Ding Dong! The Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed.Wake up, the Wicked Witch is dead. He's gone where the goblins go,
Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out. Ding Dong' the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low.Let them know
The Wicked Witch is dead!
It's pretty interesting that:
a) Saddam found, but WMDs which are orders of magnitude larger and harder to hide, not found.
b) Unlike bin Laden, Saddam is not responsible for 9/11, nor posed real threats to US national security, so the Iraq operation has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism(TM).
It seems his capture is but a distraction from the failure in the real issues.
Not to mention Cheney's Halliburton oil deal making with Saddam while he was gassing the populace. But the US, always pragmatic, turned a blind eye. Look at all the other oppressive regimes throughout recent history (not to mention China), yet the US only got involved when it's economic interests favored it. Not that looking after number one is wrong, but at least don't lie about why you are doing it, for oil and cheap distraction from a War on Terror that's about as successfull as the War on Drugs.
a) Saddam found, but WMDs which are orders of magnitude larger and harder to hide, not found.
b) Unlike bin Laden, Saddam is not responsible for 9/11, nor posed real threats to US national security, so the Iraq operation has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism(TM).
It seems his capture is but a distraction from the failure in the real issues.
Not to mention Cheney's Halliburton oil deal making with Saddam while he was gassing the populace. But the US, always pragmatic, turned a blind eye. Look at all the other oppressive regimes throughout recent history (not to mention China), yet the US only got involved when it's economic interests favored it. Not that looking after number one is wrong, but at least don't lie about why you are doing it, for oil and cheap distraction from a War on Terror that's about as successfull as the War on Drugs.
And people wonder why we don't want to give our hard earned money for the rebuilding of Iraq to these losers who spout out this kind of dribble. Why can't you just acknowledge that it's a good thing for the Iraqi people and the world that Saddam was captured.
I doubt you can say that the war on terror is as unsuccessful as the war on drugs. Terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 = 0; drug deals = countless.
Hey, I've got an idea. Let's just pull a Canada and make terrorism legal. That will solve the problem.
Today is a new day for the Iraqi people, a day they can celebrate, and hopefully a day where the rest of the world can just put behind them all of the disagreements of the past and concentrate on what is going to make Iraq a better place for the Iraqis.
I doubt you can say that the war on terror is as unsuccessful as the war on drugs. Terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 = 0; drug deals = countless.
Hey, I've got an idea. Let's just pull a Canada and make terrorism legal. That will solve the problem.
Today is a new day for the Iraqi people, a day they can celebrate, and hopefully a day where the rest of the world can just put behind them all of the disagreements of the past and concentrate on what is going to make Iraq a better place for the Iraqis.
Well I don't think Prune speaks for the government of Canada Izrun. Since Canada has pledged a couple hundred million bucks for the rebuilding of Iraq its not just your hard earned dollars but ours as well...and were not crazy about sole sourced contracts to Halliburton.
Don't forget Canada was all for joining a coalition (a UN coalition) and even had a proposal that required just 25 more days of inspections with conditions...and we would of been there with you. The US rejected the proposal because of the “immediate” danger of the weapons of mass destruction.
I think your confused...were not trying to make terrorism legal, just pot.
Canada is far more supportive than you probably know. We do have the largest contingent of soldiers in Afghanistan (we’d have a few more if you guys would stop dropping bombs on them).
I think everyone is happy that they caught the bastard. I just hope that in this new war that the US doesn't support another ***** somewhere else that is friendly (for now) to their cause. How much of your hard earned tax dollars went to support Saddam in the 80's.
I think everyone hopes the best for the Iraqi’s...they have suffered enough.
Don't forget Canada was all for joining a coalition (a UN coalition) and even had a proposal that required just 25 more days of inspections with conditions...and we would of been there with you. The US rejected the proposal because of the “immediate” danger of the weapons of mass destruction.
I think your confused...were not trying to make terrorism legal, just pot.
Canada is far more supportive than you probably know. We do have the largest contingent of soldiers in Afghanistan (we’d have a few more if you guys would stop dropping bombs on them).
I think everyone is happy that they caught the bastard. I just hope that in this new war that the US doesn't support another ***** somewhere else that is friendly (for now) to their cause. How much of your hard earned tax dollars went to support Saddam in the 80's.
I think everyone hopes the best for the Iraqi’s...they have suffered enough.
Some, but not much. Saddam's main financial and arms backers have been (surprise, surprise) France, Germany, and Russia. The US was an extremely minor player in comparison. The main worry of the principled leaders of the Axis of Weasels is what happens to the debt incurred by Saddam, and how they can manage the continuation of that sort of profitable relationship with whatever new government develops there.
"Snot running down his nose, greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes..."
jonk said:
I was actually pretty much kidding in my post. That was more directed at the France and Germany (It's against international law? Silly Chancelor) I know Canada has pledged to donate a few hundred million towards the reconstruction effort, and Bush has said that Canada won't be left out. I can't feel too sympathetic, though. When we really were looking for some global support, Canada pretty much gave us the finger. This 16 billion or so is not all of the reconstruction money, only the portion directly from us in phase 1. Canadian companies can still serve as subcontactors (which is where most of the money goes anyway). I still think it should go to the countries that were with us.
I actually agree with Canada about the drug thing. I'm actually more of a Libertarian who believes in legalization of drugs (and no, I'm not a druggy. Never touched the stuff). It's more about the constitution and economics.
Oh, and as far as Haliburton goes. Every 10 years the US Military bids on a supplier to perform action in wartime. In the 80s it was Haliburton. In the 90s it was not (though Clinton direct sourced them in Yugoslavia, of course, he was a democrat so immune to those kind of attacks). Then, in 2000, Haliburton won the contract again. Thus, when the military needed quick action and didn't have time to bid (we thought the oil fires, which Haliburton put out last time, would be much much worse), they went with their designated contract i.e. Haliburton. There's really not some big conspiracy. There are only a few companies in the world capable of doing what Haliburton can.
Saladin.
Power challenging, tribal dictatorships, money favoring, and absolute dictatorships are nothing new in that part of the world. They date back to the days when your ancestors were grumbling about those damn Italians with their fancy-shmancy chariots.
A very concise history of the regime (up to 1985) can be found in Pryce-Jones's "The Closed Circle."
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.