed to the GI tract. Respirable and relatively soluble particles are cleared to blood and can affect kidney toxicity.14,129 Less soluble particles can remain in the lung longer and in theory could pose a radiological hazard.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june03/bracing_03-11.html
Here is the excerpt:
"For instance, we were taken to the Saddam Children's Hospital in Baghdad. Here, many patients are suffering from leukemia and other diseases that the Iraqi government asserts are caused by the depleted uranium from U.S. missiles that rained down on Iraq in 1991. The government also maintains that the U.N.-imposed embargo against Iraq means there aren't enough medications available for treatment. Dr. Shafik Khodora is one of the senior staffers here. He's worked at the hospital for 18 months, and expressed anguish about the difficulties, which the facility faces."
Now, I saw the Nova program, the entire marathon of Frontline programs listed on the Frontline page, and this Newshour report. My own assertion that the US used dirty bombs in the 1991 Gulf War is a cross reference of all of these sources.
Here, many patients are suffering from leukemia and other diseases that the Iraqi government asserts
are caused by the depleted uranium from U.S. missiles that rained down on Iraq in 1991.
There is your whole problem, you are listening to the Iraqi government and not looking at the facts. If this stuff is so bad, then why is it used in aprons to protect patients in hospitals and dentists' offices from excessive x-rays, and as ballast in 747 planes and in the keels of large sailboats? This stuff is forty percent less radioactive than the natural "background" uranium that is prevalent in the earth's air, water and soil.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) did a study after the bombing in Kosovo (link). Their conclusions were "The implications for people's health are that they are not at risk from DU, unless the drinking water in the future will become contaminated."
The Defense Department is monitoring about 90 Gulf War veterans who were exposed to high levels of DU. Most have DU fragments in their bodies as a result of friendly fire incidents. No ill effects have been found so far.(link)
Also from the same link:
The problems in Iraq's hospitals is probably from military use of chemical and nerve agents in the 1980's and 1990's by Iraq itself.
JT, how long is it going to take you to pull this ignorant shitbag "Noradar"'s PLUG?
I will not pull the plug.
Naradar has every right to his opinion, as much as I disagree with him.
You seem to agree in different threads.
Bill Fold: The civil WAR some right-wingers want to start against those who do not support the war or who speak-out Against it, as it is their RIGHT to do,
is more Anti-American and unpatriotic than anything Rangle has said, ever.
Bill Fold: which is once again, an attempt to demonize someone, for their freedom to DISSENT.
That's what this is all about, isn't it?
"It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protestors are marching to defend a government which stops it's people exercising that freedom." - Daniel Pepper (Formerly naive human shield in Iraq)
I suggest you put him on your ignore list.
How do you know he isn't a citizen?
Does it matter?
Do we only extend a voice to our citizens?
Why the f**k are we even in Iraq then?
I'm not the one hiding (whatever the hell that means to you).
I've said nothing hypocritical nor to be ashamed of.
At least not recently.
Fold,
Tell us about Strom Thurmond again.
"He honestly believes that bullshit that he was spewing."
What I learned in journalism school: You don't know what anyone thinks or believes. You know what they SAY.
What I learned in journalism school: You don't know what anyone thinks or believes. You know what they SAY.
Well, he said it.
And if he doesn't believe that, why would he say such an outrageous thing?
I don't know.
Based on what he said, what do you think he believes?
He believes our troops are over there intentionally bombing women and children.
Reporter Arnett: U.S. War Plan Has Failed
By DAVID BAUDER
The Associated Press
Sunday, March 30, 2003; 9:11 PM
Journalist Peter Arnett, covering the war from Baghdad, told state-run Iraqi TV in an interview aired Sunday that the American-led coalition's first war plan had failed because of Iraq's resistanceand said strategists are "trying to write another war plan."
cont.
Arnett, who won a Pulitzer Prize reporting in Vietnam for The Associated Press, garnered much of his prominence from covering the 1991 Gulf War for CNN. He is reporting from the Iraqi capital now for NBC and its cable stations.
The interview could make Arnett a target of the war's supporters. The first Bush administration was unhappy with Arnett's reporting in 1991 for CNN, suggesting he had become a conveyor of propaganda.
He was denounced for his reporting about an allied bombing of a baby milk factory in Baghdad that the military said was a biological weapons plant. The American military responded vigorously to the suggestion it had targeted a civilian facility, but Arnett stood by his reporting that the plant's sole purpose was to make baby formula.
NBC, in a statement Sunday, praised Arnett's "outstanding" reporting from Iraq and said he was trying nothing more than to give an analytical response to an interviewer's questions.
In the interview, Arnett said his Iraqi friends tell him there is a growing sense of nationalism and resistance to what the United States and Britain are doing.
He said the United States is reappraising the battlefield and delaying the war, maybe for a week, "and rewriting the war plan. The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance. Now they are trying to write another war plan."
"Clearly, the American war plans misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces," Arnett said during the interview broadcast by Iraq's satellite television station and monitored by The Associated Press in Egypt.
cont.
Arnett said it is clear that within the United States there is growing opposition to the war and a growing challenge to President Bush about the war's conduct.
"Our reports about civilian casualties here, about the resistance of the Iraqi forces, are going back to the United States," he said. "It helps those who oppose the war when you challenge the policy to develop their arguments."
conclusion
The interview was broadcast in English and translated by a green military uniform-wearing Iraqi anchor.
NBC said Arnett gave the interview when asked shortly after he attended an Iraqi government briefing.
"His impromptu interview with Iraqi TV was done as a professional courtesy and was similar to other interviews he has done with media outlets from around the world," NBC News spokeswoman Allison Gollust said. "His remarks were analytical in nature and were not intended to be anything more. His outstanding reporting on the war speaks for itself."
Arnett was the on-air reporter of the 1998 CNN report that accused American forces of using sarin gas on a Laotian village in 1970 to kill U.S. defectors. Two CNN employees were sacked and Arnett was reprimanded over the report, which the station later retracted. Arnett ultimately left the network.
He went to Iraq this year not as an NBC News reporter but as an employee of the MSNBC show, "National Geographic Explorer." When other NBC reporters left Baghdad for safety reasons, the network began airing his reports.
National Geographic also fired his ass.
He said the Iraqi's respected him because he was also a warrior.
I remember in the gulf war, during bombing, he was crying under a desk.
Where would you go during a bombing?
I'm not stupid, I'd leave the country if I didn't have to be there.
I just thought it was funny.
Not being bombed, but calling himself a warrior.
A group of Ohio college students who wanted to hang U.S. flags on a school building were told they couldn't because the flags might hurt the feelings of anti-war folks, reports the Ohio News Network.
Melissa Paxton, a student at Muskingum College in New Concord, Ohio, wanted to show support for the troops. "I was raised to be a firm believer in my country and you know, support what's going on," she said.
But Vice President of the Administration Ransom Clark feared the flags could cause problems. "I was afraid that a major display of American flags would represent a signal if done by the college to those people who are opposing the war that we're coming down against them," he said.
The students say they will hang flags outside of their homes instead.