To all the folks who voiced unspeakably rude sentiments directed at the host of this board–which would be me–simply because I’m skeptical of the scramble for war at a time when domestic issues unattended to (or exacerbated) by the administration loom so large…
How many are actually in the service and would be required to fight? How many have children who would be required to go? And how many of draft age support a draft (and I’ll be going on the assumption that the rudest and most blustering who respond affirmatively to the last one are full of crap.)
Just wondering.
PAD
• 
Don’t take Emory too seriously- he exists only to dismiss those who disagree with him. He couldn’t summon a valid case to save his life, so he just says, in effect, “this person has no case because I say so”. Kind of laughable.
So, Jarissa, your definition of “unilateral” means “UN-sanctioned action supported by nearly two dozen nations.” OK. Got it.
I just don’t get it. How is Iraq not a threat? The guy HATES America and Americans. He’s got bioweapons and chemical weapons. Both these weapons can be easily used as terrorist fodder. When they are released, you don’t have one person falling from a bullet, you have hundreds and thousands falling.
The people who decry the President for not doing anything about 9/11 when he had a vague – VAGUE – warning are the same people who will complain bitterly when Iraq does something horrible or aids someone else in doing something horrible if the President doesn’t do anything now.
Let’s face it, there is nothing he can do that will please people who oppose him.
This of course, overlooks the little fact that Hitler and the Axis powers started World War II.
In this case, we are going to bomb and invade a country (and take control of its natural resources for “safekeeping”) on the stated grounds that it might someday pose a threat to us.
[quote]We will be the aggressors. We will be the ones attacking the weaker nation, occupying it militarily, and installing a government with the chief priority of it being acquiescent to us. Not very American, I think. But these days, you aren’t a good American if you don’t trust the President. [/quote]
This is incorrect. Iraq is under a cease fire and must disarm. They started the war by invading Kuwait and agreed to a conditional cease fire. They have broken those conditions initiating a resumption of the war. Whatever your opinion, these are the facts. Please, it makes it all the harder to debate when the truth is obfuscated. Iraq started this and continues to start it by not disarming and documenting its disarmament.
Let’s be sensible: if Saddam has had any intention of sharing his cache with terrorists, he’s already done so. All they need now is an excuse to use them, which the Idiot in Thief will be more than happy to provide. Then he’ll have betrayed national security as surely as he betrayed fairness in elections back in 2000 (when legitimate black voters in Florida were turned away at the polls- Florida had to eventually settle the case with civil rights groups who sued- that’s for anyone who is interested in facts, which doesn’t include the Limbaugh Lovers present). Does anyone doubt that we’re gonna be hit hard once we hit there? Does anyone doubt that N Korea isn’t just as dangerous but that they’re a part of the Evil Axis that’s not as well oiled–
The next strike against us is preventable not only via tightened security but by sensible actions in foreign affairs. Attacking Iraq is not smart. America can’t get its way anymore by throwing force at everything it’s not comfortable with. We can’t afford to be hated in a world where the tiniest vial can deliver untold carnage. A better mind and conscience than Bush’s is required in times like these- even a Bishop in his own church has admonished him that he’s going down the wrong path. But a man who was appointed at the expense of the rights of voters is not going to value what’s wise and decent; he’s going to play his father’s game and the country is going to pay his price.
This is incorrect. Iraq is under a cease fire and must disarm. They started the war by invading Kuwait
Correct. Not the United States, not Canada, not Mexico, not even Cuba. 12 years ago they invaded their neighbor. And haven’t done anything since. So why are WE the ones who are going to invade them (and 12 years later to boot)? Why are WE pushing for war in the Middle East? If they are such a regional threat, why isn’t a country in that region leading the charge, and asking for our support? Why do we have to twist arms to get countries to go along with a war that is supposedly being fought for THEM? Oh yeah, I know, they secretly want to, but just can’t ask for it. “You know you want it…” Ugh.
I’m with whoever did this:
http://www.asu.net/bsh/union.mov
Posted by Jeff Z @ 02/02/2003 07:49 PM ET
Don’t take Emory too seriously- he exists only to dismiss those who disagree with him. He couldn’t summon a valid case to save his life, so he just says, in effect, “this person has no case because I say so”. Kind of laughable.
Posted by David Emory @ 02/02/2003 11:25 PM ET
Waaaaaaaaaah! The grown-ups are right and I can’t logically debate my way out of a wet paper bag! I must’ve failed “Reading for Comprehension” in grammar school!
[grin] Thank you kindly, Jeff Z, for providing me with the correct perspective on the post immediately following yours. Your timing, sir, was perfect.
So, Jarissa, your definition of “unilateral” means “UN-sanctioned action supported by nearly two dozen nations.” OK. Got it.
You’ve proved my case perfectly, David– immature mockery is a Limbaugh tactic when one has no valid argument. Classic right wing mindlessness.
Jarissa, I think that your post was a bit too long because it looks like he got lost in the middle again. Maybe you should try using shorter words.
I am really sick of reading again and again about Germany (my home country – and I am dámņëd proud of it!!!!!) as Ex-Nazi-Land or similar. Is this a fixed idea of you Americans, Alan? If some TV-bosses have no other ideas: oh, lets take something about nazis! (so seen in Star Trek TOS and Voyager and other series – and I love Star Trek).
My heart hurts when I read such comments like yours, Alan. And I am really indignant about it. If I would answer the same way I could say your dámņëd American patriotism really makes me sick. You are so proud of your country that it is almost arrogant. And if a German is proud of his country then he/she is called nazi, or what? When in the last decades was the “most peaceful nation of the world” USA not in a war with any country? So you may be the biggest nation in the world, but that does not mean you are the leader of the world. And how can I really take serious a country who is too silly to do the right counting of the votes for the president. To need weeks for it and a president B. who wins over his opponent only because a court decides some votes are not valid.
But I don’t want to answer to you the same way because I am a tolerant and peaceful person – maybe despite of what you think of Germans. Do you know any German personally? It is so easy to believe it like in movies – the German is always the bad one. Just a cliche.
I am dissappointed of your so called allies, the “new europe”! Hah! This is what we call the European Nation (EU)??? To stand against Germany and France who made a brave statement. I agree with our government to say: we do not join a war. I do not want a war anywere. It always means death as Adam Hoffman truly said above. Maybe the United State are only bad about Germany because we after all these decades finally dared to have an own opinion!
It has been decades since the world war II and our nation has paid more than enough for it. I don’t see why we still have to make us small because of the sins of some ancestors. Yes, it was cruel and wrong and a tragedy. We have dealt with our history over and over. We know it. We have learned from it. So how can any country declare itself to be better than we are? Who asked how many people were killed by Stalin? Or how many people died or suffered from the atom bomb in Japan? Or how many civil victims were slaughtered in the jugoslavia war? We are not the only ones with ancestors who are responsible for deaths.
And I do not see why German soldiers should die in a war which is not ours. It is only a question about oil and it all started decades ago. The USA mainly attacks from the air and the European Allies “may” do the ground service, he?
This war is only a question about oil and it all started decades ago. The USA is not innocent about the situation in the middle east today. The USA always had their fingers in it. And now you wonder. I do not want to approve Hussein. I just say the USA should touch their own nose.
Maybe you ask yourself what kind of person I am. I tell you. I am a 27 year old woman, born and raised in the GDR (East Germany). I learned socialism and antifaschism from the beginning. After the reunion I learned more and I am proud of my country and I love it. It is easy for foreigners to come and ask for help from us and take it almost for granted. And if we dare to disagree we are all Nazis again? Oh yeah, this would bee too easy.
You can talk so easily about us Germans, Alan, but you are just a racist. Know the old thruth? People are afraid of what they don’t know. I am sorry for you that your mind is so limited.
And all you Americans who read this. This is not meant as an offense. These are only the impressions of a critical non-American. I do not believe in Bush’s statement “Who is not with us is against us.” This is bûllšhìŧ. Life is not only black and white. Good Night, America.
immature mockery is a Limbaugh tactic when one has no valid argument. Classic right wing mindlessness.
Pointing out that nearly two dozen nations support the US and that existing UN resolutions sanction taking action against Iraq is neither “immature mockery” nor “mindlessness.” And if you were paying attention, elsewhere I’ve noted I’m a Democrat, albeit one who fondly remembers when liberals were the ones who opposed totalitarian dictators, which takes the wind out of your “right wing” taunt.
Peter, I must apologize. If you were referring to my comments as the ones that were “unspeakably rude”, you were correct. When I referred to President Bush as a simpleton, I did not stop to consider the feelings of the simpleton community. Surely and I think obviously, insulting the simpleton community was not my intent. I have since reconsidered my opinions on colleges being required to have simpleton admission quotas and, if given the chance to vote for Dan Quayle’s birthday to become a federal holiday, I assure you I would now vote “Yes”. Some of my best friends are simpletons. In fact, most of them are.
On one hand, Saddam Hussein is a dictator who has spent the bulk of his time as ruler systematically wiping out the Kurds while silencing dissent and opposition, using methods as varied as torture, imprisonment, and execution. Isn’t it a testament to the fear he instills in his countrymen when he got one hundred percent of the vote in his last “election?” He supports terrorism by offering the families of Palestinian suicide bombers the equivalent of $25,000, more money than these families could ever hope to see in their life. He’s defied official UN regulations and has carried on research in both nuclear and biological weapons. He’s used chemical weapons in the past (against Iran in the 80’s and against Iraq’s own Kurdish population in 1988), and he’s still carrying on research for it, and possibly making and hiding stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.
For those that say he hasn’t done anything since he withdrew from Kuwait… After Desert Storm wound down, he went back to his old pasttime; eradicating Kurds. To make up for the lack of US soldiers killed in the Gulf War, he had 30,000 to 60,000 Iraqi Kurds and Shi’a killed, and ordered the destruction of the southern marshes in Iraq (an archeologically important area in Iraq, which was once ancient Babylon) as a deterrent to a Shi’a insurrection.
On the other hand, our position in the Middle East is precarious, to say the least. If we go in and topple the leader of an Islamic country, anti-American feelings will only grow worse. Bin Ladens would pop up all over the place, people who already see us as a prime instigator in the Israeli/Palestine conflict.
And who’s to say that the people who will take power in Iraq after Saddam’s ousting will be any different? We may be doing the Kurds a favor by getting rid of Saddam, but the Kurds don’t like us all that much either.
The general consensus among foreign powers is that Iraq is better left alone, at least for the time being, as the UN situation is still being worked out without the need for military action. So far. But we run the risk of losing our closest foreign allies (England, Japan, Canada) if we continue with this war.
I don’t consider the possibility of losing US troops in Iraq a great one, however. We’re quite adept at unmanned warfare. Consider the Afghanistan conflict, which was projected in the beginning that it would last at least two years and cost a large number of casualties. We reached, if not our primary goal of catching Osama Bin Laden, the goal of dismantling the Taliban and Al-Quaida, and with a minimum of time and loss of life.
Here’s a few links for the curious:
http://www.iraqfoundation.org/
http://usembassy.state.gov/posts/in1/wwwhpr0121e.html
http://www.stopwar.org.uk/
http://www.wadinet.de/News/nw495_unspoken.htm
http://www.stelling.nl/konfront/2e2002/15601.html
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/
This is perhaps the least effectual way of making our opinions known to anyone that matters. In that spirit, I will just say that what Powell had to offer as far as evidence, what I’ve seen prior to that, and what I know about the Bush administration’s motives re: oil contracts and the flaccid war on terrorism, I still don’t trust the government that prosecuting a war against Saddam is a good idea. Not with support, not without support. It’s the “we’d create a thousand bin Ladens” argument, which no one has refuted yet. Isn’t that nagging at everyone? Hello? We can’t keep kidding ourselves that we can put a lid on terrorism by bombing the šhìŧ out of (or taking over) a country like Iraq. Saddam Hussein is only one man. Even if we were to take him out individually, like Cerberus, a thousand more heads even more terrifying than his will take his place.
Over.
Scott, your fear is an understandable one. But this is akin to caving in to the protection racket because you’re afraid of what the Godfather will do if you stand up for yourself. If we let fear dictate our actions, they own us.
Too, if Hussein is taken out of the picture, other states which have either been covertly, or semi-overtly supporting terrorists will find themselves needing to reconsider their stance real fast. And some which have been sitting on the fence may just decide to join in on eradicating this plague.
Kalshane wrote:
As far as Israel and Palestine, they’re both in the wrong. They’re both killing innocents, Israel’s just doing it more “legitimately”.
Well, well, well. Once again, I have to discover anti-Israeli sentiments being expressed on this forum. First off: “Palestine” is the name that the Romans gave to the land of Israel in their time, and the Arabs you say are “Palestinians” are simply descendants of the Mamluke movement that conquered the Land of Israel back circa the 7th century.
Second: How DARE you make such vile attempts to say that Israel is just killing Arabs for no apparent reason while ignoring the behaviour of the Arab suicide bombers who were encouraged by the PLO/Hamas to carry out their violent crimes against innocent women and children in Israeli society. Not to mention ignoring the acts of violence that the PLO’s been carrying out against supposed “collaborators” with the authorities in Israel. Be ashamed, Kalshane. Be VERY ashamed.
Needless to say, by posting such vile incitement against Israel, you commit the error of abusing Mr. David’s forum for trying to encourage hatred, and nothing else. Alas, people of your low standing obviously don’t have a care in the world for as to if you’re erring or not. Be assured that history will judge you.
I have but one more question that’s similar in some ways to Mr. David’s question, BTW: How many people who’re biased in favor of the “Palestinians” have ever visited Israel in the flesh? How many have ever even spoken in person to those you describe as “settlers”, befriended them and even spoken to people who may be Likud supporters? As I’m sure you’re aware by now, the Likud, by the way, has won a landslide victory in the elections, which is the nation’s way of telling the world that they do not accept the Oslo accords.
And maybe most importantly of all, do you read Jewish media in English language? We read your media, and I can’t see any reason why you can’t read ours. I suggest you turn to some of the following websites to know the Jewish side of the media coverage:
http://www.jpost.com
http://www.jewishworldreview.com
I would like to recommend a few things everyone should read for the sake of being just a little bit more informed about what is going on in this world. It’s better if we are all on the same page knowledge-wise when discussing politics:
_War is a Racket_ by Smedley Butler
Very short, easy read. He states who *really benefits* from war. Through a Google search you can find many more links to reprints of the book but here is one: http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm
_Stupid White Men…and Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation_ by Michael Moore
Before anyone gets their britches in a bunch, Michael Moore is a white man so it’s okay for him to call white men whatever he likes…Also, go see his recent documentary, “Bowling for Columbine,” if you get a chance too.
_Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency by James Bamford
This book reveals that the under the Reagan Administration, US corporations sold certain biological and chemical materials to Iraq in order to produce some of the “weapons of mass destruction” which are such a big threat now. Our government is as much at fault for the present situation for allowing such treasonous transactions to take place.
_The New Nuclear Danger: George Bush’s Military-Industrial Complex_ by Dr. Helen Caldicott
Dr. Caldicott talks about the repercussions of nuclear proliferation of all sorts: nuclear war, nuclear power plants, what depleted uranium shells do to people when exposed, the need for world-wide disarmament if we are to have a future to look forward to.
_The Best Democracy Money Can Buy_ by Greg Palast
This book delves into the 2000 election, how key members of Bush’s cabinet have conflicts of interest with regard to the impending war in Iraq, how the bin Laden family is in bed with the Bush family, etc.
_Rulers of Evil_ by F. Tupper Saussy
Free chapters can be read here: http://www.rulersofevil.com
Tupper’s main site has some more background information: tuppersaussy.com
This stuff may be the most controversial and hardest to swallow. I would definitely say, read this one with several grains of salt and the utmost skepticism you can muster.
“Likud, by the way, has won a landslide victory in the elections, which is the nation’s way of telling the world that they do not accept the Oslo accords.”
Or that they’re fed up with lunatics targetting their women and children and want their government to deal with the problem once and for all?
There ya go! That too is one of the reasons why the Likud won such a big victory. Because they’re fed up and want the guv’ment to start getting serious. Thanks for the extra input, StarWolf. 🙂
And thanks for offering some of the extra info, Mr. Andrew C. It’s always good to know about the world and what can be done to help it out.
I totally disagree with the invasion of Iraq, not that there’s any love lost for the Iraqi people.I believe that this administration has lied to it’s people and with it’s second term, will experience a horrible setback for this country. When the people of this country turns a deaf ear to reason, when a country seeks revenge for a unforgettable attack of 9/11. All of you, who defend the President, send me your sons and daughters. I’m a Drill Instructor, and I say, put up or shut-up. If you are so determined to support your Commander-and-Chief. What are you willing to give up for your freedom? The administration is willing to give up your hard earn money, but not one of their kids.