December 14, 2003 at 2:40 pm #46555
Well they finally caught Saddam Hussein.
What will his people do to him? Gee, that’s a no brainer…
I just heard that he was responsible for over 400,000 Iraqi deaths in these mass graves that are starting to pop up all over.
And we shouldn’t have intervened? We should have left this turd in power? Why don’t you ask a Jewish person what they think about leaders who commit genocide…
I don’t care what the rest of the world thinks. The allied advance to stop a person like this from being in charge was more than justified. At least some nations still believe in human rights and are willing to do something about it. To the rest of the world and the PEople here who continue to condemn the U.S. involvement in Iraq… GET BENT!!! It’s because the U.S. takes action against people like this that you’re able to enjoy the good life you haveDecember 15, 2003 at 8:34 am #97821
I`m happy they caught him but you can stack all the dead bodies that it took since last March to get the bastard.Was it worth blowing the fuck out of Iraq for?Was it worth killing more innocent iraqis and allied forces to get him?this war was the most confusing thing for me this year.Around here you have ‘peace’ protestors burning american flags and yelling out their hate for the US when it`s the US gov`t that did it,I don`t hate americans.Yet,these people will go home after hours of screaming hate of the US and listen to american music,watch american tv,etc. I also did`nt like the pro war side who held up signs saying ‘remember 9/11’ when there`s no evidence of Saddam`s involvement in it and not an iraqi hijacker on any of the planes.
So where do I stand on this?I don`t like Saddam,I don`t like Bush;I`m fucking sick of the two sides on this and how it relates to being right or left wing.I`m sick of Toby Keith and his go America songs,Oh yeah,if Al Gore had gotten in he would have attacked Iraq too.The Bad Brains calls politics ‘politricks’,yeah it seems like that.Where was the US when a half a million people died in East Timor in 1975?
I hope they capture Bin Laden but what poor nation is going to suffer for it.
John Prine`s Spainish Pipedream had good advice when I bought his cd last spring:
"BLOW UP YOUR TV,THROW AWAY YOUR PAPER"
well put John
Sorry for the rant but this has been building up in me for awhileDecember 15, 2003 at 11:34 am #97822
First off.. Iraq is a better place with out Saddam. He was a horrible dictator.. HOWEVER…
Where to begin?
I seem to recall that the war on terror was the FIRST reason we went to war with Iraq. Hmm, I remember Sept. 11, 2001, like everyone else. There were 15 SAUDIS on the 4 planes and ZERO Iraqis on them. Afghanastan and the War on Terror, yes I agreed with. Iraq and the war on terror? I still do not agree with.
Then, we went to war in Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. Well now, look at this press conferece from Feb 24, 2001 with Sec. Powell. (Transcript) About a 1/3 of the way down, Sec. Powell says that the sanctions have worked, and the Iraw has not developed any significant threat for WMD. That was FEBRUARY 2001!!. Then, while in Cincinnati in Oct. 2002, Pres. Bush states the only smoking gun we may see is a mushroom cloud in the U.S. So Iraq went from nothing to a mushroom cloud in 20 months. Come on now.
Then it was to free the Iraqi people. Fine. Whatever. Well then, are we sending troops to free the North Koreans? How about China? They have ruthless dictatores. They have WMD. Where are our troops? Are we sending ANYTHING to Africa, at all??? Nope. Did not think so. So what makes the Iraqi people’s suffering any worse than those in other countries?
But back to this War on terror thing. What group was responsible for the 9/11 attacks? O.K., so the U.S. moves most of its most valuable intelligence technology and personnel away from finding Osama bin Laden to finding Saddam Hussein. Why? What for? You mean to tell me that finding Saddam was more important than finding Osama..
The ONLY thing even REMOTELY close to an Iraq sanctioning of terror that has been released so far, was that the Anslar Al-islam group (close ties to Al-Qaeda) was based in Northern Iraq. This is the SAME Northern Iraq that is controlled by the Kurds.
Also, this was an action that the U.S. did not need to undertake basically on its own. Yes, the U.S. is the most powerul nation in the world. That does not give Pres. Bush the right or moral authority to pull these "My way or the highway" schemes. They may have worked while he was Governor of Texas, but they do not work in international affairs.
Thus concludes my rant. If you got this far, thank you for taking the time to read it.
Carl.December 15, 2003 at 12:51 pm #97823
Thanks for the rant Carl.
2003 has been one of the strangest years for me.Not only the war and the pressure of having to take a side on it but SARS that started in China and ended in other places like here in Canada(if it came where I live it would have been a plague because the hospitals here would`ve never been able to handle it)then there was a hurricane that hit here.
Carl brought up a good point about why other dictatorships are`nt a issue with the US gov`t.All corners of the world have tyrants but yet the US media insists on making Saddam the star tyrant.Before 1990 or `91 no one even heard of Saddam.December 15, 2003 at 3:00 pm #97824
I’m pleased they finally caught Saddam, he deserves everything he gets from his own people. Love the way they keep showing him getting checked for lice, no doubt a humiliating experience for the nasty so & so! The people of Iraq deserve justice for all the atrocities that creep has been linked to. I thought the coalition should have finished the job the first time, after he invaded Kuwait
Being from one of the countries who didn’t fall in line & do whatever George said guess we’re part of that whole get bent deal…
That whole you’re either with us or against us keeps popping up in my mind after reading your post, the current US government seems to have a short term memory problem, conveniently forgetting all the times other countries have supported them over the years. Canadians played a role in the taking of Afghanistan & the war on terror, but because we didn’t buy the whole saddam is an imminent threat to the US, didn’t see how he was linked with osama & didn’t see any proof of wmd, we respectfully declined to participate…guess we’re against the states I remember our defense minister saying "we don’t just go to war because someone says so"…sounds like a fair plan to me! We have offered money for the rebuilding of iraq, continue to take part in the rebuilding/patrolling of Afghanistan, but apparently thats not good enuf.
I support the hunt for the terrorists responsible for 9/11, I keep hoping I’ll see Bin Laden captured. Hopefully that happens soon!December 16, 2003 at 2:03 am #97825
Allison, I don’t mean to offend you, but you have to know the image of Saddam getting checked for lice was not received well in the Middle-East. We, as citizens of the Western world, see this as humiliation of a horrible dictator. People in the Middle-East see it as humiliation of a Muslim by Americans. As horrible a dictator Saddam Hussein was, he was a symbol of the fight against the USA, especially for Palestinians. This is why there have been mixed feelings about the arrest of Saddam in the Arabic world.
Which brings us to the biggest problem unresolved in the world today. It’s not North-Korea and it certainly wasn’t Saddam. It was and is the Israel-Palestinia conflict. Until this problem is solved there is no way the hostility against the USA and the rest of the Western world will disappear.
There is no such thing as good vs. bad. People like to see the world in a simple way, preferably black and white. President Bush is one of those simple minded people. That’s why he came up with the "you’re either for or against us". I hate to break it to ya, George, but the world doesn’t work that way. There is no "Axis of Evil". The world is a complex mixture of states and different sorts of people. The only way to create a save world in which all people live together in peace is to use a democratic organization like the UN (which, granted, is not democratic enough). If the USA are going to use their power to create a world as they like to see it, then yes, they are the biggest threat to worldpeace.
Got this from Michael Moore’s website (http://www.michaelmoore.com). He, once again, points out the facts that need to be taken into account after the arrest of Saddam Hussein:
We Finally Got Our Frankenstein… and He Was In a Spider Hole! — by Michael Moore
December 14, 2003
Thank God Saddam is finally back in American hands! He must have really missed us. Man, he sure looked bad! But, at least he got a free dental exam today. That’s something most Americans can’t get.
America used to like Saddam. We LOVED Saddam. We funded him. We armed him. We helped him gas Iranian troops.
But then he screwed up. He invaded the dictatorship of Kuwait and, in doing so, did the worst thing imaginable — he threatened an even BETTER friend of ours: the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia, and its vast oil reserves. The Bushes and the Saudi royal family were and are close business partners, and Saddam, back in 1990, committed a royal blunder by getting a little too close to their wealthy holdings. Things went downhill for Saddam from there.
But it wasn’t always that way. Saddam was our good friend and ally. We supported his regime. It wasn?t the first time we had helped a murderer. We liked playing Dr. Frankenstein. We created a lot of monsters — the Shah of Iran, Somoza of Nicaragua, Pinochet of Chile — and then we expressed ignorance or shock when they ran amok and massacred people. We liked Saddam because he was willing to fight the Ayatollah. So we made sure that he got billions of dollars to purchase weapons. Weapons of mass destruction. That’s right, he had them. We should know — we gave them to him!
We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with Saddam in the 1980s. That’s how he got chemical and biological agents so he could use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here’s the list of some of the stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate report):
* Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
* Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
* Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart.
* Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
* Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
* Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.
And here are some of the American corporations who helped to prop Saddam up by doing business with him: AT&T, Bechtel, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical, Dupont, Kodak, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM (for a full list of companies and descriptions of how they helped Saddam, go here).
We were so cozy with dear old Saddam that we decided to feed him satellite images so he could locate where the Iranian troops were. We pretty much knew how he would use the information, and sure enough, as soon as we sent him the spy photos, he gassed those troops. And we kept quiet. Because he was our friend, and the Iranians were the "enemy." A year after he first gassed the Iranians, we reestablished full diplomatic relations with him!
Later he gassed his own people, the Kurds. You would think that would force us to disassociate ourselves from him. Congress tried to impose economic sanctions on Saddam, but the Reagan White House quickly rejected that idea — they wouldn?t let anything derail their good buddy Saddam. We had a virtual love fest with this Frankenstein whom we (in part) created.
And, just like the mythical Frankenstein, Saddam eventually spun out of control. He would no longer do what he was told by his master. Saddam had to be caught. And now that he has been brought back from the wilderness, perhaps he will have something to say about his creators. Maybe we can learn something… interesting. Maybe Don Rumsfeld could smile and shake Saddam’s hand again. Just like he did when he went to see him in 1983 (see the photo here).
Maybe we never would have been in the situation we’re in if Rumsfeld, Bush, Sr., and company hadn’t been so excited back in the 80s about their friendly monster in the desert.
Meanwhile, anybody know where the guy is who killed 3,000 people on 9/11? Our other Frankenstein?? Maybe he’s in a mouse hole.
So many of our little monsters, so little time before the next election.
Stay strong, Democratic candidates. Quit sounding like a bunch of wusses. These bastards sent us to war on a lie, the killing will not stop, the Arab world hates us with a passion, and we will pay for this out of our pockets for years to come. Nothing that happened today (or in the past 9 months) has made us ONE BIT safer in our post-9/11 world. Saddam was never a threat to our national security.
Only our desire to play Dr. Frankenstein dooms us all.
Michael MooreDecember 16, 2003 at 2:44 am #97826
Acutally Samwise I didn’t know that, I wouldn’t have celebrated that fact in my post had I known that, last thing I would want is to offend Muslins. Although, I don’t get how they see that as humuliating to the Muslim society, but Hey! apparently thats how they see it so hopefully they clear that up. Guess thats the north american in meDecember 16, 2003 at 6:04 pm #97827
First of all, remember kurticus likes to play devilâ€™s advocate, and sometimes says things simply to get them out in the open, whether he actually believes them or not.
This issue is an issue that involves the world, and I thought it odd that it hasnâ€™t been discussed around here. With that saidâ€¦
Saddam Hussein- Iâ€™m glad heâ€™s gone. He was a horrible tyrant, and a horrible human being. Good riddance. As far as other leaders/countries/events go, yes there are still many that need to be changed. One step at a time.
9/11- Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. Iâ€™m sorry that people continue to mix these two things as though they are one issue. They are not. Each is independent of the other. Secondly, I think Salami makes a good point about people showing their hatred for the U.S. but then enjoying the fringe benefits of it. This is sort of what I was getting at when I said â€œget bentâ€December 16, 2003 at 7:35 pm #97828
That whole your either with us or against us is something George Bush has frequently said talking about the war in Iraq, should have made that clear in my post. I don’t think the issue is as black & white as George tries to present it was basically my point.
I see your point about countries not supporting/taking part in the Iraq war not having a say in the rebuilding. My point is that Canada is contributing 300 Million to the rebuilding of Iraq, have supported the US on any number of occasions, including like I mentioned Afghanistan. But the impression I get from the American news & the American Ambassador to Canada is that none of that counts, we didn’t fall in line so screw you. But, like Salami, I don’t support the anti-American flag burning/posturing some Candians take part in, I am just really tired of feeling disrespected as a Country d/t our choice on participating in this war.
I just feel this current administration is trying to bully other countries to fall in line, not only related to the war but public policy as well. We have the american ambassador telling us if Canada decriminalizes marijuana the border control will have to be tighter, threatening our cross border trucking business with costly delays to try & influence our decison We have Canadians being apprehended in the US, supposedly linked to terrorists. Allegations never proven, but rather than honoring the Canadian passport & returning these people to Canada they deport them to Syria, where they were held for up to a year & subjected to all kinds of torture. We now have gay/lesbian civil marriages in Canada, recently a couple listed themselves as married, were refused entry into the US unless they listed themselves as not married, as the US does not recognize that kind of union I’ve seen auctions on ebay excluding Canadians d/t our governments choice on the war in Iraq. There was a contest for kids from the US that was open to Canadians, grade school kids, their submissions were rejected by the website d/t our governments stand on the war. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve listened to conservative tv creeps calling Canada Soviet Canuckistan, Weenies, losers, etc etc…all because we didn’t fall in line & do whatever george told us to. As a Candian I have gotten very tired & fed up with the disrespect shown by your government & some of your citizens & news agencies. Just wanting to give a Candians perspective on this issue.
While I agree the UN as it currently works is completely useless, I don’t think the US should take on the role of world police/moral authority for the world. I think there needs to be more cooperation between nations, less bullying, less posturing,…yeah, like thats ever gonna happen.
I’m not anti American, I just really don’t like or trust the current American government.
ps-don’t forget some of the 87 billion is going to line dick cheneys old company Haliburtons (?sp) pockets…how much did they overcharge US citizens for gas/foodDecember 17, 2003 at 7:09 am #97829
This is the most inspiring threads I’ve read here for ages! Lots of good contributions and thoughts.
Some of you have pointed out that the UN is kinda "useless" these days. Well, the UN are "useless" because the US and UK has thrown aside some of the key rules that they themselves have been a part of making.
The UN "law"(a law that every member country has agreed to follow) clearly states that there has to be a majority vote to accept military actions against other countries.
So when they don’t get the majority vote, they go ahead anyways. They decide that their oppinion is the right one, and that the rest of the member countries are wrong. They ignore all the rules, they put themselves above the law(a law that they’ve been a part of drafting.)
So for me it’s not a question of the UN not working as it should. It’s a question of the US and UK not abiding the rules, instead they just appoint themselves as the only ones with the right thoughts and go ahead doing their business regardless of the rest.
If anything, this has shown that the UN works, two such powerfull nations as the US and UK couldn’t force the majority of the UN to agree with them, and lord knows they tried to do just that.
This whole thing can, to some extent, be tracked back to the "strike first," right that the US awarded itself(but no other country.) This means that the US means that it has the right to attack any country that it feels threatens the US, without abiding any rules or conventions. In fact the US has thus given itself monopoly over the truth and said that their way of seeing the world is the only right way.
As for the reasons for the Iraq invasion:
Weapons of mass destruction -the UN inspectors said that they wouldn’t find any. The "proof" that Powell presented to the UN security council has later been proved to be manipulated and outdated. They still haven’t found anything, and they now try to change the focus away from the search for WMD.
The fact that Iraq has broken so many UN rules. This is true, and a good reason to lay pressure on Iraq. BUT, Israel has broken just as many -why no invasion to free the Palestine and kick israel out of the occupied territories?
What they have denied being the reason:
The oil. And they’ve had a golden oppurtunity to prove that this wasn’t about control of the oil, but instead of using that oppurtunity to prove us wrong, they deny french, canadian etc the right to compete for contracts regarding the rebuilding of Iraq. But still they go around "begging" other countries for help with troops and money to rebuild Iraq.
AND, wasn’t the idea to free the Iraqi people? Why then aren’t they allowed to decide for themselves who gets the contracts?
Another point is that the US is isolating itself more and more, disregarding the UN and moving further and further from the EU -latest shown by the steel taxes that they were forced to abandon. And my fear is that this will only continue, that the US will grow into this alienated giant that lives on an island, not caring about the rest of the worldv-just playing around as it see fit. Because every time the US governmentt decides something, it affects the rest of the world, but they just don’t seem to give a fuck about anything but themselves.December 17, 2003 at 8:11 am #97830
I think the gulf war in `91 was`nt handled right.Saddam attacked Kuwait yet the US bomb Iraq.I`m not a military expert but would`nt it been better if they went into Kuwait and made Saddam`s troops retreat back to Iraq instead of killing thousands of Iraqis that had nothing to do with Saddam`s invasion of Kuwait.This caused alot of anti american sentiment in the islamic world.
I also think Clinton did`nt work hard enough towards making a state of Palestine.Maybe he did all he could do but I think if he got more countries involved maybe it could have been a reality.If only Arafat was a woman everyone though Clinton was going to change the world,he really did`nt.
Yes,Gore is`nt that different than Bush and he probably would be doing the exact same thing that Bush has done.I don`t see much difference between the Republicans and the Democrats as i do in Canada with our two main parties:the liberals and the conservatives,two sides but the same coin.
I see America and the American gov`t as two different things.Not all protests were extremist and anti american but it gives all the protests a bad name;one protest I saw on tv was just people signing a petition for the US to pull out of Iraq,no flag burning or yelling about Bush.One protest I saw around here was a bunch of people yelling ‘no war’ while a number of homeless kids and huddled in blankets nearby.Why are`nt they yelling about that?a lack of shelters you might be able to do something about.Activists?yeah right.
Canada was involved in WWI and WWII before the US were.So if they want to accuse us of not caring about freedom they better get out their history books.Calling french fries ‘freedom fries’ is just plain silly.December 17, 2003 at 6:48 pm #97831
"Every minute, thirty children die from want of food and inexpensive vaccines. And every minute the world’s military budget absorbs $1.3 million of the public treasury. This is war.
The United States now devotes over $200 billion a year to military defence against foreign enemies. But 45 percent of Americans are afraid to go out alone at night within one mile of their homes. This is war.
The cost of a single new nuclear submarine equals the annual education budget of twenty-three developing countries with 160 million school-aged children. This is war.
In a year when U.S.farmers were paid to take nearly 100 million acres of cropland out of production, 450 million people in the world were starving. This is war.
For every 100,000 people in the world, there are 556 soldiers but only 85 doctors. This is war.
For every soldier, the average world military expenditure is $22,000. For every school-aged child, the average public education expenditure is $380. This is war. War is marketable. War pays, literally. War contributes to growth and development. The economic system says so."
Marilyn Waring: Copunting For Nothing:What Men Value and What Women Are Worth. University of Toronto Press. Second Edition.
My friends, this book was written over twenty years ago. What are we worth now?
:slap: :slap:December 18, 2003 at 7:38 am #97832
This is something I really don’t get: a 2 party system? 2?!!!! So there’s only two opinions in the US? Come on, that can’t be true. How can you have serious politics if you’re forced to choose between 2 parties. It’s time to change politics in the United States. Ever since the television debate Kennedy vs. Nixon, politics in the US have been about personality.
That can’t be right.
Did you know that in the US there is a law that says it’s legal for companies to donate money to the political parties? Can’t you see what that means? Your country is being governed by the same people who pay your salary. Your government should be protecting you!
And to make it worse, these companies include the ones making the big bombs you’ve been throwing at Iraqi’s.
In the year 2000, the average manager was making 531 times as much as the average working man. (numbers are from Fortune Magazine 25th of June 2001). That’s what politics should be about.
Ok, back to Iraq, or the UN. Why did Powell use the weapons of mass destruction argument to convince the Security Council? Every sane person could see that was never going to be a problem. Never. So why did he use it? I don’t mean this as criticism, I really don’t have a clue why.. I mean, if you want to get rid of a Dictator, just say so and then we can have a normal discussion about it.
The UN is not perfect, we all know. But for now, it’s the best we’ve got. If we want to create a safe world, the UN is the only option. If you would see the world as one big state, democracy in this big state seems reasonable. The best solution even. There shouldn’t be just one country telling us all what to do. There should be talking, arguments, compromise.Quote:I’m sorry that many Muslims feel that this is an attack on Islam, when it is not.
I don’t necessarily think they see it as a war against Islam, but the US army are in the heart of their part of the world. How would you feel if Europeans take over Illinois? Outraged, offended?Quote:If the nations of the world had enforced the rules of the Versailles Treaty, instead of letting Germany build up a huge armament of weapons and troops, WWII may have never happened.
Please, please, stop comparing this war to WWII. Germany at the time was the 2nd biggest economy in the world and the largest country of Europe. France and the UK were reluctant to go to war, because of WWI. The lessons they learned from WWI is that war sucks. It’s horrible, it’s death and destruction. It kills and destroys people’s lifes. This is why I am so opposed to war of any kind, this is why Wilson and the presidents after him wanted to create a world order with an organization like the UN. And this is the exact world order the Bush administration is ruining.
I sometimes feel the only way to get world peace is an attack by Aliens. And have Will Smith save us all….
OlafDecember 18, 2003 at 4:15 pm #97833
Ok real quick as I don’t have a lot of time to type. Thankyou all for the input. I’m still very mixed about this whole thing and as we are seeing, this isn’t a simple "black and white" subject. Your views are appreciated.
AGAP- After reading your post, it’s very understandable as to why many countires weren’t for supporting the U.S. in it’s decision of going to war. Being on this side of the border, we don’t get always get the story of how U.S. policy is affecting other nations. It helps one to realize why nations arent’ supporting the U.S. stance, because in many ways, they don’t agree with the U.S. ‘s stance on many other issues. I will go into this further, later.
Robert-As far as U.S. actions and decision making affecting other nations…Being the powerhouse that the U.S. is, our actions create many ripples through the rest of the world. I believe we discussed this theme to some extent on Soulseek before, so I’m not going to go into this discussion at this time.
I do disagree with you about the U.N. working. My point is that the UN ISN’T working as it is supposed to. All these nations have gotten together to establish certain ethics, standards, and liberties that the poeple of the world should enjoy. The problem being that, many of the nations affiliated with the UN don’t want to take the necessary course of action to ensure that these ideals are being met. Thus, leaving the nations with power to do something about it, left holding the bag (The U.S. and the U.K.) So what happens when the UN isn’t doing the job it’s supposed to be doing? Someone needs to step up. This is what I meant by the UN being a failure, becuase it doens’t take the prescribed course of action to remedy the situations it was established to prevent. I also understand the "screw you all, we’re going to do it anyways" point of view you all are bringing up.
Salami-As far as where was the U.S. during this issue and that issue? Time and time again, the U.S. has gotten involved when there was unrest in other parts of the world. Where was the rest of the world when all these various issues were occuring? Why does the U.S. have to be the one to first get involved every time there is a problem in other parts of the world?
The bombing of Iraq during the Persian Gulf was primarily directed at military targets in Iraq, designed to seperate the head command from its forces. Unortunately, Iraqi lives were lost to this campaign. The whole purpose of Desert Storm was to repel Iraq from Kuwait. Once this objective was met, the war ended. Thus, the alliance of nations involved did not follow Saddam’s army into Iraq, and finish it off, leaving Saddam in power. They actually did the exact action you are prescribing.
Samwise- I’m not trying to compare this issue to WWII to any extnet. I’m just trying to draw a few parallels to better understand certain points that are being addressed. What I’m saying is, that if problems are dealt with before they get out of control, they don’t tend to get out of control. I realize France and Britain were in no way eager to get involved in a costly war, but if Germany had been forced to stop disarming before it amassed a huge stockade of weapons, then the German war machine may not have led the world into the second world war. What good is establishing policies and guidelines if they aren’t going to be enorced. The same thing is happening here and around the world (hence my statement once again, the UN is not working as it was designed to do)
If the state of Illinios, was executing it’s citizens on a regular basis, and working towards weapons of war, and disregarding the rules that had been etablished for it to follow, and catering solely to it’s own agenda of the select few in power, then I would say screw Illinois. This is a good point however, and I understand where you’re coming from on having outsiders sitting in your front yard. However, the U.S. has every intention of freeing Iraq, and returning it to the rule of it’s own people, rather than the dictator that had it for so long. I hope many a muslim can realize this.
Freakazoid- A whole line of thinking that I can’t even begin to get involved in right now. The issues you bring up deserve their own conversation wholely seperate from this one but I would like to touch on them to some extent soon.
I also agree with everyone on the fact of going to war under so many false notions was wrong. The case should have been pleaded honestly and openly as to "why?". Going into Iraq under false pretenses was bullshit!
I often feel that the U.S. is the modern day Roman empire, walking across the world and forcing its policies on everyone else. This is an issue that I often come to time and again in my thoughts. Maybe more later.
I hope I haven’t treaded on any one, it wasn’t my attention. I just want as many views as possible so that I can come to my own conclusions on this matter.December 18, 2003 at 5:01 pm #97834
The US is`nt always the first country involved.I mentioned East Timor in 1975 earlier;word had it that Ford and Kissinger met with the Indonesians the day before their attack and said they would turn a blind eye to it.The Indonesians attacked and killed a half a million people,Austrailia got involved first,since this was after Vietnam the US was`nt in a position to get involved but to promise another country that was about to commit genocide that they would`nt get involved is inexcusable.
I have a graphic novel(basically a high end comic book)called Brought To Light that exposes a number of US cover ups from Kennedy to the Reagen era,it`s all fact and it`s shocking.Of course the US gov`t is the only gov`t covering up,many countries have been involved in some shocking things like Canada put money into Burma;money that was spent on torture of their people.
I agree with Samwise`s alien attack idea :aliensmile: it reminds me of a Mekons lyric:"if Mars attacks we`ll be allies"
Politics is a heavy subject,over on rateyourmusic.com the pro Bush/anti Bush thing gets into a hatefest once people get going.It`s like what Lucy from the Peanuts comic once said,never get in a debate discussing politics,religion,and the great pumpkin
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)