Going to War

[S. Fisher]

That has to be one of the dumbest sites I have seen yet.

[daeceg]

Originally posted by Inquartata

Aside from affirmation by a defecting son-in-law of Saddam, later executed, no PROVEN link...that we have been told about.

That defecting son-in-law was the head of Hussein's WMD program. He claimed that all biological and chemical weapons in Iraq had been destroyed at the end of the Gulf War. If you're willing to believe him on Al-Qaeda (which I find preposterous...more on that in a second), why don't you believe him on that?

Why is an Iraq/Al-Qaeda link unlikely at best?
bin Laden is a religious fanatic. His entire beef with the United States is that Osama wanted to use his mujahedeen fighters to throw Hussein out of Kuwait. He views Hussein as godless and secular, and is personally offended that Hussein claims to be a good Muslim. He was upset that Saudi Arabia refused his request and asked the Americans in instead. (That's when he turned against the Saudi family and got his butt exiled)

It's not just a case of Stalin and Hitler. It's more like Hitler working with a Jew... Even if Hussein were interested in an alliance, bin Laden would refuse.

Come to think of it: bin Laden would love to see Hussein dead. Aren't we simply doing that madman's work for him????

[daeceg]

Why does Bush keep changing his rationale behind the war?

Why did Rumsfeld come out yesterday and say the United States has no responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Iraq?

Why is Halliburton (the company Dick Cheney used to be CEO of) the first American company to receive a government contract in Iraq (to put out the oil well fires)?

Why is it Iraqi militia and irregulars are fighting against the US when the president and Rumsfeld both assured us they would welcome us as liberators?

Why is it that Bush has said we have no desire to conquer Iraq, and now he is refusing to allow the UN to administer post-war Iraq?

Why is it Bush is trying to cram western democracy down their throat? Do the Iraqi people want democracy??

Why is it Bush is going to war to enforce UN resolutions against Iraq, but he smiles and nods when confronted with Israel's weapons of mass destruction and it's ignoring of UN resolutions?

Why is it Bush claims the world wants us to remove Hussein, when the US and Kuwait are the only nations where a majority of the population are in favor of military action without UN backing?

Why is it Bush assumes that removing Hussein will spread democracy throughout the Middle East, and that the governments which are elected will be pro-US? (read Dr. Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" for a very informative read on the difference between being democratic and being pro-western)

Why is it a violation of the Geneva Conventions to show American POWs on TV, but not when American TV shows Iraqi POWS?

Why hasn't the media been asking more of these questions?

Why is it "embedded" media sounds so much like "in bed with"?

[daeceg]

Originally posted by daeceg
Why does Bush keep changing his rationale behind the war?

Why did Rumsfeld come out yesterday and say the United States has no responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Iraq?

Why is Halliburton (the company Dick Cheney used to be CEO of) the first American company to receive a government contract in Iraq (to put out the oil well fires)?

Why is it Iraqi militia and irregulars are fighting against the US when the president and Rumsfeld both assured us they would welcome us as liberators?

Why is it that Bush has said we have no desire to conquer Iraq, and now he is refusing to allow the UN to administer post-war Iraq?

Why is it Bush is trying to cram western democracy down their throat? Do the Iraqi people want democracy??

Why is it Bush is going to war to enforce UN resolutions against Iraq, but he smiles and nods when confronted with Israel's weapons of mass destruction and it's ignoring of UN resolutions?

Why is it Bush claims the world wants us to remove Hussein, when the US and Kuwait are the only nations where a majority of the population are in favor of military action without UN backing?

Why is it Bush assumes that removing Hussein will spread democracy throughout the Middle East, and that the governments which are elected will be pro-US? (read Dr. Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" for a very informative read on the difference between being democratic and being pro-western)

Why is it a violation of the Geneva Conventions to show American POWs on TV, but not when American TV shows Iraqi POWS?

Why hasn't the media been asking more of these questions?

[pkt]

I posted some of the 'answers' to your questions in the thread called 'Warmonger' in the 'Watercooler' section of this forum.

PK

[135711]

[quote]Originally posted by daeceg
[b]Why does Bush keep changing his rationale behind the war?
PROBABLY BECAUSE THERE ARE SEVERAL JUSTIFIABLE STANCES

Why did Rumsfeld come out yesterday and say the United States has no responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Iraq?
HAS TO RESPONSIBLITY --DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE ENGAGED IN A HOSTILE CONFLICT, THEY CAN'T BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?

Why is Halliburton (the company Dick Cheney used to be CEO of) the first American company to receive a government contract in Iraq (to put out the oil well fires)?
AT THIS POINT, IS THIS TERRIBLY IMPORTANT? I WOULD GUESS THOUGH, THAT SINCE WE'RE THERE, AND OTHER ALLIES ARE NOT, SAVE FOR GREAT BRITIAN, WE'RE THE ONE!

Why is it Iraqi militia and irregulars are fighting against the US when the president and Rumsfeld both assured us they would welcome us as liberators?
WELL, I THINK IT'S BECAUSE SOME PORTIONS OF THEIR NATION [LIKE US], SUPPORT THE ACTION, AND SOME PORTIONS [LIKE US] DON'T SUPPORT THE ACTION; AND ALSO TOO, THEY COULD BE FAKING IT.

Why is it that Bush has said we have no desire to conquer Iraq, and now he is refusing to allow the UN to administer post-war Iraq?
IT'S NOT A CONQUER THING, IT'S ABOUT TRYING TO PUT THINGS TOGETHER AFTER A CONFLICT, WHEN OUR ALLIES ARE NOT WITH US ON THIS, SAVE ENGLAND.

Why is it Bush is trying to cram western democracy down their throat? Do the Iraqi people want democracy??
THIS IS THE CRUICIAL POINT, THE BIG ONE, THE QUESTION OF THE CENTURY. IT'S NOT JUST BUSH, IT WAS LITERALLY EVERY ADMINISTRATION, TRYING TO GET OTHER GOVERNMENTS TO TRY DEMOCRACY, THE REASON BEING, THAT MILITARY LEADERS ACTING AS HEADS OF STATES TEND TO CREATE WAR SCENERIOS MORESO THAN OTHER GOVERNMENTS, AND THEY ALSO TEND TO EMPTY THE TILLS QUICK.

Why is it Bush is going to war to enforce UN resolutions against Iraq, but he smiles and nods when confronted with Israel's weapons of mass destruction and it's ignoring of UN resolutions?
WELL, IT MAY BE THAT AMERICA HAS PLEDGED TO SAFEGUARD ISRAEL.

Why is it Bush claims the world wants us to remove Hussein, when the US and Kuwait are the only nations where a majority of the population are in favor of military action without UN backing?
PERHAPS HE HAS BETTER INFORMATION THAN THE REST OF US.

Why is it Bush assumes that removing Hussein will spread democracy throughout the Middle East, and that the governments which are elected will be pro-US? (read Dr. Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" for a very informative read on the difference between being democratic and being pro-western)
PERHAPS HE HAS A SCENERIO IN MIND, WITH THE RIGHT LEADERSHIP IN PLACE, ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN. ACCORDING TO MY FRIENDS WHO WENT TO WAR WITH UN TROOPS LEBANON USED TO BE BEAUTIFUL, OTHER PLACES WERE BEAUTIFUL CITIES, WITH THRIVING POPULATIONS OF PEOPLE, LED BY DEMOCRATIC LEADERS SUCH AS THE SHAH OF IRAN, WHEN HE WAS DEPOSED BY FUNDEMENTALISTS IN THE EARLY 1980'S IT CHANGED THE FACE OF THE MIDDLE EAST, FROM IRAN, LIBIYA FOLLOWED AND MORE MILITARY LEADERSHIP RATHER THAN FROM THE RANKS OF A SENATE OR HOUSE OF COMMONS.


Why is it a violation of the Geneva Conventions to show American POWs on TV, but not when American TV shows Iraqi POWS?
IT'S IN THE CONVENTION.

Why hasn't the media been asking more of these questions?
GOOD QUESTION, BUT MAYBE THEY HAVE SOME OF THE ANSWERS!

The whole issue of embedded media, 'in bed with' and so forth, just seems like a failure to realize the fact that people associate with one another, through freedom of association.

maybe my answers are all wrong, i'm just taking a guess at them, from a purely logical standpoint.

[pkt]

civiltech,

Have you seen CBC's '5th Estate' that was shown first on March 26?

If you haven't look at my thread called 'Warmonger', I've added some links etc. to the programme.

It's well worth watching.

Salom,
PK

[daeceg]

Originally posted by 135711
[b]

There aren't, though. When the pope himself comes out and says that the United States is not involved in a just war, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. This isn't even going into the legality of the issue, it's that Bush doesn't have a defensible reason other than Hussein's a bad guy. But international affairs don't work that way. The official position of the United States has always been that sovereign heads of state are basically allowed to do what they want while they are the heads of state. This is the main reason Republicans blasted Clinton's intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo...and yet now they accuse people who speak against the war of everything short of treason!

Uhh...if the US wasn't invading, food and water supplies from the UN wouldn't have been cut off.

It is terribly important. Many Middle Eastern nations are opposed to the US action because it seems like imperialism and that our leaders are horribly self-serving. The fact that a company run by our VP gets this contract plays right into those viewpoints.

Faking what, exactly? You know who else wants Hussein destroyed? Osama bin Laden... If these people wanted Hussein gone, they could rise up on their own. Rule of law is what's important here. Besides, the US has a history of overturning governments and installing those that are friendly to us regardless of how nice they are.

But don't you see how this ties into the earlier question about Halliburton? Even if every thing is on the level, there is still an apparent conflict of interest. According to US law, a judge has to recuse himself if there is even a chance of conflict of interest...


Why is it Bush is trying to cram western democracy down their throat? Do the Iraqi people want democracy??
THIS IS THE CRUICIAL POINT, THE BIG ONE, THE QUESTION OF THE CENTURY. IT'S NOT JUST BUSH, IT WAS LITERALLY EVERY ADMINISTRATION, TRYING TO GET OTHER GOVERNMENTS TO TRY DEMOCRACY, THE REASON BEING, THAT MILITARY LEADERS ACTING AS HEADS OF STATES TEND TO CREATE WAR SCENERIOS MORESO THAN OTHER GOVERNMENTS, AND THEY ALSO TEND TO EMPTY THE TILLS QUICK.

Let's remember, Hitler got voted into office. Democracy is no guarentee the head of state won't get you into a war. Look at Bush! He 'won' the election without even a plurality. More people voted AGAINST Bush than for him!

Why is it Bush is going to war to enforce UN resolutions against Iraq, but he smiles and nods when confronted with Israel's weapons of mass destruction and it's ignoring of UN resolutions?
WELL, IT MAY BE THAT AMERICA HAS PLEDGED TO SAFEGUARD ISRAEL.

No, no, no...you can't do that. We pledged to the UN not to use force unless okayed by the Security Council. We pledged to the world to reduce our CO2 admissions. We pledged to Russia we wouldn't develop an anti-ballistic missile system. Our pledges aren't worth the paper they are written on. If secret WMD programs are a threat to the peace and require military intervention, then Israel needs to be invaded by the United States. Doctrines have to be consistent, after all. Otherwise they are not doctrines. Also, Israel's illegal settlements in the West Bank and Gaza should be stopped. But we're not doing it. Either Israel is sovereign and can't be told to stop, or we are duty bound to invade Israel for all the same reasons we've invaded Iraq.

Why is it Bush claims the world wants us to remove Hussein, when the US and Kuwait are the only nations where a majority of the population are in favor of military action without UN backing?
PERHAPS HE HAS BETTER INFORMATION THAN THE REST OF US.

Umm...how to put this nicely...President Shrub has never been known for his intellegence. Remember, also, that someone in the government forged documents to make it appear that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa. Even if Bush does 'know' more than the rest of us, that doesn't mean his information is correct.

Why is it Bush assumes that removing Hussein will spread democracy throughout the Middle East, and that the governments which are elected will be pro-US? (read Dr. Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" for a very informative read on the difference between being democratic and being pro-western)
PERHAPS HE HAS A SCENERIO IN MIND, WITH THE RIGHT LEADERSHIP IN PLACE, ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN. ACCORDING TO MY FRIENDS WHO WENT TO WAR WITH UN TROOPS LEBANON USED TO BE BEAUTIFUL, OTHER PLACES WERE BEAUTIFUL CITIES, WITH THRIVING POPULATIONS OF PEOPLE, LED BY DEMOCRATIC LEADERS SUCH AS THE SHAH OF IRAN, WHEN HE WAS DEPOSED BY FUNDEMENTALISTS IN THE EARLY 1980'S IT CHANGED THE FACE OF THE MIDDLE EAST, FROM IRAN, LIBIYA FOLLOWED AND MORE MILITARY LEADERSHIP RATHER THAN FROM THE RANKS OF A SENATE OR HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Who decides what the 'right' government is? I can't believe that you thought the Shah of Iran was a democratic leader! THE SHAH WAS A DICTATOR! He was deposed in a bloodless coup, and a true democracy was started, WHICH THE CIA OVERTHREW! Mossadegh, the Prime Minister of Iran, was concerned that the US was going to take action against Iran, so he started talking to the various parties in the Iranian Parliement. One of those parties was a socialist party. The CIA read this as 'proof' that Iran was going to go Communist, so John Eisenhower entered the nation and with CIA backing, reinstated the despised Shah! We did something similar to the Arbenz government in Guatamala! WE BACKED HUSSEIN in the 1980s, GIVING HIM THE MATERIALS TO PRODUCE BIOCHEMICAL WEAPONS!!!! The idea that the US wants to promote democracy around the world is laughable, given our past history!!! The reason the US-backed Shah was deposed by the people of Iran is that he was a ruthless dictator! Moammar Quaddafi was the man who threw the colonial powers out of Libya! The reason the Middle Eastern nations all have military governments is because those militaries were the only groups that could force the European colonial powers out of the Middle East and Africa!! The systems in place are of our own making!

Why is it a violation of the Geneva Conventions to show American POWs on TV, but not when American TV shows Iraqi POWS?
IT'S IN THE CONVENTION.

What is in the conventions? (The bad guys can't show POWs, but the good guys can?...I find that doubtful)

Why hasn't the media been asking more of these questions?
GOOD QUESTION, BUT MAYBE THEY HAVE SOME OF THE ANSWERS!

If the media had those answers, don't you think they'd be rushing to scoop the competition to tell us?

The whole issue of embedded media, 'in bed with' and so forth, just seems like a failure to realize the fact that people associate with one another, through freedom of association.

The point I was trying to make there is that the US media is not independent any more. Instead of trying to be objective, they are literally in bed with the armed forces. A free and objective press is a requirement for a democratic society. When the media gets too buddy-buddy with the government, the corporations, or the military, that objectivity is lost. What freedom of reporting did those embedded journalists have to give up to gain the privilege to travel with the army units?

maybe my answers are all wrong, i'm just taking a guess at them, from a purely logical standpoint.

I applaud your effort at taking a guess, but your logic is severely lacking.

[civiltech]

Originally posted by pkt
civiltech,

Have you seen CBC's '5th Estate' that was shown first on March 26?

If you haven't look at my thread called 'Warmonger', I've added some links etc. to the programme.

It's well worth watching.

Salom,
PK

I will look today. And hopefully comment later.

Regards,

[pkt]

CT,

Look fwd to you comments.

I learned a lot from the programme an dgot enlightened.


PK

[daeceg]

Originally posted by Swordsman
1. I have, and find it highly distasteful.

2. And THAT must make it fact!!

3. I'm amazed at the authority with which you speak. You should talk to the Bush and the UN - I'm sure you could clear a lot of issues up for them with your proof-positive information!

Uhh, lots of people with more degrees than I have have tried to tell President Bush there is no link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, including the director of the CIA, George Tenet.

What have you found distasteful about NPR? Is Garrison Keillor too racy for you?

[pkt]

Nothing wrong with the NPR.

Thank you very much, I prefer my Cdn content. I listen to our own version of it: CBC.

AS my compatriot 'civiltech' calls it: the CBC is a remnant of coummunism because it is a Crown corporaion.

In fact we now have our own Cdn version of Garrison Keillor. His name is Stewart McLean. He's on CBC's Radio 2 (FM) on Sat. morning and on Radio 1 (AM) on Sunday.
http://www.cbc.ca/onair/personalitie...fe/mclean.html



--)----------

hey, civiltech, like my new 'darkside' avatar?

[pkt]

daeceg [what does that mean?]

look at this link
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/...Columnists/Idx

The columnist talks about NPR...


I posted the whole article in the thread called
"Al-Jazeera is more popular than sex"

PK

[daeceg]

"Daeceg" means nothing, really.

Back in the dark ages, before there was this "World Wide Web", there were these primative forums knowns as "BBSes" Bulletin Board Systems. They functioned much the same way as this board here, though only one user per phone line could be on at the same time.

On the local boards, I had two different handles, Ged and Ace. "Ged" being the main character from Wizard of Earthsea, by Ursula LeGuin, and "Ace" as a reference to the fact I was the only 13 year old (at the time) I knew that had logged any flight instruction. If you think fencing gets to be expensive, flight training is a whole other world, I tell you what.

When I first got Internet access, I combined the two BBS handles to come up with my new screen name.

[daeceg]

Excellent article!

I just am so concerned that people I know around the world are going to assume that all of us US citizens are for the war, when in my neck of the woods, the majority oppose it quite heartily.

[pkt]

daeceg,

no need to worry about that - Tsu-la, are you reading this? - I think everyone in the world do make the seperation between the US POTUS/Government and the American people. In that regards, the American people and the Canadian people are very much alike indeed.

Afterall, we're of the same mother. It is the religion - e.g. Mayflower - and the politics - e.g. how the West was won - that put us asunder.

--)----------


Thanks for explaining your handle.
Hence the avatar with the aviation glasses, eh?

Yeah, I know we fencers complain about how expensive our sport is till we check out the other recreations. e.g. alpine skiing. the equipment, getting there, lift tickets, apres ski...

PK

[pkt]

...And now for something different...

http://www.funforwards.com/flash/september02/saddam.swf

make sure your speakers are on...

Enjoy.

PK

[daeceg]

HAH! That was terrific!
By the way, Capitol Steps radio show from April Fool's Day is availible online right now at http://www.moosehill.com/steps/sounds/Radio-0304.rm

This group is always good for a laugh.

[pkt]

daeceg,

I forwarded the 'Internet is closing down for cleaning' 'advisory' th eday before April Fools and actuall y got a few people.

Most of my friends got lectured by me re sending virus warning before verifying wheteher they are real or hoaxes.

So when they got that from me...

It's like feints...

Good grief, I just realiased whn I wrote that last sentence that that was the first thing I wrote re fencing in the last few days...

Too busy yakking away by the Water Cooler.

PK