DIY_Peter said:
Well, yes, he did, of the Electoral Votes, the ones needed to win.
Regardless, to compare the election process of the US to the election process in Iraq is most illogical. I was expecting some reasoned debate on my question, not irrelevent and snide comments.
DIY_Peter said:
Geez.
Well, since you had a smiley, I will reply that the only place in Florida that had problems were with the Gore supporters. But I won't comment upon their intelligence to follow simply voting instructions if you can stick to topic and reply with some intelligent debate.
you call it so but that´s not more worth than saddam calling iraq a republic, the R in USSR, the D in NSDAP.....
Jeff R said:
I dont know any Gore voters, so I can't comment on that. I do know that Bush did not get the majority of the people behind him. Regardless what was the outcome of the elections.
(here thoise two things are the same, but in the US apparently not)
It was a miracle that man even got into politics in the first place.
Now he is *****ing up the world. But I'm sure the guy is happy. 9/11 is the best thing that could have happend to him.
What most americans dont get is that they are making themself very unpopular in the rest of the world. They just can't admit they are wrong. They keep hanging on to that "we are the best" feeling.
The US used to be a great nation, but that's over 50 years ago. They always need someone to blame. the japs, the commies, no the arrabs... There's always someone to fight. It gives the people a good feeling. "Hey, we dont have social security, but we damn well kicked those guys *****!"
DIY_Peter said:
Well, no one is perfect.
I do agree that if we didn't spend so much defending the rest of the world we could have more to spend on social issues and getting a space shuttle replacement that can take us back to the moon and to Mars.
As for the rest of what you say - you are way too simplistic.
You know what Saddam and Bush have in common? They both have god on their sides. It"s always dangerous when politicians mixes religion with politics. But it's much more easier to beleive in The Bad and the Evil than to understand the cause of it.
I really think that the Bush era is the beginning of the fall of the American Empire.
I really think that the Bush era is the beginning of the fall of the American Empire.
Jeff R said:
maybe that's your problem. you always think you have to defend everyone. I'm not afraid of Iraq. And I don't see why you should be.
Sometimes things just are simple. I like to get to the basics of stuf. You don't need all the information to see that what Bush is doing is wrong. In fact any sane person would think so
DIY_Peter said:
I beg to differ on what a "sane" person would think. Again, can we debate rather than simply say someone who disagrees with your position is either immoral or insane?!
Ok, here are the basics of it then:
For the better part of twelve years, Iraq has been in violation of the terms of their surrender that ended the Gulf War.
Iraq has violated various U.N. resolutions and been repeatedly condemned by the U.N. Have a look for yourself, straight from the U.N.'s site.
On 9/11, the United States received a wake-up call, and logically, now considers it very important to enforce agreements that have been being violated for more than a decade, particularly when those agreements were reached with someone who has the capability and has shown the willingness, to spread death and destruction.
Is that basic enough for you?
Good to see that your opinions on world issues are well informed.
traderbam said:
I will respond to your post in the hopes thar it makes you feel better. I find it amusing you bring up the palistinian issue here. The arabs didn't seem to have a care about the US while arafat was waging a suicide bomber campaign against Israel. For 18 months not a peep was heard about the US coming in and doing something as long as Israelis were dying. Then as soon as Israel lashes out and takes Jenin, as well as others, all of a sudden every Arabic country calls for the US to put a stop to it. Now everyone is telling us to leave Iraq alone.
I agree, everyone that wants the US to mind it's own business should stop calling on the US to help solve their problems. So, what is it that you really want? Make up your mind. Do you realize just how contradictory your post is.
Oh bad bad US, you Americans should force your government to back out of Iraq but make them butt in to save Palistine. Is this what your saying?
😕
Unilateral behavior in retrospect....
I do realize that most of us are simply yearning for peace in our time. And I'll confess to my own ambivalence, and, at times, agreeing with whoever posted last (actually, not a result of the compelling, well argued points, but rather a reflection on my own deeply flawed character).
As it appears that the U.S. might engage in de-facto unilateral behavior, I'd appreciate some comments on another bit of unilateral behavior with regards to Iraq.
In 1983 Israeli jets destroyed the French supplied Osarik nuclear plant. This was soundly condemned by everyone. I don't know of any country that supported Israel in this endeavor, even though it is widely accepted that this plants intent was to provide fissionable material for nuclear weapons.
Is there anyone on these boards who think Israel's actions at Osarik was wrong?
Is there any country in Middle East (other than Iraq) that isn't pleased with that specific action take by Israel in 1983?
I do realize that most of us are simply yearning for peace in our time. And I'll confess to my own ambivalence, and, at times, agreeing with whoever posted last (actually, not a result of the compelling, well argued points, but rather a reflection on my own deeply flawed character).
As it appears that the U.S. might engage in de-facto unilateral behavior, I'd appreciate some comments on another bit of unilateral behavior with regards to Iraq.
In 1983 Israeli jets destroyed the French supplied Osarik nuclear plant. This was soundly condemned by everyone. I don't know of any country that supported Israel in this endeavor, even though it is widely accepted that this plants intent was to provide fissionable material for nuclear weapons.
Is there anyone on these boards who think Israel's actions at Osarik was wrong?
Is there any country in Middle East (other than Iraq) that isn't pleased with that specific action take by Israel in 1983?
DIY_Peter said:
Peter,
There was a time when millions of Americans thought that all we had to do was leave things alone, just don't bother them, and everything will get better on its own.
As you have all seen, this simply isn't reality, is it? We thought that leaving Hitler alone would be an acceptable course of action in the 1930s, and you can read up on what happened after that.
I remember as a child how everyone was scared of the tallest kid, how they spoke of him behind his back. It was assumed that messing with him would cause a major fight. Until the day when one of the schoolyard bullies began to push the smaller kids around. Then, he reached out, snagged the offender up by the collar, and held him at bay until the futility of his ways became apparent. He took a few hits in the process, but standing up for something wrong was more important.
Why don't we quit throwing venom around and look at the seriousness of the stuation.
If Hitler had made just a few decisions differently, the atom would have been his. If I recall correctly, Adolph was a wee bit distracted. Saddam has the advantage of hindsight, folks. It's time to stop him, and words have failed miserably. The requisite materials are available off-the-shelf today, you see. Has anyone looked at where the billions have been going these last 12 years? Saddam isn't hurting for money- all he has had to do was put his people on a diet.
Bob
IRAQ announces intent to gas Kurds again:
from the UK Telegraph, Feb 28th
We will gas you when US bombs fall, Kurds told
(Filed: 28/02/2003)
<b>If war comes to Iraq, the Kurds of Kifri will be right in the line of fire. Iraqi officials have threatened that the moment the first American bomb lands, they will reply with a chemical assault on the town.</b>
But in the entire place, there is not a single gas mask to be had, and no detection posts, decontamination centres or safe houses.
In lieu of proper protection, the residents of Kifri have been doing what they can to prepare. The women have baked high-energy biscuits that will keep fresh for weeks. The men scour the town's bazaar for extra blankets and plastic sheeting.
At night families listen intently to the news on ageing radio sets.
"It's going to be hard on the children," said Ali Muhammad Nasir, 30, who lives with his wife, Runak, and two little ones. "But we know only too well what Saddam's capable of."
Kifri is barely two hours' drive from Baghdad and at the southern tip of Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq. For years, the town has lived under the shadow of Saddam Hussein's forces. From its southern edge, a big Iraqi military base dominates the skyline. On the left, Baghdad's tanks are dug in and, to the right, is a missile silo.
Shells crash into the surrounding fields regularly and at night machineguns open fire without warning.
The town's misery has been dragged out for more than a decade. In 1991, its residents were forced to flee for the mountains when Iraqi troops rolled into town. Five years later, the Iraqis returned and they fled again. Mr and Mrs Nasir slept rough for 10 days.
In one vicious attack since then, the Iraqis used phosphor bombs that left victims horribly burnt.
"What can we do?" asked Mr Nasir, who earns a living as a petrol trader. "I would gladly give a month's salary for a gas mask, but there are none. The mountains are our only chance."
As he spoke, his three-year-old daughter Randa sat quietly at his feet. His wife said: "For her, it will be the first time. She is terrified."
In Kifri, the signs of war are everywhere. At the town's mosque, Bakar Abas was wearing cheap sunglasses to hide his ravaged eyes. He was blinded by an Iraqi rocket in 1993 when he was aged 11.
"Now I spend my days praying and studying the Koran," he said. In the main cemetery, the corpses of Kurdish peshmerga guerrilla fighters lie in neat rows. As we walked between the headstones, a tank shell landed just outside the town. At the last Kurdish checkpoint the officers looked nervous.
"The Iraqis have said they will overrun us when the fighting starts," said one. "We are brave, but we can't do much against tanks and missiles."
In the bazaar, demand for plastic sheeting, torches, ropes and blankets has soared. Asie Hamid Ali, 32, who runs a stall, said: "Everybody except the peshmerga is preparing to flee for the hills."
For some, escape is not even an option. All they can do is stay in their houses and hope for the best.
Wafa Kamal, 22, a housewife, wearing a bright pink dress, said: "In my house there are six children and four adults. But my uncle is sick with cancer and cannot walk. So we'll have to stay."
"I've bought some bread and sugar. What else can I do? Most of all, it's the gas that scares me. But nobody's told us what to do if it comes. All we can do is pray."
27 February 2003: Turks may send 80,000 troops to northern Iraq
26 February 2003: Iraqi troops will face 500 Kurdish women warriors
24 February 2003: Kurds thrive on their 'soapbox democracy'
from the UK Telegraph, Feb 28th
We will gas you when US bombs fall, Kurds told
(Filed: 28/02/2003)
<b>If war comes to Iraq, the Kurds of Kifri will be right in the line of fire. Iraqi officials have threatened that the moment the first American bomb lands, they will reply with a chemical assault on the town.</b>
But in the entire place, there is not a single gas mask to be had, and no detection posts, decontamination centres or safe houses.
In lieu of proper protection, the residents of Kifri have been doing what they can to prepare. The women have baked high-energy biscuits that will keep fresh for weeks. The men scour the town's bazaar for extra blankets and plastic sheeting.
At night families listen intently to the news on ageing radio sets.
"It's going to be hard on the children," said Ali Muhammad Nasir, 30, who lives with his wife, Runak, and two little ones. "But we know only too well what Saddam's capable of."
Kifri is barely two hours' drive from Baghdad and at the southern tip of Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq. For years, the town has lived under the shadow of Saddam Hussein's forces. From its southern edge, a big Iraqi military base dominates the skyline. On the left, Baghdad's tanks are dug in and, to the right, is a missile silo.
Shells crash into the surrounding fields regularly and at night machineguns open fire without warning.
The town's misery has been dragged out for more than a decade. In 1991, its residents were forced to flee for the mountains when Iraqi troops rolled into town. Five years later, the Iraqis returned and they fled again. Mr and Mrs Nasir slept rough for 10 days.
In one vicious attack since then, the Iraqis used phosphor bombs that left victims horribly burnt.
"What can we do?" asked Mr Nasir, who earns a living as a petrol trader. "I would gladly give a month's salary for a gas mask, but there are none. The mountains are our only chance."
As he spoke, his three-year-old daughter Randa sat quietly at his feet. His wife said: "For her, it will be the first time. She is terrified."
In Kifri, the signs of war are everywhere. At the town's mosque, Bakar Abas was wearing cheap sunglasses to hide his ravaged eyes. He was blinded by an Iraqi rocket in 1993 when he was aged 11.
"Now I spend my days praying and studying the Koran," he said. In the main cemetery, the corpses of Kurdish peshmerga guerrilla fighters lie in neat rows. As we walked between the headstones, a tank shell landed just outside the town. At the last Kurdish checkpoint the officers looked nervous.
"The Iraqis have said they will overrun us when the fighting starts," said one. "We are brave, but we can't do much against tanks and missiles."
In the bazaar, demand for plastic sheeting, torches, ropes and blankets has soared. Asie Hamid Ali, 32, who runs a stall, said: "Everybody except the peshmerga is preparing to flee for the hills."
For some, escape is not even an option. All they can do is stay in their houses and hope for the best.
Wafa Kamal, 22, a housewife, wearing a bright pink dress, said: "In my house there are six children and four adults. But my uncle is sick with cancer and cannot walk. So we'll have to stay."
"I've bought some bread and sugar. What else can I do? Most of all, it's the gas that scares me. But nobody's told us what to do if it comes. All we can do is pray."
27 February 2003: Turks may send 80,000 troops to northern Iraq
26 February 2003: Iraqi troops will face 500 Kurdish women warriors
24 February 2003: Kurds thrive on their 'soapbox democracy'
On the first few posts in this thread it was posted some anti-jewish opinion ( only well know craps ).
I think that in this forum we have some arabs how wanna give us peace leason. Why did I say that ? Becouse they tell only one thing : " We hate USA ! " in a covered forms .
Some smart people try to argue with decent arguments but the answeres are suburban or they post some " joke " .
Why ? Becouse they are looser !
America is a great country and the american people is the most helpful on the all world .
If the arabs have a problem with that , why do not ask Mahomed or Allah to change that ?
Why arabs do not undersandt that if they wanna fight with the biggest power they will loose ?
Becouse they are stupid and force USA to go to war !
Why they are so stupid ?
Becouse they do not have : education , honour or brain .
Arabs have a problem with Israel and atack all coutry how help Israel to survive . That is the action of a brainless people.
I think that in this forum we have some arabs how wanna give us peace leason. Why did I say that ? Becouse they tell only one thing : " We hate USA ! " in a covered forms .
Some smart people try to argue with decent arguments but the answeres are suburban or they post some " joke " .
Why ? Becouse they are looser !
America is a great country and the american people is the most helpful on the all world .
If the arabs have a problem with that , why do not ask Mahomed or Allah to change that ?
Why arabs do not undersandt that if they wanna fight with the biggest power they will loose ?
Becouse they are stupid and force USA to go to war !
Why they are so stupid ?
Becouse they do not have : education , honour or brain .
Arabs have a problem with Israel and atack all coutry how help Israel to survive . That is the action of a brainless people.
PassFan said:
They should not act unilaterally in Iraq and no, they should butt out of the Middle East completely. The only reason that the Middle East is in such turmoil, and it will continue to be so, is because of the American foreign policy in that region. When Bush declares Sharon as a man of peace you know something is terribly wrong!
So please, make them butt out to save Palestine.
pf
Believe nothing you read and only half of what you see.
Halojoy asked "what can we do to support peace in our neighborhood?" This has grown into barbs traded back and
forth between some of us in the USA and many of you
outside. We shoudn't go there (hell I did, I like many, fell
susceptible to emotion). Granted, SH is evil, I too think he
wants to develop nuclear weapons. I also feel GWB seems
hell bent on war (I voted for him, too). I am troubled over this
feeling, and I can understand where much of the bashing
we Americans have been taking is coming from. Let the U.N.
continue it's course of action. We may have to use force, but
the U.N. must make this decision. So we get back to Halojoy's question, what can we do? Write your Congressmen, Senators,
Prime Minsters, what have you. Make your voice heard in a
peaceful protest. Quit pointing fingers and calling names (
of which I am also guilty). If there's onr thing my father taught me
about politics, is use the pen along with the vote. It does work.
forth between some of us in the USA and many of you
outside. We shoudn't go there (hell I did, I like many, fell
susceptible to emotion). Granted, SH is evil, I too think he
wants to develop nuclear weapons. I also feel GWB seems
hell bent on war (I voted for him, too). I am troubled over this
feeling, and I can understand where much of the bashing
we Americans have been taking is coming from. Let the U.N.
continue it's course of action. We may have to use force, but
the U.N. must make this decision. So we get back to Halojoy's question, what can we do? Write your Congressmen, Senators,
Prime Minsters, what have you. Make your voice heard in a
peaceful protest. Quit pointing fingers and calling names (
of which I am also guilty). If there's onr thing my father taught me
about politics, is use the pen along with the vote. It does work.
traderbam said:
And therein lies the problem. The citizens of the US of A as a rule, don't vote. The last congressional elections had a turnout of approx. 35%. In the presidential elections the turnouts are usually not much more than 50%. Don't expect these people to communicate their objections when they couldn't even be bothered to vote.
It is said that in a democracy the people get the governments they deserve. There you have it. The only problem of course is that their indifference is being foisted on the rest of the world.
pf
Re: Unilateral behavior in retrospect....
Congratulations - someone is rising above the fray to ask some excellent questions. I hope we can get into some reasoned, non-name calling debate on this.
I my own opinion, had Israel not did what it did, the world would be a far worse place today. Clearly, SH would now have nuclear weapons and, like North Korea, would be pretty much untouchable now. I presume he would be in control of Kuwait and he would be greatly complicating the Israel-Palestine situation. Though I don't think he would lauch a nuclear attack against Israel directly (they would hit him back), I am not at all uncertain that he would give low-yield weapons to various terrorist organizations to use against them.
I presume some of you others will say what Israel did was wrong, period, and I am sure you can make a strong case that things would be better had they not attacked. I am looking forward to such reasoned arguements, as I see parallels in history when nations did or did not take premptive action against others with despotic rulers while they still had the chance.
pmkap said:
Congratulations - someone is rising above the fray to ask some excellent questions. I hope we can get into some reasoned, non-name calling debate on this.
I my own opinion, had Israel not did what it did, the world would be a far worse place today. Clearly, SH would now have nuclear weapons and, like North Korea, would be pretty much untouchable now. I presume he would be in control of Kuwait and he would be greatly complicating the Israel-Palestine situation. Though I don't think he would lauch a nuclear attack against Israel directly (they would hit him back), I am not at all uncertain that he would give low-yield weapons to various terrorist organizations to use against them.
I presume some of you others will say what Israel did was wrong, period, and I am sure you can make a strong case that things would be better had they not attacked. I am looking forward to such reasoned arguements, as I see parallels in history when nations did or did not take premptive action against others with despotic rulers while they still had the chance.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.