Jump to content

Ruminations about war past or present


Recommended Posts

Well Boys and Girls,

We can belabor every point, in regard to Nations, Armies, Politics,Wars, and the leaders/Governments who prosecute them, from now until doomsday,and I feel we are still missing the entire point of why all this has been and continues to occur.

That one single point,the one uttermost common denominator is Resources

Either resources to catapult a nation into an empire. Or resources to catapult a mans' bank account into super millionaire status.

The constant battle for resources has only promoted greed, Avarice, Espionage, and murder.

In our country today the goal is Money.

Why?

"Money=power

It's a pity that those who have gathered fortunes forgot, or ignored, an old adage;

"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

What is really sad is, most of the fortunes that these people weild were gathered from causing war and misery on other Humans.

We arrogantly consider ourselves to be on the top rung of the ecological ladder.

compared to every other animal on the planet, we are at the bottom.

Animals commit savagery on other animals to survive. Taking only what they need. But men however, start wars to insure future survival by hoarding resources.

We're just a bunch of Squirrels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I found it.

http://www.militarydial.com/army-force-structure.htm

quote:

ARMY ÔÇô 50,000+ soldiers. Typically commanded by a lieutenant general or higher, an army combines two or more corps. A theater army is the ranking Army component in a unified command, and it has operational and support responsibilities that are assigned by the theater commander in chief. The commander in chief and theater army commander may order formation of a field army to direct operations of assigned corps and divisions. An army group plans and directs campaigns in a theater, and is composed of two or more field armies under a designated commander. Army groups have not been employed by the Army since World War II.

So when the history channel is talking about Hitler's armies it seems to be talking about army groups (and a graphic I saw did use the term army group) which is in itself called a complete "army" totalling 50,000+ men.

That's a lot of people.

Religion and resources are what I typically see as the main cause of war. We will never have the same religion and will never have an equal distribution of resources so ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by El Che:

Wow! I'm amazed at Jaguar's post... where do I begin? It's dizzying.

"There were other options in Iraq? NAME ONE.... that we hadn't already tried....."

How about if we go after the guy who ACTUALLY had something to do with 9-11-01?

"There are also now records showing large amounts of money from the oil for food program going from Saddam, to various Terrorist organizations, Al Quaeda being one of them. The PLO and the suicide bombers getting a major portion of it."

Any proof of that? Just wondering. Don't want to put you on the spot or anything.

"I tire of hearing liberals spew, NO WMD'S, WRONG, there were and are WMD'S. I tire of hearing there was no connection between Saddam and Al Quaeda, WRONG, there is and there was, he was one of their major financiers, and was also TRAINING them in the manufacturing and Use of Chemical and biological weapons. I tire of hearing that Bush wanted to start this war no matter what. Well, NO, he didn't."

I truly apologize but, heh heh , I just need a tiny ounce of proof of the statement. If it's just pure opinion, then it doesn't really matter.

"We had every reason and right to go into Iraq for our own self defense."

Self-defense implies that there is an actual threat. The fact that there have been NO weapons of mass destruction found and that we trounced the country within a few days "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" I think it's safe to say that we had NO RIGHT to go into Iraq. We are not welcome there, we have no right to be there and we will rue the day that we invaded that country.

"I'm tired, so I am taking some time off from reading or responding to the liberals. You know who you are. Do not expect a response, so do not direct one at me. I do not want to hear your whining, nor your inadequate arguments anymore."

Yes, I know who I am, er, are. I am disheartened at your final statement. I found in you a worthy opponent. I think that your "time out" may be just the thing you need, though. All that anger has to eat away at you after awhile. Angry at terrorists, angry at Socialists, angry at Communists, angry at Liberals, angry at people who think that Rush Limbaugh should turn himself in to the authorities for drug violations. That's a lot of anger, comrade. Take some time to relax. I'll hold down the fort while you're finding yourself.

Are you really this naive?

The facts have been stated over and over and over again, throughout the worldwide media and yet you still claim that the evidence does NOT exist?

The evidence is out there, I have read it over and over again, talked to people that I know within the military apparatus that state the same facts, and yet you still claim the evidence does not exist.

Do you live in a hole?

Here, let me state Alqaedas goals for you.

quote:

Ideology and Goals

The principal aims of al-Qaeda are to drive Americans and American influence out of all Muslim nations, especially Saudi Arabia; destroy Israel; and topple pro-Western dictatorships around the Middle East. Furthermore, it is bin Laden's goal to unite all Muslims and establish, by force, an Islamic nation adhering to the rule of the first Caliphs.

According to bin Laden's 1998 fatwa (religious decree), it is the duty of Muslims around the world to wage holy war on the U.S., American citizens, and Jews. Muslims who do not heed this call are declared apostates (people who have forsaken their faith).

Al-Qaeda's ideology, often referred to as "jihadism," is marked by a willingness to kill "apostate" Muslims and an emphasis on jihad. Although it is clearly at odds with nearly all Islamic religious thought, it has its roots in the work of two modern Sunni Islamic thinkers: Mohammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Sayyid Qutb.

Al-Wahhab was an 18th-century reformer who claimed that Islam had been corrupted a generation or so after the death of Mohammed. He denounced any theology or customs developed after that as non-Islamic, including more than 1,000 years of religious scholarship. He and his supporters took over what is now Saudi Arabia, where Wahhabism remains the dominant school of religious thought.

Sayyid Qutb, a radical Egyptian scholar of the mid-20th century, declared Western civilization the enemy of Islam, denounced leaders of Muslim nations for not following Islam closely enough, and taught that jihad should be undertaken not just to defend Islam, but to purify it.


Did you read that? Do you get it?

Destroy Israel, sorry, AIN'T gonna be allowed to happen, overthrow ALL middle east governments that have a positive relationship with the US, and replace them with a giant Muslim nation ruled by Islam.

So you get it yet?

How about the part where ANY AND ALL Muslims that do not take up the call will become victims themselves? How about the fact that because you are a US citizen, or Israeli, there is a warrant out for your death?

Have you forgotten about these?

quote:

1993 Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.

1993 Bombing of World Trade Center; 6 killed.

1994 Investigation of the WTC bombing reveals that it was only a small part of a massive attack plan that included hijacking a plane and crashing it into CIA headquarters.

1995ÔÇô1996 Bombing of U.S. barracks in Saudi Arabia; 22 soldiers killed.

1998 Bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa; 224 killed; including 12 Americans.

Dec. 1999 Jordanian police arrested members of a cell planning attacks against Western tourists.

Dec. 14, 1999 Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the U.S. Other Algerians subsequently arrested were "Afghan alumni."

2000 Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen, 17 U.S. sailors killed.

Sept. 11, 2001 Destruction of WTC, attack on Pentagon.

April 11, 2002 Explosion at ancient synogogue in Tunisia left 17 dead, including 11 German tourists.

May 2002 Car explodes outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 14, including 11 French citizens.

June 2002 Bomb explodes outside American Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.

October 2002 Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, kill 202, mostly Australian citizens. Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, kills 16.

May 2003 Suicide bombers kill 34, including 8 Americans, at housing compounds for Westerners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Four bombs kill 24 people, targeting Jewish, Spanish, and Belgian sites in Casablanca, Morocco.

August 2003 Suicide car bomb kills 12, injures 150, at Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia.

November 2003 Explosions rock a Riyadh, Saudi Arabia housing compound killing 17. Suicide car bombers simultaneously attack two synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 25 and injuring hundreds. The following week a British bank in Istanbul is bombed.


And then you add the Spanish Train bombings, and the other terrors acts that theya re now threatening Spain with, because they gave in to their demands.

Bombing works, terrifying the populace works, so we will terrorize them some more to get more.

So, this is what you are saying we should do.

Leave Iraq... OK, so we leave Iraq, then what happens? Iraq gets taken over by terrorists, that's what, get out of afghanistan, that's the ticket, now they have that country back, get out of Saudi Arabia, OK, so we are out of Saudi Arabia, and what is happening? They are doing their best to undermine the rulers there, and take power themselves.

OK, so what have we got, terrorists threaten to bomb and kill us unless we leave the middle east.

So we leave, then what happens? They take over pretty much the entire middle east, might take 5 years, but they'll do it without us there, in a heartbeat. So, what happens once they build up this superislamic state?

Have you thought that far in advance? Or are you still looking for the best in them? We just give them what they want and they will leave us alone?

Ever heard of Chamberlain? Peace in our time and all that rot?

Yes, history once again repeats itself, but this time it will be different somehow?

How so? You don't actually think that these radical Islamists once they are able to build their Super Islamic state, destroy Israel, won't be coming after us as well to add to their 8th century Islamic state?

If you don't, you are in dreamland, unless of course you would like to live in an Islamic state?

Sorry, not me, because if they are able to do what they want, and actually begin attacking us here in force, then we are all pretty much dead.

There is already a death warrant on your head because A: you are an American, and B: you are not a radical Islamist.

Do you get it yet?

Do you see the BIG picture, or are you still trying to figure out the little ones?

Bush sees the big picture, Take out thier main Control and training facilities, Afghanistan, take out their major Financier, Saddam Houssien, who is in fact breaking the UN agreement for peace, so it is a GOOD time to take him out.

Once we rebuild Iraq into a middle east Democracy, the terrorists will be unable to get a toehold there, because they need a dictatorship to give them power, because a MAJORITY of Muslims actually disagree with what the terrorists are doing, but are afraid that they will paint a target on their back if they speak out.

Do you see the big picture yet?

What about the WMD's, they exist, they are in Syria right now, as we speak, and the rest are loaded on 3 cargo ships that are missing. Who has them? Most likely terrorists...

Jordan just killed a plot to kill 30,000 people with a WMD, that has all the earmarks of Iraqi WMD's. Ain't that nice?

So, not only did we allow the UN and Saddam to play footsy, by the time we got sick of it, it was too late, the WMD's had either beed "shipped" out, or driven across the border to the Baathists there.

So, we should really leave them alone you say... Right? They have WMD's, they could kill us wholesale if we don't do what they want.

Yeah, so they would, but guess what, history shows us that we would be putting off the inevitable, because they would A: get bigger and stronger, and B: within years they would be back at our borders, but in strength.

The only time to destroy them is now, id we do as you are saying,they will eend up with their Islamic superstate, a destroyed Israel, another Holocaust, and guess where that would lead?

Nuclear confrontation, as Israel pumps EVERY muclim country that is a danger to it, with as many nuclear weapons as they can launch.

See, that is EXACTLY where your policy will lead us too. You think 700 dead american soldiers are bad, what about 100's of millions of Muslims and Jews, killed in an instant in nuclear fire?

YOu look and you whine about all the little stuff, and yet you can't or won't see the big picture and the long term destruction that will lead from your ridiculous policies.....

The United States is the ONLY country in the world that is capable of stopping them, because the Europeans don't learn from their history either. That is why they repeat it, over, and over, and over again.

You keep saying how Bush and Ashcroft and the rest of his cabinet are the devils, or they're idiots, or whatever, but that is because you don't or won't or can't see the BIG picture.

I hope to god that we do not do what you want, because the destruction that will be wrought will be like nothing that you have ever seen, NOR imagined.

But it feels good, and they will like us. Why do they hate us? Because we are the ONLY thing that is stopping them from taking over every country that they wish to.

The thing you fail to realize and the thing that they fail to realize is that we know how this can go, either way, History gives us a very graphic picture of it. We know what we have to do, and the Bush administration is doing it.

And one last thing, don't ever call me comrade, you call your socialist and communist brother's in arms that, but don't even think about lumping me in with that lot. I am a constitutionalist, nothing less, nothing more..... I know who I am, I found myself a LONG time ago, probably longer then you've been alive, I am angry that there are so many nonthinking emotionally driven idiots in this country that think that if we give into their demands that they will leave us alone.

As another poster said to me, "dream on"....

I am also a historian, and history is showing me that the future is not going to be pleasant any way we go about it.

[ 05-15-2004, 08:46 PM: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to your final comment I agree. The future looks very dismal. But as for the WMD's, I don't care if they are being stored on the surface of the moon. We haven't found them, therefore they do not exist. If we HAD found them, I am certain that the FOX news channel would be broadcasting it from the rooftops. in reference to the middle east situation, I guess I've never understood why we need to be the police of the world. There are far more important things to deal with here in our own country...i.e. poverty, homelesness, crime, universal healthcare, etc. If there is a conflict between Palestine and Israel, then they should settle it and we should NOT be involved. That's what got us in this mess in the first place. I'll never forget the time that our local congressman Tom Lantos spoke at my high school and referred to th I.R.A. as terrorists. It has always struck me funny that when a military group opposes one of our allies, we refer to them as "terrosists" yet when they work out to our political advantage, they are called "freedom fighters". I apologize for calling you my comrade, Jaguar. It was not intended to insult you. it is a term Socialists use to call someone their friend. And I consider you my friend...political differences aside. I will refrain from using that term in reference to you in the future even though I consider you my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You still don't understand El Chi, and you never will

WMD's WHERE found, they WHERE broadcasted, they WHERE destroyed. There are thing's the media is not allowed to show, like the destruction of said munitions

The reason we get involved is because of the Ruminfications that might occur if we let said war continue

If the two country's have nuclear weapons, and they use them on each other, that spells disaster for EVERYONE on this earth

THAT is why we get involved, we do not want a nuclear war. If a nuclear war occur's then there is a major possibility that we will get involved as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

Has anyone else heard of the Sarin-loaded artillery shell just found in Iraq? Can't find a link yet, but lets see how much press it gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Member Rated:

posted 05-17-2004 08:52 AM You still don't understand El Chi, and you never will

WMD's WHERE found, they WHERE broadcasted, they WHERE destroyed. There are thing's the media is not allowed to show, like the destruction of said munitions

The only munitions we destroyed were "CONVENTIONAL munitions" period!!!.

I would like to see ONE publication, from any verifiable source, which would state anything other than "COULD have been modified to carry WMDs" I am sorry, but there is a great difference between conventional missiles which COULD have been modified to carry wmd, and what an actual WMD is. This is not MY opinion, but the factual occurance of what has transpired.

This is also the case with so called financing, and the so called links with AL Queada and IRAQ.They were also "COULD HAVE...MAY HAVE...MIGHT HAVe"

I need not ARGUE THIS..EVERYONE GO BACK AND READ!! , but make sure you read ALL the words in the sentences.

quote:

Leave Iraq... OK, so we leave Iraq, then what happens? Iraq gets taken over by terrorists, that's what, get out of afghanistan, that's the ticket, now they have that country back, get out of Saudi Arabia, OK, so we are out of Saudi Arabia, and what is happening? They are doing their best to undermine the rulers there, and take power themselves.

OK, so what have we got, terrorists threaten to bomb and kill us unless we leave the middle east.

So we leave, then what happens? They take over pretty much the entire middle east, might take 5 years, but they'll do it without us there, in a heartbeat. So, what happens once they build up this superislamic state?

First of all, LIKE KERRY himself states, It would not be logical to LEAVE Iraq, at this point in the Game.(oh well, had to say it)

I assert that there is a more ethical, and intelligent methodology, in which to deal with this terrible situation,than the juvinile methodology being used by our leaders, at this point.

Being a hard headed fool, in no way, helps advance any goals toward establishing a SAFE enviroment, in IRAQ, Afghanistan, or for U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, OR here at home.

quote:

THAT is why we get involved, we do not want a nuclear war. If a nuclear war occur's then there is a major possibility that we will get involved as well


The ONLY threat to us, of NUCLEAR war, which has always existed, and which has never been eliminated, Is NOT from these small third world countries, who do not have but a very small number, of small yield nuclear warheads, but from countries who are NOT true ALLIES toward capitolism, but have the capability to blind-side us, when they assess we have pushed too far.

Our FEAR from these terrorist organizations took years to actually form any basis. This is due to our unwillingness to NEGOTIATE terms of existance with these people. After all, some of which, have legitimate gripes, and we ARE, in fact, responsible,for most of their complaints, and have, in fact, turned a deaf ear to their request to be heard.

Just as, in Iraq, We did not try anything but brute ultimatums(which could NOT possibly have been met). A far cry from the "We tried everything" excuse, as justification for ACTIVE AGGRESSION through military force.

THIS is an example of HARD CORE communisim(by US), much more than any ideal of socialism ever conveyed within any action or thought within or by the UNITED STATES

I submit to you, the REST of the world will allow our "bad ass attitude", ONLY as long as it benefits those around our actions. When we go too far, The WORLD WILL stop us.

EVEN with all our TECHNOLOGY,...we are already stretched FAR too thin.

It is Pure Ignorance,to think that we are so big and bad, we can take on the WHOLE WORLD. And even MORE ignorant, to count all these little countries (little itty bitty russian sattelite countries and the like) as an effective ALLIANCE ,backing our actions.

[ 05-17-2004, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: street ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

quote:

I would like to see ONE publication, from any verifiable source, which would state anything other than "COULD have been modified to carry WMDs" I am sorry, but there is a great difference between conventional missiles which COULD have been modified to carry wmd, and what an actual WMD is.

Sarin gas and mustard gas laced shells where always apart of ol' Saddam's arsenal.

Hello??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that is impressive..Shingen. We all KNEW he had mustard gas... prior to the original GULF WAR.

Finding an OLD shell, is FAR from justifying the WAR on Iraq.

Come on...Lets put some real perspective on this,

instead of grasping at straws. That is ALL that

that article is....grasping at straws.

We Used CSS GAS on our own civilians (a GAS outlawed, by international LAW for use in the open battlefield over 10 years earlier) Our own government pumped it into the buildings at WACO (which the children, we were supposedly saving, were also in)

Would this justify another country to INVADE us?

Logic, should entail weighing ALL actions unilaterally, with equivalant objective reason.

And that is what this ADMINISTRATION has NOT done, and only proves the inept actions of this administration.

Oh yeah, almost forgot...14 mile range is a REAL threat to the world, and especially to the united states!!!!...shells so old, the have little puch left in them anyway...

Lets get REAL!!..WEAPONS of MASS DISTRUCTION????

[ 05-17-2004, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: street ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

quote:

Logic, should entail weighing ALL actions unilaterally, with equivalant objective reason.

I would venture to guess, that logic would tell you that, because of the sheer number of ordinance in the country, that it might take longer than 1 year before they all start turning up.

I would also venture to guess that we are in fact winning the war and now the enemy is resorting to using said stockpiles, even though they don't understand how to use them.

It think as time goes by, your agruement will become less and less logical, but that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Oh yeah, almost forgot...14 mile range is a REAL threat to the world, and especially to the united states!!!!...shells so old, they have little punch left in them anyway...

Lets get REAL!!..WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION????


I think as time goes on, My argument, that what we did was wrong, will not be over ridden by what people resort to do, in defense of their country...AFTER we have totally dessimated their way of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

quote:

Oh yeah, almost forgot...14 mile range is a REAL threat to the world, and especially to the united states!!!!...shells so old, the have little puch left in them anyway...

I'm beginning to wonder if you even realize just what I persistent chemical agent is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I am aware of the definition as such, but I just cant imagine, the United states people, jumping up and backing Bush in this unprecidented agressive act of invading Iraq, based on what has been discovered.

The seriousness of our actions, in no way is justified, by ANYTHING remotely discovered as yet, and by no means, has even come close to supporting, ole bushy's DECLARED reasoning, for taking such actions, as Killing hundreds of thousands of iraqi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

Yes, I am aware of the definition as such, but I just cant imagine, the United states people, jumping up and backing Bush in this unprecidented agressive act of invading Iraq, based on what has been discovered.

The seriousness of our actions, in no way is justified, by ANYTHING remotely discovered as yet, and by no means, has even come close to supporting, ole bushy's DECLARED reasoning, for taking such actions, as Killing hundreds of thousands of iraqi.

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's?

Geez, now where do you come up with such nonsense?

We have killed a few thousand, but hundreds of thousands, give me a fricking break.

Saddam, now HE killed 100's of thousands of Iraqi's, as well as Iranians. Once you add up his casualty count, it is close to a million or more. The mass graves are just now beginning to be investigated, and the families of those victims are coming out of the woodwork, to claim the bodies, files, belongings etc.

The fact of the matter is, our casualty count in this war has been staggeringly low, including Iraqi's. Less then 10,000 total if I were to make a very HIGH guesstimate. But hundreds of thousands is a ridiculous estimate and not even close to being the truth. It is a way to get some emotional response to this war that it does not and cannot support with facts.

Sorry Street, but your hundreds of thousands number is ridiculous.

WWhy is is, that liberals ignore the atrocities of those with whom we disagree, and yet when we finally do something about it, they get mad at US for killing a few thousand?

You are angry that we overthrew Saddam, yet he killed and was continously killing thousands upon thousands of his own people. Yet when we FINALLY put a stop to it, you enlarge our casualty count to such ridiculous extremes and lay the blame on us, like Saddam was a little clueless, harmless dictator, but we are some big bad power that kills willy nilly whenever we fell like it.

Our casualty count has been ridiculously low, and the collateral damage to civilians has been the same. Yet you still think that Saddam should be in power, he killed more Iraqis in a month, then we have killed in our ENTIRE occupation and war.

Why is that, why is the US the bad guy when we have saved 25 million Iraqis from a cruel and heartless dictator, and the liberals believe that it would be OK for Saddam to still be in power when he killed at least the same amount in a month that we have killed the entire war?

WHY IS THAT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

We have killed a few thousand, but hundreds of thousands, give me a fricking break.

Personally, having been in such positions, as the iraqi. dug into a defensive posture. I know the compliment of bombs we dropped on them during the first 10 days of the war would have killed at least 20-30% of their total compliment(a very conservative estimate, I assure you), if not more.

To state they all just went home, and waited for the invasion, is pure nonsense.

quote:

Saddam, now HE killed 100's of thousands of Iraqi's, as well as Iranians. Once you add up his casualty count,

agin your logic is flawed. At the time he killed the iranians, he was in a LEGITIMATE WAR, which WE condoned. It is plain irrational to put those deaths on his head as some great atrocity. That would be comparable to counting all the deaths during ww2 at the americans and allies hands, as such an atrocity, and justification to irradicate our government.

quote:

The fact of the matter is, our casualty count in this war has been staggeringly low

It is funny, you can take such a position, when our government has continuously, from the beginning, stated that there is no official count on the casualties of the enemy iraqi troops. The low count, I believe you are referring to, is that of the IRAQI CIVILIANS!!

quote:

WWhy is is, that liberals ignore the atrocities of those with whom we disagree, and yet when we finally do something about it, they get mad at US for killing a few thousand?

You are angry that we overthrew Saddam, yet he killed and was continously killing thousands upon thousands of his own people. Yet when we FINALLY put a stop to it, you enlarge our casualty count to such ridiculous extremes and lay the blame on us, like Saddam was a little clueless, harmless dictator, but we are some big bad power that kills willy nilly whenever we fell like it.


again you show how your logic is fatally flawed. I am a conservative, and I am not mad at eliminating

a small 3rd world dictator.

I am appalled, at the WAY in which it was done, and disgusted, in the methodology, by which the american people were manipulated in backing such an immoral and unprecidented ACT.

AND yes, a bit ANGRY, in that the very misrepresentation of facts has allowed good people, such as yourself, to have been tricked into believing such, and allowing our way of life, and our form of democracy, to be bent into a big powerful nation which demonstrates the oposite of everything our constitution stands for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I am sorry, but there is a great difference between conventional missiles which COULD have been modified to carry wmd, and what an actual WMD is. This is not MY opinion, but the factual occurance of what has transpired.

This is also the case with so called financing, and the so called links with AL Queada and IRAQ.They were also "COULD HAVE...MAY HAVE...MIGHT HAVe"

The "could have, may have, might have..." argument is really about the "dual use" nature of equipment. When we find mobile laboratories, we hear about how they could be used for aspirin manufacture or some such innocuous civil purpose. But I say, in a country as impoverished as Iraq, with such a separation between the Have's and the Have Not's, show me the output of the dual use. Show me the civil result of the normal industrial use of what we find. And then, explain to me why it has to be mobile instead of as a standing infrastructure facility.

quote:

Now that is impressive..Shingen. We all KNEW he had mustard gas... prior to the original GULF WAR.

Finding an OLD shell, is FAR from justifying the WAR on Iraq.

Come on...Lets put some real perspective on this,

instead of grasping at straws.

Read this article, posted in this thread, posted before you joined us.

Explain why a block of cyanide salts was found in a known terrorist's safehouse instead of in an industrial infrastructure facility. Furthermore, the person whose safehouse contained the cyanide was noneother than Abu Zarqawi, who is widely believed to be the person who beheaded Nicholas Berg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

I am appalled, at the WAY in which it was done, and disgusted, in the methodology, by which the american people were manipulated in backing such an immoral and unprecidented ACT.

AND yes, a bit ANGRY, in that the very misrepresentation of facts has allowed good people, such as yourself, to have been tricked into believing such, and allowing our way of life, and our form of democracy, to be bent into a big powerful nation which demonstrates the oposite of everything our constitution stands for.

The way it was done?

We went to the UN first, we had over 14 resolutions threatening force if Saddam did not do what we told him to do.

The French and the Germans of course didn't want it, because they had WAY too much money tied up in Iraq to be happy with the results.

But to say that we were somehow tricked into this war is one of the biggest crocks I have yet to hear.

WMD's, they existed, they do exist, and they are being found and will be found.

WMD'S, YES

Terrorist financing, most obvious being the payment of $10,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. That is not at all including the training facilities that were used by terrorists on Iraqi Soil, nor the mumerous meetings between high ranking Al Quaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence, that is also NOT including the numerous other terrorist organizations that he helped finance and train.

So, Links to terrorism, YES.

There are also now links to the Oklahoma city bombings to Muslim terrorists, and possibly Saddam as well, but those are iffy, VERY iffy, so I did not include those, as well as the links to Saddam helping finance the first World Trade center bombing, again, the evidence is thin, but it is there.

So, did Saddam have links to terrorism, DAMN straight he did.....

The inspections, he played games with the inspectors from day 1, if they wanted to inspect, he would put them off for 24 hours, go in, clean it out, and then allow them to inspect, we are getting more and more of the workers backing that up as well.

THe war was only stopped, the gulf war never really ended, it was a cease fire, so this war is legally an extension of that, but we had a further reason to go after him,, because we needed to get those WMD's before they fell into terrorist hands, which we probably were too late to do, considering the thwarted Jordanian attack, and the other smaller caches that have been found around Iraq.

There have been no lies, we declared a war on terrorism, the links to Saddam were there, the WMD's were there, the breaking of the cease fire was there.

TO say otherwise is fooling yourself in the most incredible ways that I have yet to see.

To be so blind as to not see the danger that Saddam posed to us, and to the countries around him, is just putting a blindfold on and singing LALALA until the person telling you shuts up.

What's worse with you, is that we give you the facts, and you continue to claim that they don't exist. And then go off about how it is all about Bush and his rich corporate buddies, and how the war is the only thing that is keeping the US economy alive, when in fact it has relatively little to do with it.

It's sad street, just sad...

we have a 10 trillion dollar economy, it's actually a bit more, but we will let that slide. and we have spent probably close to 100Billion on this war, that is 1% if that, the tax cuts cut loose probably close to a trillion dollars that was locked up because of tax liability, and that is close to 10% of total GDP. Which one has the greater effect?

Also, so what if the deficit is greater this year then other years? it is actually less when you consider A: The percentage of GDP it is, and B: The value of todays dollar. The deficit is NOTHING compared to other years when those economic indicators are put into it.

Also, the deficit in the Clinton years would have MUCH higher, had he not refinanced the national debt so much, and also, this years deficit is also going to cost us less then it would have in years past.

It is like you going out and buying a house at 10% interest, you probably could afford a $100,000 dollar home, but when you get an interest rate at 3-4%, you can afford to buy a 3-$400,000 home with the same payment.

So the deficit may seem big to you, when in reality, it really isn't.....

[ 05-18-2004, 02:14 AM: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by LostInSpace:

quote:

Originally posted by street:

... I am a conservative,...

There are different degrees, Liberal Conservative to name one. Jaguar is placing you in the Liberal Conservative category I assume.


I do not consider him a conservative at all, I consider him left of center, not right.

I see him spew alot of emotional nonsense, but little if any facts to go along with it, and the facts that he does put forth are questionable in the extreme.

He is against the war for political reasons, but they are actually emotional reasons.

He claims that Bush is not intelligent, when in fact, he is quite intelligent. He claims that this was an illegal war, when in fact it is one of the few legal wars that we have had in the past 40 years. He says that the war was uncalled for, and that Bush fooled us into backing it, when in fact the truth is the exact opposite.

I consider him left of center possibly even a liberal, because I have yet to see anything real in his posts except emotional responses.

All stemming from the "I hate Bush" Mentality.

He sounds like a typical left wing liberal to me.

Hate the rich, despise the republicans, hate Bush, tax cuts for people that "don't need them."

Pardon me, but I needed that tax cut, and I am sure that everyone else did too.

I like keeping more of MY money, thank you very much, and I am sure everyone else appreciated keeping more of THEIR money as well.

There is NO such thing as a person that "DOES NOT need a TAX cut." It is an oximoron, and an emotional class warfare based response used by the liberals in this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this will probably be my final post, in regard to this issue. The redundancy, I would asssume, is wearing a bit thin on all accounts.

I am just a little behooved, how the recent findings,(and the past findings) of a couple of isolated shells or small stock of "U.N. BANNED" items within iraq, can be stretched into this AWESOME classification as WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, and thus twisted into Justification for THIS IMMORAL atrocity, of INVADING another country.

I think it would be wise, you do some study, as to WHAT a weapon of MASS destruction is; then possibly, we could discuss this, in a rational sense.

Thank You ALL, it has been fun, but it has become, redundant to keep refuting an argument, which is based on an entirely false premise.

We will all do and think as we wish regardless. Will we not?

Good luck to you, and your ambition for your STYLE of AMERIKA, with your STYLE of irrational leadership. I just like mine, to be a little more rational, and level headed, when it involves the future of MY FAMILY.

:thumbs:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

Well, this will probably be my final post, in regard to this issue. The redundancy, I would asssume, is wearing a bit thin on all accounts.

I am just a little behooved, how the recent findings,(and the past findings) of a couple of isolated shells or small stock of "U.N. BANNED" items within iraq, can be stretched into this AWESOME classification as WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, and thus twisted into Justification for THIS IMMORAL atrocity, of INVADING another country.

I think it would be wise, you do some study, as to WHAT a weapon of MASS destruction is; then possibly, we could discuss this, in a rational sense.

Thank You ALL, it has been fun, but it has become, redundant to keep refuting an argument, which is based on an entirely false premise.

We will all do and think as we wish regardless. Will we not?

Good luck to you, and your ambition for your STYLE of AMERIKA, with your STYLE of irrational leadership. I just like mine, to be a little more rational, and level headed, when it involves the future of MY FAMILY.


One last question....

Did you consider Clinton Rational?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a few respects, yes; however, in most of his actions(especially concerning afghanistan and his

executive order 166) I stood firmly against his stance. I did vote for bush..as I have mentioned earlier. I have voted republican for almost 30 years. This will be the first time I will ever have voted democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kerry will be better then Bush?

Yeah right, If I hated Bush, there would be no way that I would even think that Kerry would be better.

Kerry is a tax and spend liberal, who despises the military, and will do his best to see us destroyed.

Within 6 months of a Kerry election, I would very confidentally say that we will be attacked by terrorists, that will make 911 look like a cake walk.

We will be doing EXACTLY what Spain did.

Sad Street, pretty sad...

If in your concience is going to haunt you for the rest of your life if you vote for Bush, then at least vote for Nader, because Kerry will destroy us, there is no doubt of that in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Kerry will be better then Bush?

Yeah right, If I hated Bush, there would be no way that I would even think that Kerry would be better.

Kerry is a tax and spend liberal, who despises the military, and will do his best to see us destroyed.

Within 6 months of a Kerry election, I would very confidentally say that we will be attacked by terrorists, that will make 911 look like a cake walk.

We will be doing EXACTLY what Spain did.

Sad Street, pretty sad...

Well, to be perfectly honest, I doubt we will find out; however, we can only wait and see what happens in november, and then again wait and see, if such prophecy is justified, or even remotely coherent.

I have, some very justifiable concerns, as to what may, or may not transpire if bush gains a second term.....but I am no prophet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

I am just a little behooved, how the recent findings,(and the past findings) of a couple of isolated shells or small stock of "U.N. BANNED" items within iraq, can be stretched into this AWESOME classification as WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION...

Because the amounts that are found are sufficient to kill thousands, if not tens of thousands. The fact that they were found in a single warhead or salt block is irrelevant. If converted into individual doses, they are massively lethal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...