If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Living In Fear Abroad - Welcome to Bush & Blair's More Dangerous World
I'll go along with Kevin on this. With no use whatsoever for Saddam apologists, and until the UN gets some backbone and cleans up its own house, I won't trust the UN to do anything useful in Iraq anytime soon. And thanks to captured documents, it's being found that the whole oil-for-food program was being used as a cash cow for Saddam and his cronies; that kickbacks were being paid to supporters of Saddam in France, Germany, Russia, a certain British Member of Parliment who was a frequent apologist for Saddam, and so forth. I'd like to see what Saddam's apologists say about the mass graves that keep turning up, and who was filling them. So what if the U.S. and its partners haven't found any "traditional WMD" in Iraq? Saddam, his ******* sons, his cronies like Chemical Ali, were WMDs. Goodbye and good riddance to them and their ilk. "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Vince Brannigan" wrote in message . .. Kevin Brooks wrote: "Vince Brannigan" wrote in message ... Stephen Harding wrote: Timothy-Allen Albertson wrote: Living In Fear Abroad Elizabeth Scanlon Thomas [...] So this is the safer world that Bush and Blair promised us? © 2004 Chicago Tribune" Wonder what Elizabeth would have thought of FDR and Churchill in 1942? Its not analogous. This was a preemptive war. We were not attacked by Iraq. We claimed at most that they coudl become a threat in the future. Not attacked? Let's see...one assasination attempt on a former US President (which I guess you don't count bein' as he was just a danged Republican), You mean during a prior war? No, afterwards--the attack was planned to occur during Bush's post-office visit to Kuwait. and repeated (and failed) attacks against aircraft monitoring the No-Fly Zone. Theya re not attacks on the united states Attacking USAF and USN aircraft is not an attack on the US? Then I guess you consider Pearl Harbor the same way--after all, the Japanese were attacking only ships and aircraft, and a few facilities located in what was then merely a US territory, huh? Or maybe the attack by AQ on the USS Cole was also "not an attack on the US"? For a lawyer, your reasoning often leaves a lot to be desired. Not to mention one attack into Kuwait that started the whole affair up, not us A US interest. Good enough, unless you are now claiming that the first Gulf War was also a terrible mistake? and another feint in that direction that led to beefing up the US ground force in Kuwait for a couple of years before this last excursion. A brutal dictator who conducted genocidal operations against elements of his own population. A group of nations that think appeasement is the best course of action. Gee, it appears that analogy is not that far off after all. What, no outlandish answers to these? Vkince, why do you like Saddam so much? OFCS Do you get a thrill out of that type of personal abuse? Does it make you feel "macho" ? I just think its silly No, it is just that you continually defend him and his interests. I note above that you seem to think that his overrunning Kuwait now was not sufficient causus belli? Hitler was a slime but he did not attack the USA either. We had to lie about the Greer incident to make it appear that he did. Actually, in the end he declared war on the US first. Kind of made things a bit easier for us in the end. Your history knowledge is apparently about as flawed as your "expertise" in tilt-wing aircraft design and operations. Iraq was not a threat to the united states unless it had WMDs Really? So Saddam's continued bellicosity towards his neighbors, and the fact that a goodly portion of the world's oil supplies come from that area, did not pose a threat, nor did his support of folks like Abu Nidal, Abbu Abbas, etc.? Again, odd how you go so far to defend Saddam; what is your take on his mass graves? Maybe he just was trying to economize on burial expenses for his beloved followers? That was the whoel claim for the war. No, it was not. His continued refusal to comply with the terms that had been laid down for him at the cessation of hostilities the first go-around was the root cause, largely manifested in his game-playing in the WMD arena, and also in the TBM field, where he did indeed violate the range cap. everythign else you mention is a matter for the UN not the US. That would be the same UN that is now coming under increasing fire for alleged corruption and mishandling of the pre-war "oil for food/medicine" program? Or the same UN that, despite repeated resolutions and inspections, could not get a real handle on the WMD status, and only caught onto the TBM situation at the very end? The same UN that botched the Somalia operation? I don't think so. Brooks Vince Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:17:26 GMT, "Matt Wiser" wrote:
I'll go along with Kevin on this. With no use whatsoever for Saddam apologists, and until the UN gets some backbone and cleans up its own house, I won't trust the UN to do anything useful in Iraq anytime soon. And thanks to captured documents, it's being found that the whole oil-for-food program was being used as a cash cow for Saddam and his cronies; that kickbacks were being paid to supporters of Saddam in France, Germany, Russia, a certain British Member of Parliment who was a frequent apologist for Saddam, and so forth. I'd like to see what Saddam's apologists say about the mass graves that keep turning up, and who was filling them. So what if the U.S. and its partners haven't found any "traditional WMD" in Iraq? Saddam, his ******* sons, his cronies like Chemical Ali, were WMDs. Goodbye and good riddance to them and their ilk. Vince will say "there is no proof that Saddam personally ordered the killings, and, since not all of the bodies were autopsied, they may have been death due to natural causes. The almighty UN should form a committee to set up a commission to study the need for a study group to look into this". Needless to say, I will not agree with him. Al Minyard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
Living In Fear Abroad - Welcome to Al qaeda's More Dangerous World | OXMORON1 | Military Aviation | 17 | March 19th 04 05:04 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |