Guest $iLk Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 Read this anti-American news story from Great Britain and dissect the feelings from the facts. quote:PILGER: HIDDEN AGENDA BEHIND WAR ON TERROR By John Pilger, Former Mirror chief foreign correspondentThe war against terrorism is a fraud. After three weeks' bombing, not a single terrorist implicated in the attacks on America has been caught or killed in Afghanistan.Instead, one of the poorest, most stricken nations has been terrorised by the most powerful - to the point where American pilots have run out of dubious "military" targets and are now destroying mud houses, a hospital, Red Cross warehouses, lorries carrying refugees.Unlike the relentless pictures from New York, we are seeing almost nothing of this. Tony Blair has yet to tell us what the violent death of children - seven in one family - has to do with Osama bin Laden.And why are cluster bombs being used? The British public should know about these bombs, which the RAF also uses. They spray hundreds of bomblets that have only one purpose; to kill and maim people. Those that do not explode lie on the ground like landmines, waiting for people to step on them.If ever a weapon was designed specifically for acts of terrorism, this is it. I have seen the victims of American cluster weapons in other countries, such as the Laotian toddler who picked one up and had her right leg and face blown off. Be assured this is now happening in Afghanistan, in your name.None of those directly involved in the September 11 atrocity was Afghani. Most were Saudis, who apparently did their planning and training in Germany and the United States.The camps which the Taliban allowed bin Laden to use were emptied weeks ago. Moreover, the Taliban itself is a creation of the Americans and the British. In the 1980s, the tribal army that produced them was funded by the CIA and trained by the SAS to fight the Russians.The hypocrisy does not stop there. When the Taliban took Kabul in 1996, Washington said nothing. Why? Because Taliban leaders were soon on their way to Houston, Texas, to be entertained by executives of the oil company, Unocal.With secret US government approval, the company offered them a generous cut of the profits of the oil and gas pumped through a pipeline that the Americans wanted to build from Soviet central Asia through Afghanistan.A US diplomat said: "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis did." He explained that Afghanistan would become an American oil colony, there would be huge profits for the West, no democracy and the legal persecution of women. "We can live with that," he said.Although the deal fell through, it remains an urgent priority of the administration of George W. Bush, which is steeped in the oil industry. Bush's concealed agenda is to exploit the oil and gas reserves in the Caspian basin, the greatest source of untapped fossil fuel on earth and enough, according to one estimate, to meet America's voracious energy needs for a generation. Only if the pipeline runs through Afghanistan can the Americans hope to control it.So, not surprisingly, US Secretary of State Colin Powell is now referring to "moderate" Taliban, who will join an American-sponsored "loose federation" to run Afghanistan. The "war on terrorism" is a cover for this: a means of achieving American strategic aims that lie behind the flag-waving facade of great power.The Royal Marines, who will do the real dirty work, will be little more than mercenaries for Washington's imperial ambitions, not to mention the extraordinary pretensions of Blair himself. Having made Britain a target for terrorism with his bellicose "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush nonsense, he is now prepared to send troops to a battlefield where the goals are so uncertain that even the Chief of the Defence Staff says the conflict "could last 50 years".The irresponsibility of this is breathtaking; the pressure on Pakistan alone could ignite an unprecedented crisis across the Indian sub-continent. Having reported many wars, I am always struck by the absurdity of effete politicians eager to wave farewell to young soldiers, but who themselves would not say boo to a Taliban goose.In the days of gunboats, our imperial leaders covered their violence in the "morality" of their actions. Blair is no different. Like them, his selective moralising omits the most basic truth. Nothing justified the killing of innocent people in America on September 11, and nothing justifies the killing of innocent people anywhere else.By killing innocents in Afghanistan, Blair and Bush stoop to the level of the criminal outrage in New York. Once you cluster bomb, "mistakes" and "blunders" are a pretence. Murder is murder, regardless of whether you crash a plane into a building or order and collude with it from the Oval Office and Downing Street. GRIEF: A father weeps over his dead son after the bombs blunder in KabulIf Blair was really opposed to all forms of terrorism, he would get Britain out of the arms trade. On the day of the twin towers attack, an "arms fair", selling weapons of terror (like cluster bombs and missiles) to assorted tyrants and human rights abusers, opened in London's Docklands with the full backing of the Blair government.Britain's biggest arms customer is the medieval Saudi regime, which beheads heretics and spawned the religious fanaticism of the Taliban.If he really wanted to demonstrate "the moral fibre of Britain", Blair would do everything in his power to lift the threat of violence in those parts of the world where there is great and justifiable grievance and anger.He would do more than make gestures; he would demand that Israel ends its illegal occupation of Palestine and withdraw to its borders prior to the 1967 war, as ordered by the Security Council, of which Britain is a permanent member.He would call for an end to the genocidal blockade which the UN - in reality, America and Britain - has imposed on the suffering people of Iraq for more than a decade, causing the deaths of half a million children under the age of five.That's more deaths of infants every month than the number killed in the World Trade Center.There are signs that Washington is about to extend its current "war" to Iraq; yet unknown to most of us, almost every day RAF and American aircraft already bomb Iraq. There are no headlines. There is nothing on the TV news. This terror is the longest-running Anglo-American bombing campaign since World War Two.The Wall Street Journal reported that the US and Britain faced a "dilemma" in Iraq, because "few targets remain". "We're down to the last outhouse," said a US official. That was two years ago, and they're still bombing. The cost to the British taxpayer? £800 million so far.According to an internal UN report, covering a five-month period, 41 per cent of the casualties are civilians. In northern Iraq, I met a woman whose husband and four children were among the deaths listed in the report. He was a shepherd, who was tending his sheep with his elderly father and his children when two planes attacked them, each making a sweep. It was an open valley; there were no military targets nearby."I want to see the pilot who did this," said the widow at the graveside of her entire family. For them, there was no service in St Paul's Cathedral with the Queen in attendance; no rock concert with Paul McCartney.The tragedy of the Iraqis, and the Palestinians, and the Afghanis is a truth that is the very opposite of their caricatures in much of the Western media.Far from being the terrorists of the world, the overwhelming majority of the Islamic peoples of the Middle East and south Asia have been its victims - victims largely of the West's exploitation of precious natural resources in or near their countries.There is no war on terrorism. If there was, the Royal Marines and the SAS would be storming the beaches of Florida, where more CIA-funded terrorists, ex-Latin American dictators and torturers, are given refuge than anywhere on earth.There is, however, a continuing war of the powerful against the powerless, with new excuses, new hidden agendas, new lies. Before another child dies violently, or quietly from starvation, before new fanatics are created in both the east and the west, it is time for the people of Britain to make their voices heard and to stop this fraudulent war - and to demand the kind of bold, imaginative non-violent initiatives that require real political courage.The other day, the parents of Greg Rodriguez, a young man who died in the World Trade Center, said this: "We read enough of the news to sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us."It is not the way to go...not in our son's name." What a tear jerking story, yet they make vague references as to the why of the matter. I will comment later, what do you guys think?
Põdi Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 quote: Former Mirror chief foreign correspondent I didn't really have to read much further. The Mirror is a notorious tabloid rag. Sensationalist journalism at its worst I'm afraid. Very clever though; a lot of WHAT he says is true, but you're right, a lot of sentimental crap and interpretation make it sound oh so heart-wrenching. Hell, he makes some points I agree with, just can't stand the sickening tone he makes them with.
Guest Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 This guy has his head where the son don't shine.Bush is not OWNED by the oil companies, give me a break. He wants our domestic production increased, who cares if a pipeline goes through Afghanistan. Once we start drilling in ANWAR we will have a MAJOR source of Domestically supplied oil, then we open the Gulf of Mexico again, and then off the coast of California. This would supply us with about 50% of our energy needs in themselves.As far as Iraq is concerned, we have allowed them Food for oil, but Saddam has refused. He doesn't care about his people, he cares about the publicity he gets when some moron like this says poor Iraqi people. Well if his people are suffering they should take out the person who is making them suffer, Saddam!!This guy is a peacenik of the worst sort, trying to make a conspiracy where ther is none.The only thing terrorists understand is Terror, and we are bringin it to them in Spades. Once the Taliban is overthrown, we are going to go into that godforsaken country and take out Osamm at our liesure, the Taliban is only our first target, once they are gone, then the terrorists will be taken care of.FEELINGS, NOTHING MORE THEN FEELINGS!!
Steve Schacher Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 Three WHOLE weeks? And we haven't won yet? Why did we ever start this in the first place?I bet these are the same people who yell at the microwave oven after 30 seconds because dinner isn't done yet.
emphy Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 quote: The only thing terrorists understand is Terror, and we are bringin it to them in Spades Well, at the moment terrorist are probably laughing in some caves, whilst the few American misses and the Taleban perform all the propaganda they need. People who perform suicide attacks are not going to be afraid of some bombs which may miss them, and the Taleban have plenty of experiencce in combating super powers. Somehow I doubt that handing out terror in spadefuls is helping much.
Soback Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 Drilling off the coast of California? I don't like that idea. I know that oil companies say that it's all clean but have you ever been at the beaches of Gulf of Mexico? The water there is gunk. You will go in and come out all covered in some weird oily stuff. I sometimes like to serf and hang out at the beach in the summer so does most of the bay area, if they start drilling near the coast then a whole lot of people will be pissed off including me so I don't think that that will happen.
Guest $iLk Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 I live next to the beach here in Gulf Shores and there are oil rigs less than a quarter mile offshore. The water is blue, there is no "gunk" The only trouble we have is with dumbass companies wanting to "accidentally" dump sewage into the water.
Guest Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 quote: Well, at the moment terrorist are probably laughing in some caves, whilst the few American misses and the Taleban perform all the propaganda they need. People who perform suicide attacks are not going to be afraid of some bombs which may miss them, and the Taleban have plenty of experiencce in combating super powers. OK, one point at a time, Yes, they are hiding in Caves, but once we take out the Taliban, they will not be hiding for long, because then we will be free to go into those caves and get them. Taliban first, because they are protecting them, and then Terrorists. As long as they keep thier little heads in the caves, we will get them!! and as long as we are bombing, they will stay in the caves!! Now as far as taking on a Superpower is concerned, WHEN WAS THAT?Oh, you mean when the USSR tried to TAKE OVER the country. We are NOT trying to take over the country, we are helping the Northern Alliance and thier allies, take the counry from the Taliban. THAT IS ALL, we are not going to INVADE, so whatever experience the Taliban had is now moot.Once we have a friendly government in place, IE: the ex king and the Northern Alliance, then we go into the caves and kick some terrorist butt....
Steve Schacher Posted October 29, 2001 Report Posted October 29, 2001 The Bay Area had an incident last year where a cargo ship was leaking oil off-shore as it was departing. Another incident involved another ship dumping its bilge or something. The Coast Guard tracked that one down a day later and hauled them back to shore.It's not the oil companies that are messing up the coastal waters -- it's the local city governments that exempt themselves from the toxic protections and cleanups. The city governments are the biggest polluters of the San Francisco Bay, but they want you to think that it's the refineries in the delta that are the problem.What gets me is when the left says that the attack is a result of the US policies in the Middle East and oil, yet the left is what drove us there because of restrictions on drilling here.As you can see from the following links, the oil companies are far from the largest polluters of California's coastal waters: From Mechanical Glitch Blamed for Oil Spill quote:An official of San Francisco Drydock Inc. said yesterday that Monday's oil spill was the result of an unorthodox system on board the government-owned cargo ship Cape Mohican that linked the ship's fuel tanks to a valve on its hull. Carl Hanson, managing director of the Pier 70 shipyard, said workers never suspected that oil was being held back by an ``external sea valve'' when they opened it for routine repair and cleaning, releasing more than 80,000 gallons of heavy bunker and diesel fuel into a floating dry-dock. From Ship Owner Fined $3.8 Million For San Mateo County Oil Spill quote:Anax admitted in September that the crew of its 717-foot tanker M-T Command spilled the oil and sailed away from the mess without notifying the Coast Guard. Hall also fined the M-T Command's skipper, Dimitrios Georgantas, $500 for his role in the spill and barred him from American ports for three years. From Tanker Captain Pleads Guilty in '98 Oil Spill Off S.F. Company to pay $9.4 million fine quote:The spill occurred on the night of Sept. 26, 1998, when the crew of the tanker Command, a Liberian-registered ship owned by Anax, attempted to illegally transfer oil from one holding tank to another. From SAN FRANCISCO Mercury Levels In Fish a Hazard, Bay Report Says quote:The East Bay research group, which tracks contaminants and exotic species in the bay, notes that the toxic element comes from a variety of sources. The most significant source is abandoned mercury mines, but diesel fuel combustion, consumer products that contain mercury and dental amalgams also contribute to aquatic contamination. ``Legacy'' mercury left over from the Gold Rush -- when it was used to separate gold from ore -- also is a problem. From Redwood City Settlement in Port Cleanup quote:U.S. District Court Justice Thelton Henderson in San Francisco approved the settlement May 10. Most of the 42 defendants are oil companies, including Chevron, Exxon and Texaco. The port hopes to get another $500,000 from a second batch of defendants in the next few weeks. But getting an additional $2 million chunk from the six largest defendants -- mostly federal government agencies such as Moffett Field and Hamilton Air Force Base -- is proving to be more difficult, Sidorenko said. From Foot-Dragging Needs to End On Bay Cleanup quote:These toxic hot spots are a legacy of mining, oil refineries, the U.S. Navy and other industrial and agricultural activity. We have known their location for the last decade, yet these silent killers continue to pollute. Several traditionally pro-environment legislators bowed to heavy lobbying by petroleum producers, the California Farm Bureau, ports and sanitation agencies, including the city of San Francisco. From Our Poisoned Bay Despite end to direct piping of sewage, pollution worse now than 30 years ago quote:The problem, scientists say, is that the bay is suffering from millions of tiny, diffuse sources of pollution. Considered separately, each is small, even inconsequential. But collectively, they are doing serious damage. Oil and gas spilled on streets, pesticides from farm fields and backyard lawns, polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxin buried in soil at thousands of small, contaminated sites -- they all flow downhill with the winter rains, ending up in estuaries and the ocean.
Soback Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 I am even toying with the idea of moving to Hawaii. My instructor moved there a couple of months ago and says the water is clean and warm. So when he has free time he just tans and surfs, and the life is so much more relaxed there.
Menchise Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 quote: Read this anti-American news story from Great Britain and dissect the feelings from the facts. How in hell is this guy anti-American? He spends just as much time criticizing Blair. He is anti-war. If that makes him anti-American in your eyes, then guess who's being emotional.You want to separate the feelings from the facts, fine. Here they are:The war against terrorism is a fraud. - FeelingAfter three weeks' bombing, not a single terrorist implicated in the attacks on America has been caught or killed in Afghanistan. - FactInstead, one of the poorest, most stricken nations has been terrorised by the most powerful - to the point where American pilots have run out of dubious "military" targets and are now destroying mud houses, a hospital, Red Cross warehouses, lorries carrying refugees. - FeelingUnlike the relentless pictures from New York, we are seeing almost nothing of this. - FactTony Blair has yet to tell us what the violent death of children - seven in one family - has to do with Osama bin Laden. - FeelingAnd why are cluster bombs being used? The British public should know about these bombs, which the RAF also uses. They spray hundreds of bomblets that have only one purpose; to kill and maim people. Those that do not explode lie on the ground like landmines, waiting for people to step on them. - Fact, although cluster bombs are primarily anti-vehicle devices.If ever a weapon was designed specifically for acts of terrorism, this is it. - FeelingI have seen the victims of American cluster weapons in other countries, such as the Laotian toddler who picked one up and had her right leg and face blown off. Be assured this is now happening in Afghanistan - Factin your name - FeelingNone of those directly involved in the September 11 atrocity was Afghani. Most were Saudis, who apparently did their planning and training in Germany and the United States. - FactThe camps which the Taliban allowed bin Laden to use were emptied weeks ago. - FactMoreover, the Taliban itself is a creation of the Americans and the British. - FeelingIn the 1980s, the tribal army that produced them was funded by the CIA and trained by the SAS to fight the Russians. - FactThe hypocrisy does not stop there. - FeelingWhen the Taliban took Kabul in 1996, Washington said nothing. Why? Because Taliban leaders were soon on their way to Houston, Texas, to be entertained by executives of the oil company, Unocal.With secret US government approval, the company offered them a generous cut of the profits of the oil and gas pumped through a pipeline that the Americans wanted to build from Soviet central Asia through Afghanistan. - FactA US diplomat said: "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis did." He explained that Afghanistan would become an American oil colony, there would be huge profits for the West, no democracy and the legal persecution of women. "We can live with that," he said. - FeelingAlthough the deal fell through, it remains an urgent priority of the administration of George W. Bush, which is steeped in the oil industry. Bush's concealed agenda is to exploit the oil and gas reserves in the Caspian basin, the greatest source of untapped fossil fuel on earth and enough, according to one estimate, to meet America's voracious energy needs for a generation. Only if the pipeline runs through Afghanistan can the Americans hope to control it.So, not surprisingly, US Secretary of State Colin Powell is now referring to "moderate" Taliban, who will join an American-sponsored "loose federation" to run Afghanistan. The "war on terrorism" is a cover for this: a means of achieving American strategic aims that lie behind the flag-waving facade of great power. - Theory based on previous fact and some common sense.The Royal Marines, who will do the real dirty work, will be little more than mercenaries for Washington's imperial ambitions, not to mention the extraordinary pretensions of Blair himself. Having made Britain a target for terrorism with his bellicose "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush nonsense, he is now prepared to send troops to a battlefield where the goals are so uncertain that even the Chief of the Defence Staff says the conflict "could last 50 years". - FeelingThe irresponsibility of this is breathtaking; the pressure on Pakistan alone could ignite an unprecedented crisis across the Indian sub-continent. Having reported many wars, I am always struck by the absurdity of effete politicians eager to wave farewell to young soldiers, but who themselves would not say boo to a Taliban goose. - FeelingIn the days of gunboats, our imperial leaders covered their violence in the "morality" of their actions. Blair is no different. Like them, his selective moralising omits the most basic truth. Nothing justified the killing of innocent people in America on September 11, and nothing justifies the killing of innocent people anywhere else.By killing innocents in Afghanistan, Blair and Bush stoop to the level of the criminal outrage in New York. Once you cluster bomb, "mistakes" and "blunders" are a pretence. Murder is murder, regardless of whether you crash a plane into a building or order and collude with it from the Oval Office and Downing Street. - FactIf Blair was really opposed to all forms of terrorism, he would get Britain out of the arms trade. - FeelingOn the day of the twin towers attack, an "arms fair", selling weapons of terror (like cluster bombs and missiles) to assorted tyrants and human rights abusers, opened in London's Docklands with the full backing of the Blair government. - FactBritain's biggest arms customer is the medieval Saudi regime, which beheads heretics and spawned the religious fanaticism of the Taliban. - FactIf he really wanted to demonstrate "the moral fibre of Britain", Blair would do everything in his power to lift the threat of violence in those parts of the world where there is great and justifiable grievance and anger.He would do more than make gestures; he would demand that Israel ends its illegal occupation of Palestine and withdraw to its borders prior to the 1967 war, as ordered by the Security Council, of which Britain is a permanent member.He would call for an end to the genocidal blockade which the UN - in reality, America and Britain - has imposed on the suffering people of Iraq for more than a decade, - Feelingcausing the deaths of half a million children under the age of five. - FactThat's more deaths of infants every month than the number killed in the World Trade Center. - FactThere are signs that Washington is about to extend its current "war" to Iraq; yet unknown to most of us, almost every day RAF and American aircraft already bomb Iraq. There are no headlines. There is nothing on the TV news. This terror is the longest-running Anglo-American bombing campaign since World War Two. - FactThe Wall Street Journal reported that the US and Britain faced a "dilemma" in Iraq, because "few targets remain". "We're down to the last outhouse," said a US official. That was two years ago, and they're still bombing. The cost to the British taxpayer? £800 million so far. - Feeling, although I suggest that you find out how much it's costing American taxpayers.According to an internal UN report, covering a five-month period, 41 per cent of the casualties are civilians. - FactIn northern Iraq, I met a woman whose husband and four children were among the deaths listed in the report. He was a shepherd, who was tending his sheep with his elderly father and his children when two planes attacked them, each making a sweep. It was an open valley; there were no military targets nearby."I want to see the pilot who did this," said the widow at the graveside of her entire family. For them, there was no service in St Paul's Cathedral with the Queen in attendance; no rock concert with Paul McCartney. - FeelingThe tragedy of the Iraqis, and the Palestinians, and the Afghanis is a truth that is the very opposite of their caricatures in much of the Western media. - FactFar from being the terrorists of the world, the overwhelming majority of the Islamic peoples of the Middle East and south Asia have been its victims - victims largely of the West's exploitation of precious natural resources in or near their countries.There is no war on terrorism. If there was, the Royal Marines and the SAS would be storming the beaches of Florida, where more CIA-funded terrorists, ex-Latin American dictators and torturers, are given refuge than anywhere on earth.There is, however, a continuing war of the powerful against the powerless, with new excuses, new hidden agendas, new lies. Before another child dies violently, or quietly from starvation, before new fanatics are created in both the east and the west, it is time for the people of Britain to make their voices heard and to stop this fraudulent war - and to demand the kind of bold, imaginative non-violent initiatives that require real political courage.The other day, the parents of Greg Rodriguez, a young man who died in the World Trade Center, said this: "We read enough of the news to sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us."It is not the way to go...not in our son's name." - Feeling quote: I didn't really have to read much further. The Mirror is a notorious tabloid rag. Sensationalist journalism at its worst I'm afraid. Very clever though; a lot of WHAT he says is true, but you're right, a lot of sentimental crap and interpretation make it sound oh so heart-wrenching. Hell, he makes some points I agree with, just can't stand the sickening tone he makes them with. - Feeling quote:This guy has his head where the son don't shine. - Feeling quote:Bush is not OWNED by the oil companies, give me a break. He wants our domestic production increased, who cares if a pipeline goes through Afghanistan. - Feeling quote:Once we start drilling in ANWAR we will have a MAJOR source of Domestically supplied oil, then we open the Gulf of Mexico again, and then off the coast of California. This would supply us with about 50% of our energy needs in themselves. - Fact, although I'm not so sure about the 50% figure, and it would only supply those needs while it lasts. quote:As far as Iraq is concerned, we have allowed them Food for oil, but Saddam has refused. He doesn't care about his people, he cares about the publicity he gets when some moron like this says poor Iraqi people. Well if his people are suffering they should take out the person who is making them suffer, Saddam!! - Feeling. By the way, Saddam's popularity increases when Iraq is bombed or sanctioned against. quote:This guy is a peacenik of the worst sort, trying to make a conspiracy where ther is none. - Feeling quote:The only thing terrorists understand is Terror, and we are bringin it to them in Spades. Once the Taliban is overthrown, we are going to go into that godforsaken country and take out Osamm at our liesure, the Taliban is only our first target, once they are gone, then the terrorists will be taken care of. - Feeling quote:FEELINGS, NOTHING MORE THEN FEELINGS!! - Feeling quote:Three WHOLE weeks? And we haven't won yet? Why did we ever start this in the first place?I bet these are the same people who yell at the microwave oven after 30 seconds because dinner isn't done yet. - Feeling quote:Well, at the moment terrorist are probably laughing in some caves, whilst the few American misses and the Taleban perform all the propaganda they need. People who perform suicide attacks are not going to be afraid of some bombs which may miss them, and the Taleban have plenty of experiencce in combating super powers. Somehow I doubt that handing out terror in spadefuls is helping much. - I agree, but it's still feeling. quote:OK, one point at a time, Yes, they are hiding in Caves, but once we take out the Taliban, they will not be hiding for long, because then we will be free to go into those caves and get them. Taliban first, because they are protecting them, and then Terrorists. As long as they keep thier little heads in the caves, we will get them!! and as long as we are bombing, they will stay in the caves!! - Feeling. The US government can't even confirm that Bin Laden is still in Afghanistan. They have no idea where he is. quote:Now as far as taking on a Superpower is concerned, WHEN WAS THAT?Oh, you mean when the USSR tried to TAKE OVER the country. We are NOT trying to take over the country, we are helping the Northern Alliance and thier allies, take the counry from the Taliban. THAT IS ALL, we are not going to INVADE, so whatever experience the Taliban had is now moot. - Some fact, some feeling. quote:Once we have a friendly government in place, IE: the ex king and the Northern Alliance, then we go into the caves and kick some terrorist butt.... - Feeling. I suggest you find out more about the Northern Alliance before you declare them as Afghanistan's second coming. From what I've read, they're no better than the Taliban. quote:dissect the feelings from the facts. You asked for it.
Guest Herbert Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 John Pilger is a Australian, and there is a word that is sometimes used - "Pilgerise" which means, "To Pilgerise is to distort the real picture by a mixture of 50 per cent fact, 25 per cent omission of facts and 25 per cent innuendo" This has even been quoted in the UK House of Commons by Sir Peter Blaker, who was the Minister of State for Defense under Margaret Thatcher!
Menchise Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 Well then, I guess it was prudent to separate the facts from the feelings, eh?
Guest $iLk Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 Thanks Menchise! Anyway the facts remain that in Iraq, and Afganistan, those countries leaders are responsible for the majority of deaths in their countries. Those who cheer inside that country are either indoctrinated from youth or made to at gunpoint.It's a backwards society, both leaders of each country hide their military equipment among hospitals and orphanages.We have the civility to at least use our military to defend instead of to terrorize.Our people are fighting for freedom."The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants "-Thomas JeffersonThose people need our help. As much as international law regards each country as handling their own affairs, we cannot sit by and watch as they butcher their own people and attack citizens of other countries.We can't stand by and let them do the killing while we just mourn and watch. This isn't about skin color, religion, or anything political. It's about morality and human decency. It's about helping our fellow man.The quicker we get this over with, not by running away, but by accomplishing our objectives, the quicker we can help these people.Some would rather die on their feet than live on their knees under the Taliban. What does everyone think?
emphy Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 $ilk: And, of course, attack is the best defence.I wish you luck in China, Saoudi Arabia, Usbekistan, Pakistan, and other nations where people suffer from oppression...
Guest Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 Menchise,You haven't been keeping a close eye on this thing obviously.We know within a 40 Kilometer square, EXACTLY where Bin Laden is. We are making darn sure that he can't go anywhere. Our reconnasaince craft can recognize individuals from 10 miles away, we know exactly what is going on.There were no feelings in most of what I said, just the facts as I see them from the info that I have acquired.the Iraqi thing is NOT feeling, it is logic. quote: - Feeling. I suggest you find out more about the Northern Alliance before you declare them as Afghanistan's second coming. From what I've read, they're no better than the Taliban. They are not the second coming, they are the ones that are supplying domeatic groundtroops to this war. Also, the King is putting together a coalition government to put in place once the Taliban is overthrown. No FEELINGS in that part of my post at all. Just conclusions from the given facts that I have seen and looked at.You like to see feelings in a lot of my statements above, but the FACTS are different. Most have factual data to back them up, and are not FEELINGS at all.
Menchise Posted October 30, 2001 Report Posted October 30, 2001 quote:Anyway the facts remain that in Iraq, and Afganistan, those countries leaders are responsible for the majority of deaths in their countries. Those who cheer inside that country are either indoctrinated from youth or made to at gunpoint.It's a backwards society, both leaders of each country hide their military equipment among hospitals and orphanages.We have the civility to at least use our military to defend instead of to terrorize.Our people are fighting for freedom.You ignored the facts that Iraq is bombed every second day without provocation, and 41 percent of the casualties are civilians.Here are some other facts for you: Iraq was not regarded as backward by the US until Saddam started pursuing Iraqi interests that contradicted with US interests. Secondly, the economic sanctions against Iraq (not to mention the constant bombings) prevent Saddam from implementing the social reform programs that he announced in the 1980s, which would actually help to improve the living conditions of the population.Is it any wonder that his popularity increases when Iraq is bombed? quote: We know within a 40 Kilometer square, EXACTLY where Bin Laden is. We are making darn sure that he can't go anywhere. Then why isn't that 40 square kilometer area being attacked instead of every major city in Afghanistan?
Menchise Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 Hey Aramike, calm down. quote: Without provocation? Then what do you call firing SAMs at patrol aircraft? What do you call violating a surrender agreement with regards to WEAPONS inspections? Every two days? quote: Great job in painting a pretty face on the dirty canvas. I wonder what you'd say if the US started persuing similar interests. Perhaps we should lobby for an invasion of a sovereign nation and find out... Just pointing out a fact. Saddam was supported by the US and UK when he was fighting Iran. That's how he got chemical weapons in the first place. quote: So you're a Saddam Hussein backer, eh? Just pointing out a fact. Stop jumping to conclusions. quote: Do you REALLY think that Saddam Hussein's "reform programs" would help ANYONE? Can you prove that they wouldn't? quote: Besides, he had his chance. Then he invaded a sovereign nation with ZERO provocation. And you want the world to give THAT TYPE OF PERSON a chance to make MONEY? How would he be making money out of it? quote: Why the HELL do you think he doesn't want weapons inspectors in there, because he's making vegetable oil? Did I say that he should be left alone? No. Did I say that we shouldn't be suspicious? No. quote: He has had PLENTY of opportunities to feed his people, even post-Gulf War. That is NOT the person that will take care of his people if sanctions are lifted. If that's true then the US and UK should be providing support for the people to overthrow him instead of making him look like a victim by destroying everything in the country. quote: So, the solution would be to remove him from "office", and that would have to be by force. But you don't want THAT either. Another assumption. quote: Here's what YOUR logic would be likely to produce: we lift sanctions, Saddam has more money to produce weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein has a HISTORY of aggressive action against neighboring states, INCLUDING the use of chemical agents, EVEN ON HIS OWN PEOPLE. Here is how my logic works: Offer to lift the sanctions on the condition that he cooperates with weapon inspectors. If he refuses, then expose his refusal to the Iraqis and they will question his priorities. If he accepts, keep an eye on him. If he does something else foolish, then withdraw the deal. If he doesn't, well then... quote: There's only one word for a stance that HISTORY proves to be not only unlikely, but near impossible: naive. Maybe I am naive on this issue, but your near-hysterical cap writing isn't helping. quote: So if Hitler's popularity increased when Germany was bombed you'd be pro-Hitler? Brilliant... A brilliant twisting of my words.
Menchise Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 quote: Ever hear of the "TALIBAN"? As I recall, this was supposed to be a war against the attackers of the WTC, not the Taliban. quote: Or do you support terrorist nations that suppress women and harbor murderers in the name of peace?You know what, Nick? I *DON'T* want YOUR kind of peace. I don't want a peace where people are violently oppressed. Hey. Stop telling me what I want. You're not a mind reader, you know. quote: If that is what YOU want, so be it. Do you really think that is what I want? quote: If you do NOT want that, but preferthe peace that I do, then continuing to condemn those who actually sacrifice for it is hypocritical. I don't believe that this war will achieve any kind of long term peace. Therefore, I'm not being hypocritical.
Guest $iLk Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 It is Hussein that is breaching the treaty requirements of the Gulf War that the liberal poster child Clinton chose to ignore.Convenient.We supported the Taliban as well, but it was the means to an end. Isn't that what Communists like to phrase?The means only matter when it is supposed "capitalists" pursuing an agenda?What are we supposed to do when a nuclear bomb is detonated somewhere like new york?"thank you may we have another?"The peace movement is the refuge of those who aren't willing to have the strength of their convictions. Just like Liberalism is a refuge of those who can't have the strength of their convictions in Communism.Who cares what Saddam's POV is? I hope his POV is a good view of ground zero when we drop one on him. These people are killing Americans and you and those others are basically cheerleading for them. In the name of "humanity". Open your eyes and realize your thoughts are destructive when applied to anything except fantasy land with purple dinosaurs and Tali Tubbys.
Guest Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 Menchise,You are talking to a veteran, and I am a veteran as well. When you start to defend a known mass murderer, Saddam Hussien, then we get a little upset.Also, the reason we are NOT going after Bin Laden right now is because we do not want to get shot in the back as well, namely by the Taliban. Once the Taliban is taken out, then we will take out Ossama. They asked for it, they were warned, and they got what they asked for.Did you hear that the Taliban actually threatened Russia today? Yes, they believe that THEY are the reason the Soviet Union fell apart, talk about delusions of Grandeur.Have they never heard of Ronald Wilson Reagan, the greatest president of this century. Oh, and Menchise, have you never heard the saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" ? This is why we support the Northern Alliance, this is also why we are bringing the old King in, to create a COALITION government to rule Afghanistan and not this bunch of cretons.We WILL take the Taliban out, have no doubts of that, and if Saddam gets his panties in a bunch, he will be next!!Now, you are all for peace, and that's wonderful, but let me tell you, no one wants peace more then the soldiers and veterans, we know what it is like to take that oath, and it can be scary. But, when the cause is right and the reasons just, we are like a tiger, we will tear our enemy to pieces.And political correctness has no place in war, it does nothing but create vietnams.I think the media should be totally cut off from this war. Any media found in the combat zone should be arrested and brought up on spy charges. This is a military operation, and there is no place in it for the media, armchair quarterbacks and politicians, EXCEPT the president.Once the war is won, then they can have all the info they want, but in the meantime, the only journalist that should be telling anyone anything are military journalists!!
Menchise Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 quote: You are talking to a veteran, and I am a veteran as well. When you start to defend a known mass murderer, Saddam Hussien, then we get a little upset. I get a little upset when people accuse me of defending mass murder.
Guest $iLk Posted October 31, 2001 Report Posted October 31, 2001 Political Correctness must be shown as the false religion that it is!Political Correctness divides people along racial, social, and economic status in order to differentiate voter blocks.Menchise, no offense really, but your posts indicate that you haven't watched the news, besides the People's Weekly World or whatever. The Taliban was given numerous opportunities to hand over a proven terrorist and mass murderer. Since they are more comfortable with their own kind they refused. President Bush (who is climbing up behind Reagan in greatness - but his PC might be his downfall in that) said that we will "make no distinction between terrorists and those who harbor them"The Taliban is in effect a terrorist organization. Regardless of what the Communist newspaper says this is a war against terrorists.If these people are so commited why did only 4 of the hijackers leave notes to their families? (the leaders of each group) Perhaps because some of them didn't know it was a suicide mission????Who knows, but it makes me doubt they are that commited if they have to trick their people into being bombs.And BTW, you are saying that Christians and Jews have a problem with Arabs, and point to the post disaster beatings as proof. What proof do you have that those doing the beating were christians or jews?They were probably Communists. Trying to get publicity to fuel the peace movement.Anyway I'm tired, see you guys later.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now