IRAN - How many countries has Iran invaded?
tdny
When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
the Shah of Iran.
All to steal Iran's oil.
We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention around the
world.
Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign countries, we do.
Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
Phxbrd
"tdny" <td...@live.com> wrote in message
news:lI-dnZ0tY4MaYiHX...@earthlink.com...
Apologists for ugly Israel?
Alex DeLarge
>
> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
> the Shah of Iran.
>
> All to steal Iran's oil.
>
Oh well....
> We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
Because they were trucked into Syria, dimmy:
http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive report
soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports indicate that it
will conclude Saddam had no WMD. But you disagree with that belief. Why
do you disagree and is it more likely WMD are still inside Iraq, or have
they been moved?
DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody else
has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no definitive
statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally, there was WMD in
Iraq before and during the war. You have multiple-source intelligence.
Also, from other Arab leaders � as Tommy Franks says in his book � King
Abdullah said Saddam has WMD. President Mubarek of Egypt said you have
to be very careful going in, because Saddam has weapons of mass
destruction. Other leaders who have chosen not to be named said the same
thing. We had technical intelligence that saw the same thing.
Two days before March 19, 2003, we saw quite a number of vehicles going
into Syria. We could not go after them because we said we'd give Saddam
48 hours. A lot of (Iraqi) leaders went into Syria, and a lot of WMD
went into Syria. We've gotten indications some went into Lebanon, and
probably some went into Iran.
The size of Iraq is roughly, in square miles, the same size as
California. Seven-eighths of the country is arid desert land. We've done
calculations that you could probably bury 16 Eiffel Towers or Empire
State Buildings and never find them in the desert. Just four months ago,
they were digging for something out in the middle of
the desert and they hit something. It was a MIG-25 Foxbat that the
Iraqis buried in the sand. We never would have found this thing.
Biological Weapons, you could put almost your whole program in a
suitcase. You could probably put your whole chemical weapons industry
inside a van. Yes, they did have it and right today they can't find it.
The people we've captured, like Dr. Germ and Chemical Ali, the murderer
of the Kurds, aren't talking.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2004/oct/28/20041028-115519-3700r/
U.S. intelligence agencies have obtained satellite photographs of truck
convoys that were at several weapons sites in Iraq in the weeks before
U.S. military operations were launched, defense officials said yesterday.
The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of
anonymity.
According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,
known as NGA, "documented the movement of long convoys of trucks from
various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border."
> Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
around > the world.
YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
Afghanistan and Iraq...
How shameless of us...
> Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign countries, we do.
...and that's a GOOD thing!
> Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
> So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
We are the BIG DOG, deal!
Alex DeLarge
Look, the Jew-hater needs his FAQ posted again:
FAQ time for the senile old doper!
Did you ever stop and count the number of subjects you cycle through here?
And there are less since the Limey trolls got sick of you; no
matter...the repetitive boredom out of your festering piehole amounts to:
~ Hating Israel
~ Hating Sheriff Arpaio
~ Hating Harleys
~ Hating border enforcement
~ Hating queers and trannys
~ Hating D's and R's
~ Hating Christians
~ Hating Mormons
~ Making excuses for Palestinians
~ Calling anyone who disagrees with you a "nasty racist"...
That's IT Les!
That's the sum total of your usenet presence!
How sad, how predictably, boringly, mind-numbingly sad!
Toss in the vitriol you still harbor for your deceased alcoholic wife,
whose ashes you vowed to piss on, and your irrational, all-consuming
hatred for the English and that's the story of YOU!
Need I remind you which word comes up most frequently in this analysis?
Yes...HATE...
That's all you are Les, a seething, roiling sack of hatred.
I honestly pity you, you poor poisoned old git.
Iapetus
> tdny wrote:
>>
>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>> the Shah of Iran.
>>
>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>
> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>
> Oh well....
>
> > We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
>
> Because they were trucked into Syria, dimmy:
>
>
Rubbish. Saddam knew he had no chance in hell of winning, there was
nothing... NOTHING to stop him using them on Iran, Kuwait, Israel or
western troops when they started the invasion.
If Hitler had had The Bomb do you think he wouldn't use it just 'cause
he was about to lose?
> http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
>
> TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive report
> soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports indicate that it
> will conclude Saddam had no WMD.
So a 1,400 member international fact-finding team says no.
>
> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody else
> has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no definitive
> statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally, there was WMD in
> Iraq before and during the war.
One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the war
in Iraq, says yes.
I know who I'd believe.
Alex DeLarge
> Alex DeLarge wrote:
>> tdny wrote:
>>>
>>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>>> the Shah of Iran.
>>>
>>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>>
>> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>>
>> Oh well....
>>
>> > We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
>>
>> Because they were trucked into Syria, dimmy:
>>
>>
>
>
> Rubbish. Saddam knew he had no chance in hell of winning, there was
> nothing... NOTHING to stop him using them on Iran, Kuwait, Israel or
> western troops when they started the invasion.
Incorrect.
In the months leading up to the invasion the US was in active and
repeated contact with his top brass and repeatedly warned them what the
consequences would mean to them personally if any WMD were used on US
troops. It was considered on of the best intel successes of the operation.
> If Hitler had had The Bomb do you think he wouldn't use it just 'cause
> he was about to lose?
Godwins law.
You punched out predictably early.
>> http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
>>
>> TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive report
>> soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports indicate that it
>> will conclude Saddam had no WMD.
>
> So a 1,400 member international fact-finding team says no.
So he trucked them out, oh well.
>>
>> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody else
>> has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no definitive
>> statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally, there was WMD in
>> Iraq before and during the war.
>
> One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the war
> in Iraq, says yes.
Oh, he's a "war-monger" is he?
Cite?
> I know who I'd believe.
I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
Why you snip the part about the NGA satellite imagery of truck caravans
heading for Syria?
Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
jonny
He's and old failed Computer (from the days when a "Computer" was the
size of a house!) salesman.
Alex DeLarge
Yes he is.
All that's left for him is hate and cowering in that double wide while
the taggers hit his alley.
Iapetus
> tdny wrote:
>>
>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>> the Shah of Iran.
>>
>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>
> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>
> Oh well....
>
> its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of
> anonymity.
>
ROTFLMAO
Providing I get anonymity can I claim GWB raped and murdered 50 young girls?
> According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,
> known as NGA, "documented the movement of long convoys of trucks from
> various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border."
Trucks = WMD?
How many convoys from the US go to Mexico and Canada on a daily basis?
They could be carrying wounded, people fleeing, belongings, precious
metals, monies... Anything.
> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
> around > the world.
>
> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>
And the million+ dead and 3-5 million who fled those countries. Plus
they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being killed daily
by terrorists AND American forces.
The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law that
allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex. Sounds
oppressive to me.
> How shameless of us...
>
Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Burma
and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend themselves.
A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign countries, we
> do.
>
> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>
Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>
> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>
That ended 64 years ago.
> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>
> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
Big bully..!
Iapetus
> Iapetus wrote:
>> Alex DeLarge wrote:
>>> tdny wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>>>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>>>> the Shah of Iran.
>>>>
>>>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>>>
>>> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>>>
>>> Oh well....
>>>
>>> > We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
>>>
>>> Because they were trucked into Syria, dimmy:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Rubbish. Saddam knew he had no chance in hell of winning, there was
>> nothing... NOTHING to stop him using them on Iran, Kuwait, Israel or
>> western troops when they started the invasion.
>
> Incorrect.
>
> In the months leading up to the invasion the US was in active and
> repeated contact with his top brass and repeatedly warned them what the
> consequences would mean to them personally if any WMD were used on US
> troops. It was considered on of the best intel successes of the operation.
>
Yeah, Saddam and his ilk were all for obeying their invaders... Both him
and his top brass knew they would be executed once caught.
>> If Hitler had had The Bomb do you think he wouldn't use it just 'cause
>> he was about to lose?
>
> Godwins law.
>
> You punched out predictably early.
No answer?
>
>>> http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
>>>
>>> TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive report
>>> soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports indicate that it
>>> will conclude Saddam had no WMD.
>>
>> So a 1,400 member international fact-finding team says no.
>
> So he trucked them out, oh well.
>
Says...?
>>>
>>> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody else
>>> has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no
>>> definitive statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally,
>>> there was WMD in Iraq before and during the war.
>>
>> One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the
>> war in Iraq, says yes.
>
> Oh, he's a "war-monger" is he?
>
> Cite?
No need, the wanker was in charge of the invasion.
>
>> I know who I'd believe.
>
> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
>
> Why you snip the part about the NGA satellite imagery of truck caravans
> heading for Syria?
>
> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
Nope, read other post.
Alex DeLarge
> Alex DeLarge wrote:
>> tdny wrote:
>>>
>>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>>> the Shah of Iran.
>>>
>>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>>
>> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>>
>> Oh well....
>>
>> The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
>> its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of
>> anonymity.
>>
>
> ROTFLMAO
>
> Providing I get anonymity can I claim GWB raped and murdered 50 young
> girls?
>
Oh lookie, we have someone whose debate skills are limited to the sandbox!
>> According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence
>> Agency, known as NGA, "documented the movement of long convoys of
>> trucks from various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border."
>
> Trucks = WMD?
Darn, you think they'd carry them out by hand?
> How many convoys from the US go to Mexico and Canada on a daily basis?
"Convoys"?
Not all that many I suspect, unless you refer to those servicing oil
rigs or Wal Mart stores.
> They could be carrying wounded, people fleeing, belongings, precious
> metals, monies... Anything.
From ammunition bunkers?
Do tell...
"satellite photographs of truck convoys that were at several weapons
sites in Iraq in the weeks before U.S. military operations were
launched, defense officials said yesterday.
The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
its known weapons sites..."
Yeah, that's where I'd go to flee...
>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
>> around > the world.
>>
>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
>> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>
>
> And the million+ dead
CITE?!?!
There are no "million dead", you asshat!
Documented civilian deaths from violence
93,148 � 101,650
> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
Thus...NOT DEAD!
> Plus
> they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being killed daily
> by terrorists AND American forces.
Have they had several free elections in both nations?
Yes.
> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law that
> allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex. Sounds
> oppressive to me.
Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
You're insane.
>> How shameless of us...
>>
>
> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Burma
> and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
1.) It's expensive
2.) No one else wants to help out
3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
> Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend
> themselves.
Like Nazi Germany and Japan?
> A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
> sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
But one abusing "oil for food" to rearm and also one sponsoring terror
operations in neighboring states.
> A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
> warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
But one strong enough to shelter and grow al Qaeda.
>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign countries,
>> we do.
>>
>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>
>
> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
"Here"?
Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon we
saved in WW2?
>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>
>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>
>
> That ended 64 years ago.
Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, which
WE had to get called in to put down...
>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>
>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>
> Big bully..!
Kiss my ass, wimp.
Alex DeLarge
> Alex DeLarge wrote:
>> Iapetus wrote:
>>> Alex DeLarge wrote:
>>>> tdny wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When the people of Iran went to the polls and elected a president,
>>>>> our CIA overthrew that government and installed a brutal dictator,
>>>>> the Shah of Iran.
>>>>>
>>>>> All to steal Iran's oil.
>>>>>
>>>> Funny thing is, just like Iraq, we never got the oil...
>>>>
>>>> Oh well....
>>>>
>>>> > We have recently attacked Iraq, because Iraq had WMD we never found.
>>>>
>>>> Because they were trucked into Syria, dimmy:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rubbish. Saddam knew he had no chance in hell of winning, there was
>>> nothing... NOTHING to stop him using them on Iran, Kuwait, Israel or
>>> western troops when they started the invasion.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> In the months leading up to the invasion the US was in active and
>> repeated contact with his top brass and repeatedly warned them what
>> the consequences would mean to them personally if any WMD were used on
>> US troops. It was considered on of the best intel successes of the
>> operation.
>>
>
>
> Yeah, Saddam and his ilk were all for obeying their invaders... Both him
> and his top brass knew they would be executed once caught.
Isn't that largely what happened to the worst of the worst?
Saddam harbored fantasies that he'd bought free passage in Syria you know:
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=456
Is Saddam in Syria?
From DEBKAfile War Diary - Day 15, April 3, 2003
April 5, 2003
The group may include Saddam Hussein or his sons, but this is not confirmed.
The hotel is located close to the Assad family villa.
Top Iraqi officials are reported hiding there since March 23, four days
after the US-led coalition invaded Iraq. They are guarded by a Syrian
commando unit armed with anti-air missiles while Syrian naval missile
boats secure the port.
Monday, 14 April 2003
A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
his way to Syria.
A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
his way to Syria.
His capture prompted a warning to Syria from President George Bush not
to harbour fleeing Iraqi leaders.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/frhance.htm
The French government secretly supplied fleeing Iraqi officials with
passports in Syria that allowed them to escape to Europe, The Washington
Times has learned.
An unknown number of Iraqis who worked for Saddam Hussein's
government were given passports by French officials in Syria, U.S.
intelligence officials said.
The passports are regarded as documents of the European Union,
because of France's membership in the union, and have helped the Iraqis
avoid capture, said officials familiar with intelligence reports.
The French support, which was revealed through sensitive
intelligence-gathering means, angered Pentagon, State Department and
intelligence officials in Washington because it undermined the search
for senior aides to Saddam, who fled Iraq in large numbers after the
fall of Baghdad on April 9.
"It made it very difficult to track these people," one official said.
>>> If Hitler had had The Bomb do you think he wouldn't use it just
>>> 'cause he was about to lose?
>>
>> Godwins law.
>>
>> You punched out predictably early.
>
> No answer?
Are you unfamiliar with Godwins law?
You're done here.
>>
>>>> http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
>>>>
>>>> TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive
>>>> report soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports indicate
>>>> that it will conclude Saddam had no WMD.
>>>
>>> So a 1,400 member international fact-finding team says no.
>>
>> So he trucked them out, oh well.
>>
>
> Says...?
NGA satellite imagery, former Iraqi generals, and US commanders.
>>>>
>>>> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody
>>>> else has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no
>>>> definitive statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally,
>>>> there was WMD in Iraq before and during the war.
>>>
>>> One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the
>>> war in Iraq, says yes.
>>
>> Oh, he's a "war-monger" is he?
>>
>> Cite?
>
> No need, the wanker was in charge of the invasion.
DeLong was?
Do tell.
I think you need some factual repairs made.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
At 5:34 AM Baghdad time on March 20, 2003 (9:34 p.m., March 19 EST) the
military invasion of Iraq began.[117] The 2003 invasion of Iraq, led by
US army General Tommy Franks, began under the codename "Operation Iraqi
Liberation",[118] later renamed "Operation Iraqi Freedom", the UK
codename Operation Telic, and the Australian codename Operation
Falconer. Coalition forces also cooperated with Kurdish Peshmerga forces
in the north. Approximately forty other governments, the "coalition of
the willing," participated by providing troops, equipment, services,
security, and special forces.
>>
>>> I know who I'd believe.
>>
>> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
>
>
> And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
Ah no...there is the NGA sat imagery, the Iraqi general's testimony, etc.
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime,
said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper �De Telegraaf,�
that he knows the three sites where Iraq�s WMD are kept. The storage
places are:
1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in
northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground
factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles.
Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.
2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there
is a big Syrian airforce camp. Vital parts of Iraq�s WMD are stored there.
3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of
the city Homs.
Najoef writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by
the commanders of Saddam Hussein�s Special Republican Guard, including
General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad�s cousin.
Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad
family.
Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
"Dear Nizar.
We received confirmations that the Iraqi weapons, which were moved to
Syria by the help of General Zoul-Himla Chalich are now hidden in three
places inside Syria:
First place: a tunnel dug in the mountain close to the Al-Ba�dah
village, which is roughly two kilometers from Misyaf village. This place
is under the 489 Safety cipher Documents' office control .
Second place: the factory of the Air Armed Forces in the village of Tal
Sinan, between the town of Hama and Salamiyyah. This factory is under
the Air Force control.
Third place: the location of Shinsar, 40 kilometers south of Homs, two
kilometers east of the Homs - Damascus road. There are underground
tunnels there, controlled by Brigade 661 of the armed air Forces. It is
a Brigade of air Patrol. The tunnels are several tens of meters deep.
The weapons were transported in large wooden cases and barrels, under
the supervision of the General Zoul-Himla Chalich and the son of his
brother Assef, who works at Al-Bachaer company.
The company is owned by the Assad family and has offices in Beirut,
Damascus and Baghdad.
This company also undertook the illegal Iraqi oil importation in Syria,
and supplied weapons to Saddam. I will try to send you all the new
information as i get .
Take care and be safe."
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514/
The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force
says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by
loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats
were removed.
The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book,
"Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an
interview yesterday with The New York Sun.
"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and
they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am
confident they were taken over."
>>
>> Why you snip the part about the NGA satellite imagery of truck
>> caravans heading for Syria?
>>
>> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
>
> Nope, read other post.
I did, you are a deceitful and cowardly post-editor.
Iapetus
Who have anonymity...
LOL
> The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
> its known weapons sites..."
>
> Yeah, that's where I'd go to flee...
>
FROM, not to, numpty.
>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
>>> around > the world.
>>>
>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
>>> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>
>>
>> And the million+ dead
>
> CITE?!?!
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>
> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
malnutrition.
>
> Documented civilian deaths from violence
> 93,148 � 101,650
>
Violence.....
If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY how
many would die in winter?
Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were taken out.
>
>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>
> Thus...NOT DEAD!
Nice of you.
>
>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being killed
>> daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>
> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>
> Yes.
>
About as free as those in Iran.
>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law that
>> allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex. Sounds
>> oppressive to me.
>
> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>
> You're insane.
So it's OK then? Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped
in a country you helped 'liberate'?
>
>>> How shameless of us...
>>>
>>
>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Burma
>> and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>
> 1.) It's expensive
>
Even Zimbabwe?
Oh yeah, no oil.
> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>
Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when invading
other countries
> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>
You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not give the
people in N. Korea freedom?
Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
>> Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend
>> themselves.
>
> Like Nazi Germany and Japan?
>
Oh FFS, WWII started in 1945, not 1948.
>> A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
>> sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
>
> But one abusing "oil for food" to rearm and also one sponsoring terror
> operations in neighboring states.
>
>> A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
>> warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
>
> But one strong enough to shelter and grow al Qaeda.
>
Of course, they had monies and weapons left behind by the US when the
Soviets left.
>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign countries,
>>> we do.
>>>
>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>
>>
>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>
> "Here"?
>
Yep.. Here.
Need a dictionary?
> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon we
> saved in WW2?
>
Like fuck....
The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>
>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>
>>
>> That ended 64 years ago.
>
> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, which
> WE had to get called in to put down...
Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
>
>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>
>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>
>> Big bully..!
>
> Kiss my ass, wimp.
Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
Iapetus
Yep, so again why didn't they use the so-called WMD if they had nothing
to lose?
> Saddam harbored fantasies that he'd bought free passage in Syria you know:
>
And?
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=456
>
> Is Saddam in Syria?
>
nope, was hiding in a hole.
> From DEBKAfile War Diary - Day 15, April 3, 2003
>
> April 5, 2003
>
> The group may include Saddam Hussein or his sons, but this is not
> confirmed.
> The hotel is located close to the Assad family villa.
> Top Iraqi officials are reported hiding there since March 23, four days
> after the US-led coalition invaded Iraq. They are guarded by a Syrian
> commando unit armed with anti-air missiles while Syrian naval missile
> boats secure the port.
>
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saddams-brother-captured-trying-to-escape-to-syria-594438.html
>
>
> Monday, 14 April 2003
>
> A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
> Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
> his way to Syria.
>
> A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
> Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
> his way to Syria.
>
> His capture prompted a warning to Syria from President George Bush not
> to harbour fleeing Iraqi leaders.
>
>
> http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/frhance.htm
>
> The French government secretly supplied fleeing Iraqi officials with
> passports in Syria that allowed them to escape to Europe, The Washington
> Times has learned.
Hey, gotta keep the frog-hating flag flying.
> An unknown number of Iraqis who worked for Saddam Hussein's
> government were given passports by French officials in Syria, U.S.
> intelligence officials said.
Ditto.
> The passports are regarded as documents of the European Union,
> because of France's membership in the union, and have helped the Iraqis
> avoid capture, said officials familiar with intelligence reports.
> The French support, which was revealed through sensitive
> intelligence-gathering means, angered Pentagon, State Department and
> intelligence officials in Washington because it undermined the search
> for senior aides to Saddam, who fled Iraq in large numbers after the
> fall of Baghdad on April 9.
> "It made it very difficult to track these people," one official said.
>
>
>
>>>> If Hitler had had The Bomb do you think he wouldn't use it just
>>>> 'cause he was about to lose?
>>>
>>> Godwins law.
>>>
>>> You punched out predictably early.
>>
>> No answer?
>
> Are you unfamiliar with Godwins law?
>
> You're done here.
>
>>>
>>>>> http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/015496.html
>>>>>
>>>>> TCP: The Iraq Survey Group is expected to file a comprehensive
>>>>> report soon on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Reports
>>>>> indicate that it will conclude Saddam had no WMD.
>>>>
>>>> So a 1,400 member international fact-finding team says no.
>>>
>>> So he trucked them out, oh well.
>>>
>>
>> Says...?
>
> NGA satellite imagery, former Iraqi generals, and US commanders.
>
All military personnel. All under the person who started it all, their
commander-in-chief.
>>>>>
>>>>> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody
>>>>> else has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no
>>>>> definitive statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally,
>>>>> there was WMD in Iraq before and during the war.
>>>>
>>>> One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the
>>>> war in Iraq, says yes.
>>>
>>> Oh, he's a "war-monger" is he?
>>>
>>> Cite?
>>
>> No need, the wanker was in charge of the invasion.
>
> DeLong was?
>
> Do tell.
>
> I think you need some factual repairs made.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
Ok, second in command, or third if you count GWB.
Whatever, he had to obey and be behind his leaders 110%. Even if it
meant a porky or two.
>>>
>>>> I know who I'd believe.
>>>
>>> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
>>
>>
>> And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
>
> Ah no...there is the NGA sat imagery, the Iraqi general's testimony, etc.
>
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>
> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
> Western Europe
Oh, a 'defector'... God, for info the government really did scrape the
bottom of the barrel.
>
>
> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>
>>> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
>>
>> Nope, read other post.
>
> I did, you are a deceitful and cowardly post-editor.
It's called snipping, or this page would be too tall
Alex DeLarge
Does your military Intel regularly NOT have anonymity?
> LOL
You make mirth only of yourself.
>> The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
>> its known weapons sites..."
>>
>> Yeah, that's where I'd go to flee...
>>
>
> FROM, not to, numpty.
Your reading comprehension isn't too swift.
You indicated they could be moving civilians FROM those locations.
Or have you already forgotten what you said?
Hence, by your metric, a civilian fleeing would go TO there to be
trucked out, yes?
Sheesh...
>>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
>>>> around > the world.
>>>>
>>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
>>>> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>>
>>>
>>> And the million+ dead
>>
>> CITE?!?!
>>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
"The question asked is a loaded question. It presupposes that a half
million children had died so far and that is the price being payed for
conflict, forcing Albright into a position that discredits her whether
she answered? "yes" or "no." This is like asking someone, "Do you still
beat your children?" This assumes that you have children and you have
beaten them, either of which could be false.
She should have addressed the fallacy rather than answer it. It's an
easy trap to fall into."
> Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
Utter unsubstantiated crap.
Oh and btw, the 1990's is not the time line for this discussion, obfuscater.
>> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>>
>> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
>
>
> That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
> infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
> malnutrition.
Oh boo fucking hoo, double it if you like then!
>>
>> Documented civilian deaths from violence
>> 93,148 � 101,650
>>
>
> Violence.....
Yeah, car-bombs, head-chopping, etc.
> If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY how
> many would die in winter?
Non sequitur.
> Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were taken
> out.
Yet OUR aid DID get in and OUR rebuilding HAS been unending.
>>
>>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>>
>> Thus...NOT DEAD!
>
>
> Nice of you.
Accurate too.
>>
>>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being killed
>>> daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>>
>> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>
> About as free as those in Iran.
Not really, likely a lot more free.
>>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law
>>> that allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex.
>>> Sounds oppressive to me.
>>
>> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>>
>> You're insane.
>
> So it's OK then?
So it's irrelevant then.
> Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped
> in a country you helped 'liberate'?
I can't think of much about either nation that satisfies ME, no.
But they both have, within a single generation now, a shot at evolving,
something that was NOT going to happen before.
>>
>>>> How shameless of us...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe,
>>> Burma and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>>
>> 1.) It's expensive
>>
>
> Even Zimbabwe?
Sure.
> Oh yeah, no oil.
You do realize that US oil imports from Iraq _never_ exceeded 6-8%
regardless of the war, don't you?
Meanwhile:
http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/af/zi/p0005.htm
Although it has huge deposits of coal, the landlocked southern African
country of Zimbabwe has no proven oil or natural gas reserves. However,
it has been established that it has good potential for coal-bed methane
gas production.
[we're doing a lot of that domestically now]
>> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>>
>
> Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when invading
> other countries
Right, the Marshall Plan and W. Edwards Deming just stuck it to Germany
and Japan...
>> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>>
>
> You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not give the
> people in N. Korea freedom?
That's not an answer, dimmy.
> Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
Isn't it more humane to leave them alone with dear leader?
He's _very_ popular you know...
>>> Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend
>>> themselves.
>>
>> Like Nazi Germany and Japan?
>>
>
> Oh FFS, WWII started in 1945, not 1948.
Irresponsive.
>>> A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
>>> sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
>>
>> But one abusing "oil for food" to rearm and also one sponsoring terror
>> operations in neighboring states.
>>
>>> A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
>>> warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
>>
>> But one strong enough to shelter and grow al Qaeda.
>>
>
> Of course, they had monies and weapons left behind by the US when the
> Soviets left.
Er, but none from Russia?
Or China?
Really?
Funny thing is, when I see them with rifles they're AKs not M16s...
>>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign
>>>> countries, we do.
>>>>
>>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>>
>> "Here"?
>>
>
> Yep.. Here.
>
> Need a dictionary?
Just a place setting.
>> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon we
>> saved in WW2?
>>
>
> Like fuck....
No?
> The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
Belgian?
>>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>>
>>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>>
>>>
>>> That ended 64 years ago.
>>
>> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
>> which WE had to get called in to put down...
>
>
> Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
Your penchant for misrepresentation and outright LYING is sensational.
>>
>>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>>
>>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>>
>>> Big bully..!
>>
>> Kiss my ass, wimp.
>
> Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
He might be the smartest partner you'll ever stand a chance at...
Alex DeLarge
Because they were PROMISED leniency if they relented.
And Saddam, for his part, was interested in one thing only - fleeing.
>> Saddam harbored fantasies that he'd bought free passage in Syria you
>> know:
>>
>
> And?
He paid them a fair sum according to reports but never made it over.
>> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=456
>>
>> Is Saddam in Syria?
>>
>
> nope, was hiding in a hole.
But he was hoping to get into Syria.
>> From DEBKAfile War Diary - Day 15, April 3, 2003
>>
>> April 5, 2003
>>
>> The group may include Saddam Hussein or his sons, but this is not
>> confirmed.
>> The hotel is located close to the Assad family villa.
>> Top Iraqi officials are reported hiding there since March 23, four
>> days after the US-led coalition invaded Iraq. They are guarded by a
>> Syrian commando unit armed with anti-air missiles while Syrian naval
>> missile boats secure the port.
>>
>> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saddams-brother-captured-trying-to-escape-to-syria-594438.html
>>
>>
>> Monday, 14 April 2003
>>
>> A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
>> Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
>> his way to Syria.
>>
>> A joint American-Kurdish force has seized Saddam Hussein's brother
>> Watban in north-west Iraq, from where he may have been trying to make
>> his way to Syria.
>>
>> His capture prompted a warning to Syria from President George Bush not
>> to harbour fleeing Iraqi leaders.
>>
>>
>> http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/frhance.htm
>>
>> The French government secretly supplied fleeing Iraqi officials with
>> passports in Syria that allowed them to escape to Europe, The
>> Washington Times has learned.
>
> Hey, gotta keep the frog-hating flag flying.
They DID have a lot at stake in Iraq though, didn't they:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm
France
France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] French total
trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest,
totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2]
In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly
60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with Baghdad
in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3]
France's largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive
oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in
southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to
contain as much as 25 percent of the country's oil reserves. The two
fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.[4] In
2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average
these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650
billion.
France's Alcatel company, a major telecom firm, is negotiating a $76
million contract to rehabilitate Iraq's telephone system.[5]
In 2001 French carmaker Renault SA sold $75 million worth of farming
equipment to Iraq.[6]
More objections have been lodged against French export contracts with
Iraq than any other exporting country under the oil-for-food program,
according to a report published by the London Times. In addition French
companies have signed contracts with Iraq worth more than $150 million
that are suspected of being linked to its military operations.[7] Some
of the goods offered by French companies to Iraq, detailed by UN
documents, include refrigerated trucks that can be used as storage
facilities and mobile laboratories for biological weapons.
Iraq owes France an estimated $6 billion in foreign debt accrued from
arms sales in the 1970s and '80s.[8]
From 1981 to 2001, according to the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute (SIPRI), France was responsible for over 13 percent
of Iraq's arms imports.[9]
>
>> An unknown number of Iraqis who worked for Saddam Hussein's
>> government were given passports by French officials in Syria, U.S.
>> intelligence officials said.
>
>
> Ditto.
Nice of them wasn't it?
Oh well then, nothing can ever be taken as valid by any military person,
right?
That goes for YOUR side too...
But how about the journalist?
The one who fled to France with cancer?
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime,
said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper �De Telegraaf,�
that he knows the three sites where Iraq�s WMD are kept. The storage
places are:
1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in
northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground
factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles.
Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.
2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there
is a big Syrian airforce camp. Vital parts of Iraq�s WMD are stored there.
3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of
the city Homs.
Najoef writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by
the commanders of Saddam Hussein�s Special Republican Guard, including
General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad�s cousin.
Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad
family.
Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
"Dear Nizar.
We received confirmations that the Iraqi weapons, which were moved to
Syria by the help of General Zoul-Himla Chalich are now hidden in three
places inside Syria:
First place: a tunnel dug in the mountain close to the Al-Ba�dah
village, which is roughly two kilometers from Misyaf village. This place
is under the 489 Safety cipher Documents' office control .
Second place: the factory of the Air Armed Forces in the village of Tal
Sinan, between the town of Hama and Salamiyyah. This factory is under
the Air Force control.
Third place: the location of Shinsar, 40 kilometers south of Homs, two
kilometers east of the Homs - Damascus road. There are underground
tunnels there, controlled by Brigade 661 of the armed air Forces. It is
a Brigade of air Patrol. The tunnels are several tens of meters deep.
The weapons were transported in large wooden cases and barrels, under
the supervision of the General Zoul-Himla Chalich and the son of his
brother Assef, who works at Al-Bachaer company.
The company is owned by the Assad family and has offices in Beirut,
Damascus and Baghdad.
This company also undertook the illegal Iraqi oil importation in Syria,
and supplied weapons to Saddam. I will try to send you all the new
information as i get .
Take care and be safe."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DeLong: I think what the report will say is, just like everybody
>>>>>> else has said, there is no proof there was WMD. There will be no
>>>>>> definitive statement in this report. I can state, unequivocally,
>>>>>> there was WMD in Iraq before and during the war.
>>>>>
>>>>> One war-mongering American Lt General, who was was in charge of the
>>>>> war in Iraq, says yes.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, he's a "war-monger" is he?
>>>>
>>>> Cite?
>>>
>>> No need, the wanker was in charge of the invasion.
>>
>> DeLong was?
>>
>> Do tell.
>>
>> I think you need some factual repairs made.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
>
>
> Ok, second in command, or third if you count GWB.
>
>
> Whatever, he had to obey and be behind his leaders 110%. Even if it
> meant a porky or two.
You've made your mind up and it's unlikely factual re-tellings will
penetrate, so be it.
I personally know from sources who were there and worked in intel that
the convoy out reports are accurate, believe what you wish.
The Russians DID sell them a lot of stuff they were not anxious for US
to find:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/oct/28/20041028-122637-6257r/
Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and
related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March
2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.
John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international
technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian
troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the
high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility,
south of Baghdad.
"The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole
series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred
all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the
Iraqis. The others were transportation units."
http://frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4255
Just recently, Saddam Hussein's former southern regional commander, Gen.
Al-Tikriti, gave the first videotaped testimony confirming that Iraq had
WMDs up to the American invasion in 2003 and that Russia helped remove
them prior to the war. His testimony confirms numerous other sources
that have pointed to Russia's secret alliance with Iraq and the
co-ordinated moving of WMDs before the American liberation.
The reason General Al-Tikriti's testimony needs to be heard is because
he was in a position to know what would happen in the event of an
invasion of Iraq and plans to hide WMD, and because we have additional
information from people like General Georges Sada, the former #2 man in
Saddam's air force; Jack Shaw, as Mr. Loftus pointed out; and Ion
Pacepa, the former chief of Romanian intelligence, who described plans
for Russia to activate a plan to move and hide WMDs out of their rogue
state allies should a Western invasion be feared.
>>>>
>>>>> I know who I'd believe.
>>>>
>>>> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
>>>
>>>
>>> And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
>>
>> Ah no...there is the NGA sat imagery, the Iraqi general's testimony, etc.
>>
>> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>>
>> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
>> Western Europe
>
>
> Oh, a 'defector'... God, for info the government really did scrape the
> bottom of the barrel.
Um...he defected to France, booby!
>>
>>
>> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>>
>
>>>> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
>>>
>>> Nope, read other post.
>>
>> I did, you are a deceitful and cowardly post-editor.
>
> It's called snipping, or this page would be too tall
It's called cowardice, there is no page height restriction.
Iapetus
The trucks CAME FROM THERE, picked op their cargo elsewhere. Or did they
have a movie of the convoy from start line to destination?
> Hence, by your metric, a civilian fleeing would go TO there to be
> trucked out, yes?
>
No, if I wanted to catch some transport I wouldn't walk 200 miles to go
to the depot, I'd wait till they came here.
> Sheesh...
>
>
>>>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
>>>>> around > the world.
>>>>>
>>>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
>>>>> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And the million+ dead
>>>
>>> CITE?!?!
>>>
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
>
> "The question asked is a loaded question. It presupposes that a half
> million children had died so far and that is the price being payed for
> conflict, forcing Albright into a position that discredits her whether
> she answered? "yes" or "no." This is like asking someone, "Do you still
> beat your children?" This assumes that you have children and you have
> beaten them, either of which could be false.
Bollocks, she could have said "WHAT! That's a load of {beep] rubbish!!",
not just yes or no.
She was an experienced politician that spend the best part of her life
dealing with (sidestepping) awkward questions from joe public and the media.
This twat didn't have the audacity to deny it either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S1YkQs5nXQ
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7.weekend9
http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Ramsey.html
http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
Thousands more links out there and MOST if not all are from reputable
people and charities, not some anonymous military person or defector you
seem to like quoting.
>
> She should have addressed the fallacy rather than answer it. It's an
> easy trap to fall into."
>
>> Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
>
> Utter unsubstantiated crap.
>
You would say that, at least it was said live in front of cameras and
not by some anonymous person.
> Oh and btw, the 1990's is not the time line for this discussion,
> obfuscater.
>
Says someone who mentioned the US involvement in WWII.
>>> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>>>
>>> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
>>
>>
>> That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
>> infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
>> malnutrition.
>
> Oh boo fucking hoo, double it if you like then!
Why would I double it?
I cite reputable sources, not anonymous crap your government does.
>>>
>>> Documented civilian deaths from violence
>>> 93,148 � 101,650
>>>
>>
>> Violence.....
>
> Yeah, car-bombs, head-chopping, etc.
>
Bombs dropped on apartments, schools... Troops firing wildly not caring
what they hit... etc.
Plus 'friendly fire'.
>> If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY how
>> many would die in winter?
>
> Non sequitur.
>
You love saying that, are you French?
>> Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were
>> taken out.
>
> Yet OUR aid DID get in and OUR rebuilding HAS been unending.
>
Yep, close to half a billion dollars spent pampering US diplomats and
most of the rest going inside the Green Zone.
>>>
>>>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>>>
>>> Thus...NOT DEAD!
>>
>>
>> Nice of you.
>
> Accurate too.
>
>>>
>>>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being
>>>> killed daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>>>
>>> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>
>> About as free as those in Iran.
>
> Not really, likely a lot more free.
>
How so?
>>>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law
>>>> that allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex.
>>>> Sounds oppressive to me.
>>>
>>> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>>>
>>> You're insane.
>>
>> So it's OK then?
>
> So it's irrelevant then.
>
Nope, swapping one dictator for another isn't.
>> Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped in a country
>> you helped 'liberate'?
>
> I can't think of much about either nation that satisfies ME, no.
What will it take to satisfy you? Them to fly the Stars and Stripes
above their government buildings?
>
> But they both have, within a single generation now, a shot at evolving,
> something that was NOT going to happen before.
>
Obviously not when your country tries to starve them into submission.
>>>
>>>>> How shameless of us...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe,
>>>> Burma and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>>>
>>> 1.) It's expensive
>>>
>>
>> Even Zimbabwe?
>
> Sure.
Why?
>
>> Oh yeah, no oil.
>
> You do realize that US oil imports from Iraq _never_ exceeded 6-8%
> regardless of the war, don't you?
>
6-8% of..?
> Meanwhile:
>
> http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/af/zi/p0005.htm
>
> Although it has huge deposits of coal, the landlocked southern African
> country of Zimbabwe has no proven oil or natural gas reserves. However,
> it has been established that it has good potential for coal-bed methane
> gas production.
>
So no oil reserves, as I said.
> [we're doing a lot of that domestically now]
>
>>> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>>>
>>
>> Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when invading
>> other countries
>
> Right, the Marshall Plan and W. Edwards Deming just stuck it to Germany
> and Japan...
Yeah, images of Japaneses women throwing themselves of cliffs rather
than being captured by US force in WWII.
The pictures of young girls burnt with Napalm in Vietnam too.
>
>>> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>>>
>>
>> You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not give
>> the people in N. Korea freedom?
>
> That's not an answer, dimmy.
There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question. -Buddha
>
>> Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
>
> Isn't it more humane to leave them alone with dear leader?
Much more than bombing the fuck out of it, yeah.
>
> He's _very_ popular you know...
Like GWB.
>
>>>> Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend
>>>> themselves.
>>>
>>> Like Nazi Germany and Japan?
>>>
>>
>> Oh FFS, WWII started in 1945, not 1948.
>
> Irresponsive.
>
>>>> A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
>>>> sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
>>>
>>> But one abusing "oil for food" to rearm and also one sponsoring
>>> terror operations in neighboring states.
>>>
>>>> A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
>>>> warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
>>>
>>> But one strong enough to shelter and grow al Qaeda.
>>>
>>
>> Of course, they had monies and weapons left behind by the US when the
>> Soviets left.
>
> Er, but none from Russia?
Mostly Soviet.
>
> Or China?
>
> Really?
>
> Funny thing is, when I see them with rifles they're AKs not M16s...
>
US military hardware did have problems in deserts and jungles. Bet they
were scrap after a month or two.
AK's are so simple not much can go wrong.
>>>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign
>>>>> countries, we do.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>>>
>>> "Here"?
>>>
>>
>> Yep.. Here.
>>
>> Need a dictionary?
>
> Just a place setting.
Postcode or country?
>
>>> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon we
>>> saved in WW2?
>>>
>>
>> Like fuck....
>
> No?
>
>> The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
>
> Belgian?
>
Yep. It was a combined effort, no one country should take credit,
especially one that waited a few years then took it.
>>>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>>>
>>>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That ended 64 years ago.
>>>
>>> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
>>> which WE had to get called in to put down...
>>
>>
>> Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
>
> Your penchant for misrepresentation and outright LYING is sensational.
>
Not me, Unicef and lots of others.
>>>
>>>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>>>
>>>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>>>
>>>> Big bully..!
>>>
>>> Kiss my ass, wimp.
>>
>> Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
>
> He might be the smartest partner you'll ever stand a chance at...
Nope, I don't want your sloppy seconds.
Iapetus
If he was why was he caught in a bolt-hole? I'm sure he had enough money
to buy a vehicle and wig.
Not as much as the US.
>
> http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm
>
> France
> France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] French total
> trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest,
> totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2]
> In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly
> 60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with Baghdad
> in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3]
"The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the
UN Oil-for-Food program. However, U.S. companies can no longer deal
directly with Iraq for its oil imports. U.S. companies are forced to
deal with third party vendors as a result of a ban on all American
companies imposed by Iraq. In 2002, the U.S. imported $3.5 billion worth
of Iraqi oil."
To be treated by their doctors perchance? If France loved Saddam so much
why didn't they imprison him?
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>
> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
> Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime,
> said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper �De Telegraaf,�
> that he knows the three sites where Iraq�s WMD are kept. The storage
> places are:
So a journalist from one country knew the location of Saddam's most
closely guarded secret?
One that knew he'd get treatment for his cancer if he handed over a
juicy bit of intel.
> 1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in
> northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground
> factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles.
> Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.
> 2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there
> is a big Syrian airforce camp. Vital parts of Iraq�s WMD are stored there.
> 3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of
> the city Homs.
> Najoef writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by
> the commanders of Saddam Hussein�s Special Republican Guard, including
> General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad�s cousin.
> Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad
> family.
>
>
> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>
Anonymous perchance?
If all you're going to quote is government and anonymous sources... Yep.
> I personally know from sources who were there and worked in intel that
> the convoy out reports are accurate, believe what you wish.
>
Well.... Where do I start with that one?
Should have given all your info to your government, then there would be
no doubt whatsoever Saddam had WMD and was about to use them.
You could have put a 6 year conspiracy theory to rest.
> The Russians DID sell them a lot of stuff they were not anxious for US
> to find:
>
And why not?
Payback for US involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war?
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/oct/28/20041028-122637-6257r/
>
> Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and
> related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March
> 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.
>
> John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international
> technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian
> troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the
> high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility,
> south of Baghdad.
>
"believes", "almost certainly".
No facts then.
> "The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole
> series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred
> all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the
> Iraqis. The others were transportation units."
>
> http://frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4255
>
Run by the same knobheads who run this http://www.jihadwatch.org/
> Just recently, Saddam Hussein's former southern regional commander, Gen.
> Al-Tikriti, gave the first videotaped testimony confirming that Iraq had
> WMDs up to the American invasion in 2003 and that Russia helped remove
> them prior to the war. His testimony confirms numerous other sources
> that have pointed to Russia's secret alliance with Iraq and the
> co-ordinated moving of WMDs before the American liberation.
About as convincing as the "If I tell you a story will you reduce my
sentence..." prison inmate grassing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know who I'd believe.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
>>>
>>> Ah no...there is the NGA sat imagery, the Iraqi general's testimony,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>>>
>>> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
>>> Western Europe
>>
>>
>> Oh, a 'defector'... God, for info the government really did scrape the
>> bottom of the barrel.
>
> Um...he defected to France, booby!
>
Why? to get medical treatment.
>>>
>>>
>>> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>>>
>>
>>>>> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
>>>>
>>>> Nope, read other post.
>>>
>>> I did, you are a deceitful and cowardly post-editor.
>>
>> It's called snipping, or this page would be too tall
>
> It's called cowardice, there is no page height restriction.
Cowardice?
Were not talking about dropping 2,000 lb bombs on wedding parties here.
Alex DeLarge
Oh...I see...they came from ammo dumps but picked stuff up elsewhere..
> Or did they
> have a movie of the convoy from start line to destination?
The imagery I saw showed a very long line.
>> Hence, by your metric, a civilian fleeing would go TO there to be
>> trucked out, yes?
>>
>
> No, if I wanted to catch some transport I wouldn't walk 200 miles to go
> to the depot, I'd wait till they came here.
Which is "where"?
The trucks went from the ammo dumps to Syria, period.
Deal with it.
>> Sheesh...
>>
>>
>>>>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military intervention
>>>>>> around > the world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes in
>>>>>> Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And the million+ dead
>>>>
>>>> CITE?!?!
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
>>
>> "The question asked is a loaded question. It presupposes that a half
>> million children had died so far and that is the price being payed for
>> conflict, forcing Albright into a position that discredits her whether
>> she answered? "yes" or "no." This is like asking someone, "Do you
>> still beat your children?" This assumes that you have children and you
>> have beaten them, either of which could be false.
>
>
> Bollocks, she could have said "WHAT! That's a load of {beep] rubbish!!",
> not just yes or no.
If you know Albright you'll realize she wasn't going to be that
committal on national television.
> She was an experienced politician that spend the best part of her life
> dealing with (sidestepping) awkward questions from joe public and the
> media.
Blah, blah, blah...that's what she did, sidestepped it.
> This twat didn't have the audacity to deny it either.
Lol, "Democracy Now" - hardly an impartial questioning.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S1YkQs5nXQ
If he answers "our policy is wrong", she scores, if he says "it was
sound," she scores based on an embedded question.
It's one of the oldest prosecutorial tricks in the bag, and would soon
be undone in any court of law with incisive follow-up questioning.
Questioning in which, I guarantee you, neither party would avow any
acumen as to the number of dead children, nor would they have the on the
job expertise to do so.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7.weekend9
According to Unicef, the United Nations Children's Fund, the death rate
of children under five is
<speculative resource at best given these were UN sanctions...>
> http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Ramsey.html
Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of the United States, founder of
the International Action Centre, and Co-President of the International
Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions,
< famously hard left, really in most respects a communist - not credible
given his anti-US grudge >
> http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
< not a disinterested party given these were UN sanctions >
> Thousands more links out there and MOST if not all are from reputable
> people and charities, not some anonymous military person or defector you
> seem to like quoting.
I'm not quoting ANYONE with regard to child mortality though, you are.
You have a profoundly intellectually dishonest tendency to merge
disparate elements of a discussion.
>>
>> She should have addressed the fallacy rather than answer it. It's an
>> easy trap to fall into."
>>
>>> Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
>>
>> Utter unsubstantiated crap.
>>
>
> You would say that, at least it was said live in front of cameras and
> not by some anonymous person.
BFD, it's a guesstimate at best.
>> Oh and btw, the 1990's is not the time line for this discussion,
>> obfuscater.
>>
>
> Says someone who mentioned the US involvement in WWII.
You leveled a general charge against the US, I responded.
If you don't want rebuttal don't cast stones.
>>>> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>>>>
>>>> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
>>> infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
>>> malnutrition.
>>
>> Oh boo fucking hoo, double it if you like then!
>
> Why would I double it?
Multiply by the number 2?
> I cite reputable sources, not anonymous crap your government does.
You find Iraq Body Count not reputable?
Or you claim it's "government"?
>>>>
>>>> Documented civilian deaths from violence
>>>> 93,148 � 101,650
>>>>
>>>
>>> Violence.....
>>
>> Yeah, car-bombs, head-chopping, etc.
>>
>
> Bombs dropped on apartments, schools... Troops firing wildly not caring
> what they hit... etc.
>
> Plus 'friendly fire'.
War is always Hell.
>>> If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY how
>>> many would die in winter?
>>
>> Non sequitur.
>>
>
> You love saying that, are you French?
Non.
>>> Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were
>>> taken out.
>>
>> Yet OUR aid DID get in and OUR rebuilding HAS been unending.
>>
>
> Yep, close to half a billion dollars spent pampering US diplomats and
> most of the rest going inside the Green Zone.
More horsecrap, you do love to lie.
Latest USAID/Iraq News
USAID Microfinance Program in Iraq Tops $300 Million in Micro-loans -
May 28, 2009
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) announced that
Tijara, its private-sector development program in Iraq, has helped
provide more than 132,000 micro-loans worth a combined value of $300
million since the start of U.S. government microfinance assistance to
Iraq in 2004.
USAID, World Bank Partner with Iraqis to Launch Social Safety Net
Program - May 28, 2009
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and
Iraq's Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (MoLSA) today launched the
Social Safety Net program nationwide aimed at providing benefits to the
most vulnerable citizens of Iraq and facilitating their integration into
the country's economic development.
USAID Forum Advances Dialogue on Iraq's Five-Year National Development
Plan - May 20, 2009
Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Rafie al-Issawi, Minister of Planning
Dr. Ali Baban and U.S. Agency for International Development's Acting
Mission Director Thomas R. Delaney opened a two-day conference to
discuss the prospects for sustained development of Iraq under the
Five-Year National Development Plan (NDP).
USAID Helps Upgrade the Skills of Iraqi Public Managers for Oil and
Electricity - May 14, 2009
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), in collaboration
with the Ministry of Oil (MoO) and the Ministry of Electricity (MoE),
hosted a graduation ceremony for 36 managers from across Iraq who
received training in core public administration skills to prepare them
for senior leadership roles within the ministries
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/
Below is information on many of the programs that USAID has worked on
over the past few years.
Education
Health
Water and Sanitation
Power
Operations and Maintenance
Airports
Umm Qasr Seaport
Surface Transportation
Telecommunications
Vocational Education
Business Skills Training
Marshlands
Food Security
Support to Iraqi Women
Supporting Iraq's Constitution
Transition Initiatives
Civil Society and Media Development
Izdihar
Global Development Alliance
Community Based Conflict Mitigation
Elections Strengthening
Economic Governance
>>>>
>>>>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>>>>
>>>> Thus...NOT DEAD!
>>>
>>>
>>> Nice of you.
>>
>> Accurate too.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being
>>>>> killed daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>>>>
>>>> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> About as free as those in Iran.
>>
>> Not really, likely a lot more free.
>>
>
> How so?
Well they were safe, monitored, largely violence free, and verified.
>>>>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law
>>>>> that allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have sex.
>>>>> Sounds oppressive to me.
>>>>
>>>> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>>>>
>>>> You're insane.
>>>
>>> So it's OK then?
>>
>> So it's irrelevant then.
>>
>
> Nope, swapping one dictator for another isn't.
Hard to have a dictator when you have free elections - hence the
exhaustive Karzai recount.
>>> Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped in a country
>>> you helped 'liberate'?
>>
>> I can't think of much about either nation that satisfies ME, no.
>
> What will it take to satisfy you? Them to fly the Stars and Stripes
> above their government buildings?
I love your America-hating bile, it drips with delicious cycnicism, bred
no doubt over a guilt complex regarding how we aided the UK in the past.
Are you one of those new Brit-muzzies?
>>
>> But they both have, within a single generation now, a shot at
>> evolving, something that was NOT going to happen before.
>>
>
> Obviously not when your country tries to starve them into submission.
We're not doing any such thing, liar.
>>>>
>>>>>> How shameless of us...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe,
>>>>> Burma and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>>>>
>>>> 1.) It's expensive
>>>>
>>>
>>> Even Zimbabwe?
>>
>> Sure.
>
>
> Why?
Supply lines, logistics in a land-locked nation, occupation, etc.
Why don't YOU go liberate them, eh?
You love liberation so much...or do you?
>>
>>> Oh yeah, no oil.
>>
>> You do realize that US oil imports from Iraq _never_ exceeded 6-8%
>> regardless of the war, don't you?
>>
>
> 6-8% of..?
Our total crude oil imports annualized.
For a time we were down to about 2%.
>> Meanwhile:
>>
>> http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/af/zi/p0005.htm
>>
>> Although it has huge deposits of coal, the landlocked southern African
>> country of Zimbabwe has no proven oil or natural gas reserves.
>> However, it has been established that it has good potential for
>> coal-bed methane gas production.
>>
>
>
> So no oil reserves, as I said.
So what, the coal bed methane is equally attractive.
>> [we're doing a lot of that domestically now]
>>
>>>> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>>>>
>>>
>>> Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when
>>> invading other countries
>>
>> Right, the Marshall Plan and W. Edwards Deming just stuck it to
>> Germany and Japan...
>
>
> Yeah, images of Japaneses women throwing themselves of cliffs rather
> than being captured by US force in WWII.
Yeah, images of a Japanese economy WE rebuilt from the ground up.
> The pictures of young girls burnt with Napalm in Vietnam too.
See how you can't stay on topic.
The bile and hatred just flows from you.
So...the Rape of Nanking, Auschwitz, etc.
War is always Hell.
>>
>>>> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not give
>>> the people in N. Korea freedom?
>>
>> That's not an answer, dimmy.
>
>
> There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question.
> -Buddha
You can't win on any given topic so you seek to scattershot like a
deranged nitwit, it's amusing to watch.
>>
>>> Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
>>
>> Isn't it more humane to leave them alone with dear leader?
>
> Much more than bombing the fuck out of it, yeah.
Maybe you would like to travel there, stay for a while, see how it works
out?
>>
>> He's _very_ popular you know...
>
>
> Like GWB.
Oh no...not at all...MUCH MORE SO!
Big posters, photos in every home, all kindsa dictator cool stuff.
>>
>>>>> Oh that's right, the US only picks on countries unable to defend
>>>>> themselves.
>>>>
>>>> Like Nazi Germany and Japan?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh FFS, WWII started in 1945, not 1948.
>>
>> Irresponsive.
>>
>>>>> A 12 year war with Iran + 1 with the west + 12 years of very heavy
>>>>> sanctions = a very weak Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> But one abusing "oil for food" to rearm and also one sponsoring
>>>> terror operations in neighboring states.
>>>>
>>>>> A 9 year war with the Soviet Union + 23 years of rule by various
>>>>> warlords = a weak Afghanistan.
>>>>
>>>> But one strong enough to shelter and grow al Qaeda.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, they had monies and weapons left behind by the US when the
>>> Soviets left.
>>
>> Er, but none from Russia?
>
> Mostly Soviet.
That is the point.
>>
>> Or China?
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> Funny thing is, when I see them with rifles they're AKs not M16s...
>>
>
> US military hardware did have problems in deserts and jungles.
Not really, M16s are rather well-sorted.
> Bet they were scrap after a month or two.
Based on what?
Ever use one?
> AK's are so simple not much can go wrong.
You'd be surprised, ever fire one?
There are some issues with the magazine release and safety.
As well the AK is cheap stamped crap, the Colt is far more accurate,
albeit requiring lubrication more regularly.
Regardless the arms they used were Soviet and Chicom, period.
>>>>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign
>>>>>> countries, we do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>>>>
>>>> "Here"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep.. Here.
>>>
>>> Need a dictionary?
>>
>> Just a place setting.
>
> Postcode or country?
Country is fine, Brit.
>>
>>>> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon we
>>>> saved in WW2?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Like fuck....
>>
>> No?
>>
>>> The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
>>
>> Belgian?
>>
>
> Yep. It was a combined effort, no one country should take credit,
> especially one that waited a few years then took it.
Then why do I find you in another group pretending to be from the UK and
whining about the British East India Co?
Are you a liar?
>>>>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That ended 64 years ago.
>>>>
>>>> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
>>>> which WE had to get called in to put down...
>>>
>>>
>>> Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
>>
>> Your penchant for misrepresentation and outright LYING is sensational.
>>
>
> Not me, Unicef and lots of others.
Hearsay.
>>>>
>>>>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>>>>
>>>>> Big bully..!
>>>>
>>>> Kiss my ass, wimp.
>>>
>>> Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
>>
>> He might be the smartest partner you'll ever stand a chance at...
>
> Nope, I don't want your sloppy seconds.
You already have them, LOL!
Alex DeLarge
He was on the run, and you're running on empty now.
Ya think?
All those oil contracts for Total?
No, they were big-time invested.
And had future contracts that we managed to unwind as well.
>>
>> http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm
>>
>> France
>> France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] French total
>> trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest,
>> totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2]
>> In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly
>> 60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with
>> Baghdad in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3]
>
>
> "The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the
> UN Oil-for-Food program. However, U.S. companies can no longer deal
> directly with Iraq for its oil imports. U.S. companies are forced to
> deal with third party vendors as a result of a ban on all American
> companies imposed by Iraq. In 2002, the U.S. imported $3.5 billion worth
> of Iraqi oil."
Ya, so?
Um sort of, he was alleged to be terminal.
> If France loved Saddam so much
> why didn't they imprison him?
Because they knew Saddam was over, duh.
>> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>>
>> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to
>> Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime,
>> said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper �De Telegraaf,�
>> that he knows the three sites where Iraq�s WMD are kept. The storage
>> places are:
>
>
> So a journalist from one country knew the location of Saddam's most
> closely guarded secret?
That surprises you?
> One that knew he'd get treatment for his cancer if he handed over a
> juicy bit of intel.
Terminal cancer.
So, anyone been in Syria to inspect lately?
Huh...guess not...
>> 1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in
>> northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground
>> factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud
>> missiles. Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in
>> these tunnels.
>> 2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there
>> is a big Syrian airforce camp. Vital parts of Iraq�s WMD are stored
>> there.
>> 3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south
>> of the city Homs.
>> Najoef writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by
>> the commanders of Saddam Hussein�s Special Republican Guard, including
>> General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad�s
>> cousin. Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by
>> the Assad family.
>>
>>
>> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>>
>
> Anonymous perchance?
The kind of thing you'd sign your name to?
If you have no factual rebuttals whatsoever, your mind is closed.
>> I personally know from sources who were there and worked in intel that
>> the convoy out reports are accurate, believe what you wish.
>>
>
> Well.... Where do I start with that one?
You don't - it's anecdotal for all practical purposes. But none the less
true.
> Should have given all your info to your government, then there would be
> no doubt whatsoever Saddam had WMD and was about to use them.
They knew.
> You could have put a 6 year conspiracy theory to rest.
Larger stakes were in play.
See - Russia.
Some face was saved.
>> The Russians DID sell them a lot of stuff they were not anxious for US
>> to find:
>>
>
> And why not?
Oh yeah.
> Payback for US involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war?
Nope, just business as usual for a starving nation with a few good
assets to trade.
>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/oct/28/20041028-122637-6257r/
>>
>> Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons
>> and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the
>> March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.
>>
>> John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international
>> technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian
>> troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed
>> the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa
>> facility, south of Baghdad.
>>
>
> "believes", "almost certainly".
>
>
> No facts then.
No factual rebuttal either.
>> "The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole
>> series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred
>> all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the
>> Iraqis. The others were transportation units."
>>
>> http://frontpagemagazine.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4255
>>
>
>
> Run by the same knobheads who run this http://www.jihadwatch.org/
Focus on WHO was being interviewed, not by whom.
>
>> Just recently, Saddam Hussein's former southern regional commander,
>> Gen. Al-Tikriti, gave the first videotaped testimony confirming that
>> Iraq had WMDs up to the American invasion in 2003 and that Russia
>> helped remove them prior to the war. His testimony confirms numerous
>> other sources that have pointed to Russia's secret alliance with Iraq
>> and the co-ordinated moving of WMDs before the American liberation.
>
>
> About as convincing as the "If I tell you a story will you reduce my
> sentence..." prison inmate grassing.
Nothing short of a raid on Syria would convince you anyway, that's obvious.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know who I'd believe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know your penchant for denial is legendary.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And yours, believing one general over 1,400 independent people.
>>>>
>>>> Ah no...there is the NGA sat imagery, the Iraqi general's testimony,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=764
>>>>
>>>> Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria
>>>> to Western Europe
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, a 'defector'... God, for info the government really did scrape
>>> the bottom of the barrel.
>>
>> Um...he defected to France, booby!
>>
>
> Why? to get medical treatment.
So?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Letter from a Syrian source to Nizar:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Uncomfortable bit of intel that...
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, read other post.
>>>>
>>>> I did, you are a deceitful and cowardly post-editor.
>>>
>>> It's called snipping, or this page would be too tall
>>
>> It's called cowardice, there is no page height restriction.
>
> Cowardice?
Quite, the intellectual variety.
That's what snip and snipe types like you do.
> Were not talking about dropping 2,000 lb bombs on wedding parties here.
More hyperbolic irrelevancies.
Iapetus
Ah, the satellite images showed how heavy they were too, silly me.
>
>> Or did they have a movie of the convoy from start line to destination?
>
> The imagery I saw showed a very long line.
Of stationary trucks...
Any markings saying "this truck is carrying WMD" in Arabic? Or is it
look at those truck, they must be carrying WMD, as there is absolutely
nothing else they're capable of carrying.
>
>>> Hence, by your metric, a civilian fleeing would go TO there to be
>>> trucked out, yes?
>>>
>>
>> No, if I wanted to catch some transport I wouldn't walk 200 miles to
>> go to the depot, I'd wait till they came here.
>
> Which is "where"?
In my town.
>
> The trucks went from the ammo dumps to Syria, period.
No stopping for refreshments and fuel? Go invade Syria if they're loaded
to the hilt with WMD.
>
> Deal with it.
>
>>> Sheesh...
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military
>>>>>>> intervention around > the world.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes
>>>>>>> in Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the million+ dead
>>>>>
>>>>> CITE?!?!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
>>>
>>> "The question asked is a loaded question. It presupposes that a half
>>> million children had died so far and that is the price being payed
>>> for conflict, forcing Albright into a position that discredits her
>>> whether she answered? "yes" or "no." This is like asking someone, "Do
>>> you still beat your children?" This assumes that you have children
>>> and you have beaten them, either of which could be false.
>>
>>
>> Bollocks, she could have said "WHAT! That's a load of {beep]
>> rubbish!!", not just yes or no.
>
> If you know Albright you'll realize she wasn't going to be that
> committal on national television.
Committal? The silly bint admitted they were killing hundreds of
thousands of kids live on TV.
Received a humongous bollocking from her boss and changed her mind.
>
>> She was an experienced politician that spend the best part of her life
>> dealing with (sidestepping) awkward questions from joe public and the
>> media.
>
> Blah, blah, blah...that's what she did, sidestepped it.
>
>> This twat didn't have the audacity to deny it either.
>
> Lol, "Democracy Now" - hardly an impartial questioning.
>
But no "That's a load of male bovine excrement.." statement about the
dead kids.
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S1YkQs5nXQ
>
> If he answers "our policy is wrong", she scores, if he says "it was
> sound," she scores based on an embedded question.
>
Nope. Again were talking about politicians, not some mug off the
streets, if they cant handle an awkward question or two they could never
get elected.
> It's one of the oldest prosecutorial tricks in the bag, and would soon
> be undone in any court of law with incisive follow-up questioning.
And so would your anonymous "if I give you some juicy info..." sources.
>
> Questioning in which, I guarantee you, neither party would avow any
> acumen as to the number of dead children, nor would they have the on the
> job expertise to do so.
>
>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7.weekend9
>
> According to Unicef, the United Nations Children's Fund, the death rate
> of children under five is
>
> <speculative resource at best given these were UN sanctions...>
>
Speculation by... The US government?
>> http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Ramsey.html
>
> Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of the United States, founder of
> the International Action Centre, and Co-President of the International
> Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions,
>
> < famously hard left, really in most respects a communist - not credible
> given his anti-US grudge >
"We must discredit the witness", "call him a communist, that always works".
>
>> http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
>
> < not a disinterested party given these were UN sanctions >
Oh, now it's denial. "Nothing to do with us, it was the UN I tell ya!"
>
>> Thousands more links out there and MOST if not all are from reputable
>> people and charities, not some anonymous military person or defector
>> you seem to like quoting.
>
> I'm not quoting ANYONE with regard to child mortality though, you are.
>
Never said you was.
> You have a profoundly intellectually dishonest tendency to merge
> disparate elements of a discussion.
>
Eh?
You're ten times worse. Quoting anonymous sources as 110% undeniable
proof, then dissing a children's charity on the premise they have
something to gain by lying.
>>>
>>> She should have addressed the fallacy rather than answer it. It's an
>>> easy trap to fall into."
>>>
>>>> Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
>>>
>>> Utter unsubstantiated crap.
>>>
>>
>> You would say that, at least it was said live in front of cameras and
>> not by some anonymous person.
>
> BFD, it's a guesstimate at best.
100,000, 200,000, 500,000 or 700,000 dead, at which point do you say
"that should not have happened"?
>
>>> Oh and btw, the 1990's is not the time line for this discussion,
>>> obfuscater.
>>>
>>
>> Says someone who mentioned the US involvement in WWII.
>
> You leveled a general charge against the US, I responded.
>
By bringing something up nearly 70 years ago, hypocrite.
> If you don't want rebuttal don't cast stones.
Again, hypocritical.
>
>>>>> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
>>>> infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
>>>> malnutrition.
>>>
>>> Oh boo fucking hoo, double it if you like then!
>>
>> Why would I double it?
>
> Multiply by the number 2?
>
>> I cite reputable sources, not anonymous crap your government does.
>
> You find Iraq Body Count not reputable?
Do you have dementia? Iraq body count only deals with violence, not
someone forced to drink polluted river water.
>
> Or you claim it's "government"?
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Documented civilian deaths from violence
>>>>> 93,148 � 101,650
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Violence.....
>>>
>>> Yeah, car-bombs, head-chopping, etc.
>>>
>>
>> Bombs dropped on apartments, schools... Troops firing wildly not
>> caring what they hit... etc.
>>
>> Plus 'friendly fire'.
>
> War is always Hell.
Tell that to the American families of those that have died in Iraq...
They'd shoot you were you stand.
>
>>>> If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY
>>>> how many would die in winter?
>>>
>>> Non sequitur.
>>>
>>
>> You love saying that, are you French?
>
> Non.
>
>>>> Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were
>>>> taken out.
>>>
>>> Yet OUR aid DID get in and OUR rebuilding HAS been unending.
>>>
>>
>> Yep, close to half a billion dollars spent pampering US diplomats and
>> most of the rest going inside the Green Zone.
>
> More horsecrap, you do love to lie.
Do I?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3813267.stm
The beginning of July will see the official launch of the US embassy in
Baghdad, which many are describing at the largest US diplomatic mission
in the world.
The embassy itself will have an operating budget of up to $1bn in fiscal
year 2005 alone, the US State Department estimates.
And that does not include the cost of constructing the embassy building
itself.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article712424.ece
THE question puzzles and enrages a city: how is it that the Americans
cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a couple of
hours a day, yet still manage to build themselves the *biggest embassy
on Earth?*
Irritation grows as residents deprived of air-conditioning and running
water three years after the US-led invasion watch the massive US Embassy
they call �George W�s palace� rising from the banks of the Tigris.
In the pavement caf�s, people moan that the structure is bigger than
anything Saddam Hussein built. They are not impressed by the architects�
claims that the diplomatic outpost will be visible from space and cover
an area that is larger than the Vatican city and big enough to
accommodate four Millennium Domes. They are more interested in knowing
whether the US State Department paid for the prime real estate or simply
took it.
http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/637
No Water, No Electricity, No Progress
With the approaching hot summer come troubling reports of major water
and electricity shortages in Baghdad. The situation is so dire that many
Iraqis have resorted to digging wells in their backyards. Electricity
levels across Iraq are still below prewar levels, despite the fact that
increasing Iraq�s power supply was a top priority of the Bush
Administration. No military strategy will work if the U.S. cannot
provide basic services to the Iraqi people.
Baghdad is still averaging only 5.6 hours of electricity per day. This
number represents only 20% of prewar production levels. The Bush
Administration�s Coalition Provisional Authority initially targeted
6,000 megawatts per day by June of 2004 and made the creation of a
stable Iraqi electrical and water infrastructure a top priority. Iraq is
still 40% below those levels. The average amount of electricity
generated nationally in May (The last full month of reporting) was only
3,722 megawatts, a 6% drop-off from prewar levels. This despite an
effort to distribute electricity more equitably on a national level.
[Brookings Institution, 6/7/07]
"Past few years"? Saddam was toppled 6 year ago.
> Education
> Health
> Water and Sanitation
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/47680f1705a41755f52cc54b99ad50ae.htm
18 Feb 2007 12:47:18 GMT
Iraq in turmoil
BAGHDAD, 18 February (IRIN) - Umm Muhammad Jalal, 39, starts every day
walking to a river 7km away from her temporary home in a displacement
camp on the outskirts of Fallujah, 70km west of the capital, Baghdad.
Because of severe water shortages, she and many others make the daily
trip to the river to collect water for all their needs.
"For the past four months we have been forced to drink, wash and clean
with the river water. There is a dire shortage of potable water in
Fallujah and nearby cities," Umm Muhammad said.
"My children are sick with diarrhoea but I have no option. They cannot
live without water," she added. "Aid agencies that were helping us with
their trucks of potable water are less and less frequent these days for
security reasons. For the same reason, the military doesn't want the
[aid] convoys to get too close to some areas."
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus...NOT DEAD!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nice of you.
>>>
>>> Accurate too.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being
>>>>>> killed daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> About as free as those in Iran.
>>>
>>> Not really, likely a lot more free.
>>>
>>
>> How so?
>
> Well they were safe, monitored, largely violence free, and verified.
>
>>>>>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law
>>>>>> that allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have
>>>>>> sex. Sounds oppressive to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>>>>>
>>>>> You're insane.
>>>>
>>>> So it's OK then?
>>>
>>> So it's irrelevant then.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, swapping one dictator for another isn't.
>
> Hard to have a dictator when you have free elections - hence the
> exhaustive Karzai recount.
>
Yeah?
Legally raping women one week, beheading a bit later..
>
>>>> Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped in a country
>>>> you helped 'liberate'?
>>>
>>> I can't think of much about either nation that satisfies ME, no.
>>
>> What will it take to satisfy you? Them to fly the Stars and Stripes
>> above their government buildings?
>
> I love your America-hating bile, it drips with delicious cycnicism, bred
> no doubt over a guilt complex regarding how we aided the UK in the past.
>
<yawn>
No aid whatsoever. Loans, payed pack in full.
> Are you one of those new Brit-muzzies?
>
>
White Atheist.
>>>
>>> But they both have, within a single generation now, a shot at
>>> evolving, something that was NOT going to happen before.
>>>
>>
>> Obviously not when your country tries to starve them into submission.
>
> We're not doing any such thing, liar.
>
Was. And planning to increase sanctions in Iran.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> How shameless of us...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe,
>>>>>> Burma and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.) It's expensive
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Even Zimbabwe?
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>
>>
>> Why?
>
> Supply lines, logistics in a land-locked nation, occupation, etc.
>
> Why don't YOU go liberate them, eh?
>
> You love liberation so much...or do you?
>
Nope, I wasn't for liberating a million Iraqis of their lives,
especially as they never attacked or invaded anyone since the 90s.
Go on, I dare you to say they were behind 9/11.
>>>
>>>> Oh yeah, no oil.
>>>
>>> You do realize that US oil imports from Iraq _never_ exceeded 6-8%
>>> regardless of the war, don't you?
>>>
>>
>> 6-8% of..?
>
> Our total crude oil imports annualized.
>
> For a time we were down to about 2%.
>
How many billions of dollars was that?
>
>>> Meanwhile:
>>>
>>> http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/af/zi/p0005.htm
>>>
>>> Although it has huge deposits of coal, the landlocked southern
>>> African country of Zimbabwe has no proven oil or natural gas
>>> reserves. However, it has been established that it has good potential
>>> for coal-bed methane gas production.
>>>
>>
>>
>> So no oil reserves, as I said.
>
> So what, the coal bed methane is equally attractive.
Drill baby, drill.
>
>>> [we're doing a lot of that domestically now]
>>>
>>>>> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when
>>>> invading other countries
>>>
>>> Right, the Marshall Plan and W. Edwards Deming just stuck it to
>>> Germany and Japan...
>>
>>
>> Yeah, images of Japaneses women throwing themselves of cliffs rather
>> than being captured by US force in WWII.
>
> Yeah, images of a Japanese economy WE rebuilt from the ground up.
After using WMD on them.
>
>> The pictures of young girls burnt with Napalm in Vietnam too.
>
> See how you can't stay on topic.
>
> The bile and hatred just flows from you.
>
Are you going to 'shock and awe' me?
> So...the Rape of Nanking, Auschwitz, etc.
>
> War is always Hell.
>
Sure is, ten times worse when the most powerful nation on earth wages
war on a defenseless one. For no reason.
>>>
>>>>> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not give
>>>> the people in N. Korea freedom?
>>>
>>> That's not an answer, dimmy.
>>
>>
>> There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question.
>> -Buddha
>
> You can't win on any given topic so you seek to scattershot like a
> deranged nitwit, it's amusing to watch.
Yeah.
While you quote hearsay from someone scared to show their face.
>
>>>
>>>> Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
>>>
>>> Isn't it more humane to leave them alone with dear leader?
>>
>> Much more than bombing the fuck out of it, yeah.
>
> Maybe you would like to travel there, stay for a while, see how it works
> out?
>
Why? planning to invade?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCzUvCRiBZs
>
>> Bet they were scrap after a month or two.
>
> Based on what?
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCzUvCRiBZs
> Ever use one?
>
>> AK's are so simple not much can go wrong.
>
> You'd be surprised, ever fire one?
>
> There are some issues with the magazine release and safety.
>
> As well the AK is cheap stamped crap, the Colt is far more accurate,
> albeit requiring lubrication more regularly.
Who needs to be accurate when on full auto? Point, shoot and hope you hit.
>
> Regardless the arms they used were Soviet and Chicom, period.
Yep, not one single US munition, they beat the Ruskies all on their
lonesome.
>
>>>>>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign
>>>>>>> countries, we do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Here"?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep.. Here.
>>>>
>>>> Need a dictionary?
>>>
>>> Just a place setting.
>>
>> Postcode or country?
>
> Country is fine, Brit.
>
Britain is not a country.
>>>
>>>>> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon
>>>>> we saved in WW2?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Like fuck....
>>>
>>> No?
>>>
>>>> The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
>>>
>>> Belgian?
>>>
>>
>> Yep. It was a combined effort, no one country should take credit,
>> especially one that waited a few years then took it.
>
> Then why do I find you in another group pretending to be from the UK and
> whining about the British East India Co?
>
What the fuck has that got to do with the US taking credit for winning WWII?
As you like to say, non sequitur
> Are you a liar?
>
Go look at one of the names of the groups you're cross-postin to,
alt.politics.british, then look at the post about East India Co, is it
alt.politics.british by chance?
>>>>>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That ended 64 years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
>>>>> which WE had to get called in to put down...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
>>>
>>> Your penchant for misrepresentation and outright LYING is sensational.
>>>
>>
>> Not me, Unicef and lots of others.
>
> Hearsay.
>
Wow, from someone quoting anonymous/military sources that's a bit
hypocritical.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Big bully..!
>>>>>
>>>>> Kiss my ass, wimp.
>>>>
>>>> Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
>>>
>>> He might be the smartest partner you'll ever stand a chance at...
>>
>> Nope, I don't want your sloppy seconds.
>
> You already have them, LOL!
Nope. You must have sent it to the wrong address, no donkeys within 2
miles from here.
Iapetus
Oh, so The US was the bigest importer of Iraqi oil while the French were
the third.
And you say they have a bigger stake.
Moron, your not worth typing to any more.
Alex DeLarge
You really have nothing substantive to say, this discourse is largely ended.
>>
>>> Or did they have a movie of the convoy from start line to destination?
>>
>> The imagery I saw showed a very long line.
>
>
> Of stationary trucks...
Did you see the imagery too?
> Any markings saying "this truck is carrying WMD" in Arabic? Or is it
> look at those truck, they must be carrying WMD, as there is absolutely
> nothing else they're capable of carrying.
What do trucks coming from ammo dumps usually carry?
How many more ways will you spin denial?
>>
>>>> Hence, by your metric, a civilian fleeing would go TO there to be
>>>> trucked out, yes?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, if I wanted to catch some transport I wouldn't walk 200 miles to
>>> go to the depot, I'd wait till they came here.
>>
>> Which is "where"?
>
>
> In my town.
This has become silly, you don't live in Iraq.
And those trucks weren't carrying civilians.
>>
>> The trucks went from the ammo dumps to Syria, period.
>
> No stopping for refreshments and fuel? Go invade Syria if they're loaded
> to the hilt with WMD.
Why would Iraq invade a friendly nation (Syria) when they had the US and
allies to contend with?
You have utterly abandoned logic and devolved to banal stupidity.
>>
>> Deal with it.
>>
>>>> Sheesh...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Take a look, at our long sorry history of military
>>>>>>>> intervention around > the world.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> YEs, take a look...50 million liberated from oppressive regimes
>>>>>>>> in Afghanistan and Iraq...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And the million+ dead
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CITE?!?!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4
>>>>
>>>> "The question asked is a loaded question. It presupposes that a half
>>>> million children had died so far and that is the price being payed
>>>> for conflict, forcing Albright into a position that discredits her
>>>> whether she answered? "yes" or "no." This is like asking someone,
>>>> "Do you still beat your children?" This assumes that you have
>>>> children and you have beaten them, either of which could be false.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bollocks, she could have said "WHAT! That's a load of {beep]
>>> rubbish!!", not just yes or no.
>>
>> If you know Albright you'll realize she wasn't going to be that
>> committal on national television.
>
> Committal? The silly bint admitted they were killing hundreds of
> thousands of kids live on TV.
No, she did not.
> Received a humongous bollocking from her boss and changed her mind.
Wrong again.
>>
>>> She was an experienced politician that spend the best part of her
>>> life dealing with (sidestepping) awkward questions from joe public
>>> and the media.
>>
>> Blah, blah, blah...that's what she did, sidestepped it.
>>
>>> This twat didn't have the audacity to deny it either.
>>
>> Lol, "Democracy Now" - hardly an impartial questioning.
>>
>
> But no "That's a load of male bovine excrement.." statement about the
> dead kids.
You fail to grasp the act of ignoring a leading question.
>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S1YkQs5nXQ
>>
>> If he answers "our policy is wrong", she scores, if he says "it was
>> sound," she scores based on an embedded question.
>>
>
>
> Nope.
Yep.
You are intellectually dishonest.
> Again were talking about politicians, not some mug off the
> streets, if they cant handle an awkward question or two they could never
> get elected.
They did "handle" it, fool, are you too dense to grasp the sidestep
maneuver?
>> It's one of the oldest prosecutorial tricks in the bag, and would soon
>> be undone in any court of law with incisive follow-up questioning.
>
>
> And so would your anonymous "if I give you some juicy info..." sources.
Again your consummate mendacity is evidenced in trying to merge
disparate elements of the discussion.
Why are you unable to address discrete subjects on their individual merits?
Do you think anyone reading this can't see your need to polemicize with
a systemic indictment?
>>
>> Questioning in which, I guarantee you, neither party would avow any
>> acumen as to the number of dead children, nor would they have the on
>> the job expertise to do so.
>>
>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/mar/04/weekend7.weekend9
>>
>> According to Unicef, the United Nations Children's Fund, the death
>> rate of children under five is
>>
>> <speculative resource at best given these were UN sanctions...>
>>
>
> Speculation by... The US government?
UNICEF is not the "US government".
>
>>> http://www.twf.org/News/Y1997/Ramsey.html
>>
>> Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of the United States, founder of
>> the International Action Centre, and Co-President of the International
>> Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions,
>>
>> < famously hard left, really in most respects a communist - not
>> credible given his anti-US grudge >
>
>
> "We must discredit the witness", "call him a communist, that always works".
Do you deny his communist background?
>>
>>> http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
>>
>> < not a disinterested party given these were UN sanctions >
>
>
> Oh, now it's denial. "Nothing to do with us, it was the UN I tell ya!"
Do you deny their vested conflict of interest?
>>
>>> Thousands more links out there and MOST if not all are from reputable
>>> people and charities, not some anonymous military person or defector
>>> you seem to like quoting.
>>
>> I'm not quoting ANYONE with regard to child mortality though, you are.
>>
>
> Never said you was.
Then why did you dishonestly merge my cite of Maj. Delong with the
UNICEF diatribe?
Is it because you are rife with intellectual deceit?
Is it because you got your ass kicked and had to hop to another topic?
>> You have a profoundly intellectually dishonest tendency to merge
>> disparate elements of a discussion.
>>
>
> Eh?
The indictment is secure, you refuse to argue on topic.
> You're ten times worse.
That's another lie.
I have not once crossed topics to pollute the discussion, that's been
YOUR methodology.
> Quoting anonymous sources as 110% undeniable
> proof,
I never said anything about 110% deniability, that's another LIE from you.
> then dissing a children's charity on the premise they have
> something to gain by lying.
There's your straw man.
I let you play with him a while, now it's time to expose your strident
need to do nothing more than attack the US.
And really that's all you were about in the first place.
You lost the Iraq-WMD entry skirmish badly and now have spread your
attack into everything from UN sanctions to Vietnam and Korea.
It's a pathetic display of disrespect for the honest tenets of debate
and a clear example of embedded national spite.
Here's a clue, fuck off, eat shit, and choke to death on a bad batch of
mussels you moldy Belgian Nazi-appeaser.
Mmmm'k?
>>>>
>>>> She should have addressed the fallacy rather than answer it. It's an
>>>> easy trap to fall into."
>>>>
>>>>> Half a million Muslim kids, and that was in the 90s
>>>>
>>>> Utter unsubstantiated crap.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You would say that, at least it was said live in front of cameras and
>>> not by some anonymous person.
>>
>> BFD, it's a guesstimate at best.
>
>
> 100,000, 200,000, 500,000 or 700,000 dead, at which point do you say
> "that should not have happened"?
Dunno, why don't you ask the root CAUSE of the sanctions, jolly old Sod-em?
Oh, never mind...he's DEAD!
I suppose you might indict the organization that issued them then...the
UNITED NATIONS...
Or maybe you'll just keep on falsely blaming the US.
Which is all you scum sucking Euro-trash ever do anyway.
Do us all a favor, drop fucking dead.
>>
>>>> Oh and btw, the 1990's is not the time line for this discussion,
>>>> obfuscater.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Says someone who mentioned the US involvement in WWII.
>>
>> You leveled a general charge against the US, I responded.
>>
>
> By bringing something up nearly 70 years ago, hypocrite.
Then don't level general charges, ok?
Too fucking bad your feelings got hurt by the cold steel of history.
Be glad I didn't take a swipe at your appeaser King Leopold, eh
mussel-eater?
>> If you don't want rebuttal don't cast stones.
>
>
> Again, hypocritical.
Yes, you summarily are.
>>
>>>>>> There are no "million dead", you asshat!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That deals with those that died from munitions, not because their
>>>>> infrastructure was taken out and they died from disease, cold and
>>>>> malnutrition.
>>>>
>>>> Oh boo fucking hoo, double it if you like then!
>>>
>>> Why would I double it?
>>
>> Multiply by the number 2?
>>
>>> I cite reputable sources, not anonymous crap your government does.
>>
>> You find Iraq Body Count not reputable?
>
>
> Do you have dementia?
Do you ever answer a question honestly?
> Iraq body count only deals with violence, not
> someone forced to drink polluted river water.
Choke on some yourself, liar.
>>
>> Or you claim it's "government"?
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Documented civilian deaths from violence
>>>>>> 93,148 � 101,650
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Violence.....
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, car-bombs, head-chopping, etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Bombs dropped on apartments, schools... Troops firing wildly not
>>> caring what they hit... etc.
>>>
>>> Plus 'friendly fire'.
>>
>> War is always Hell.
>
>
> Tell that to the American families of those that have died in Iraq...
> They'd shoot you were you stand.
No...they would agree.
It's rather a constant in any war.
Even one Nazi-appeasers like your countrymen tried to weasel out of.
>>
>>>>> If water treatment plants and power stations were taken out in NY
>>>>> how many would die in winter?
>>>>
>>>> Non sequitur.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You love saying that, are you French?
>>
>> Non.
>>
>>>>> Especially as no aid could get to them as the roads/railways were
>>>>> taken out.
>>>>
>>>> Yet OUR aid DID get in and OUR rebuilding HAS been unending.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep, close to half a billion dollars spent pampering US diplomats and
>>> most of the rest going inside the Green Zone.
>>
>> More horsecrap, you do love to lie.
>
>
> Do I?
Why yes you do.
You also like to snip out cites.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3813267.stm
>
>
> The beginning of July will see the official launch of the US embassy in
> Baghdad, which many are describing at the largest US diplomatic mission
> in the world.
>
> The embassy itself will have an operating budget of up to $1bn in fiscal
> year 2005 alone, the US State Department estimates.
>
> And that does not include the cost of constructing the embassy building
> itself.
So?
Is that the ONLY project we've done there?
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article712424.ece
>
> THE question puzzles and enrages a city: how is it that the Americans
> cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a couple of
> hours a day, yet still manage to build themselves the *biggest embassy
> on Earth?*
Simple, one is a building, the other a city.
> Irritation grows as residents deprived of air-conditioning and running
> water three years after the US-led invasion watch the massive US Embassy
> they call �George W�s palace� rising from the banks of the Tigris.
>
> In the pavement caf�s, people moan that the structure is bigger than
> anything Saddam Hussein built. They are not impressed by the architects�
> claims that the diplomatic outpost will be visible from space and cover
> an area that is larger than the Vatican city and big enough to
> accommodate four Millennium Domes. They are more interested in knowing
> whether the US State Department paid for the prime real estate or simply
> took it.
Big 'ol yawn...
> http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/637
>
> No Water, No Electricity, No Progress
>
> With the approaching hot summer come troubling reports of major water
> and electricity shortages in Baghdad. The situation is so dire that many
> Iraqis have resorted to digging wells in their backyards. Electricity
> levels across Iraq are still below prewar levels, despite the fact that
> increasing Iraq�s power supply was a top priority of the Bush
> Administration. No military strategy will work if the U.S. cannot
> provide basic services to the Iraqi people.
>
>
> Baghdad is still averaging only 5.6 hours of electricity per day. This
> number represents only 20% of prewar production levels. The Bush
> Administration�s Coalition Provisional Authority initially targeted
> 6,000 megawatts per day by June of 2004 and made the creation of a
> stable Iraqi electrical and water infrastructure a top priority. Iraq is
> still 40% below those levels. The average amount of electricity
> generated nationally in May (The last full month of reporting) was only
> 3,722 megawatts, a 6% drop-off from prewar levels. This despite an
> effort to distribute electricity more equitably on a national level.
> [Brookings Institution, 6/7/07]
2 years old.
Anything more recent?
So?
You can search deeper if you wish.
You will recall it took time to secure the region so contractors could
work without being killed by AQ insurgents.
Well, no you won't, because intellectual deceit is your byline.
>> Education
>> Health
>> Water and Sanitation
>
> http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/47680f1705a41755f52cc54b99ad50ae.htm
>
>
>
> 18 Feb 2007 12:47:18 GMT
>
> Iraq in turmoil
>
> BAGHDAD, 18 February (IRIN) - Umm Muhammad Jalal, 39, starts every day
> walking to a river 7km away from her temporary home in a displacement
> camp on the outskirts of Fallujah, 70km west of the capital, Baghdad.
> Because of severe water shortages, she and many others make the daily
> trip to the river to collect water for all their needs.
>
> "For the past four months we have been forced to drink, wash and clean
> with the river water. There is a dire shortage of potable water in
> Fallujah and nearby cities," Umm Muhammad said.
>
> "My children are sick with diarrhoea but I have no option. They cannot
> live without water," she added. "Aid agencies that were helping us with
> their trucks of potable water are less and less frequent these days for
> security reasons. For the same reason, the military doesn't want the
> [aid] convoys to get too close to some areas."
That cite is 2 years old!
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and 3-5 million who fled those countries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus...NOT DEAD!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice of you.
>>>>
>>>> Accurate too.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Plus they haven't been 'liberated' yet, people are still being
>>>>>>> killed daily by terrorists AND American forces.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have they had several free elections in both nations?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> About as free as those in Iran.
>>>>
>>>> Not really, likely a lot more free.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How so?
>>
>> Well they were safe, monitored, largely violence free, and verified.
>>
>>>>>>> The current ruler (dictator) of Afghanistan recently passed a law
>>>>>>> that allowed men to starve their wives if they refused to have
>>>>>>> sex. Sounds oppressive to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Compared to what the Taliban were doing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're insane.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's OK then?
>>>>
>>>> So it's irrelevant then.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, swapping one dictator for another isn't.
>>
>> Hard to have a dictator when you have free elections - hence the
>> exhaustive Karzai recount.
>>
>
> Yeah?
Why yes.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/09/us-to-karzai-accept-vote-recount/
The Obama administration, debating whether to send thousands more U.S.
troops to Afghanistan, has intensified pressure on Afghan President
Hamid Karzai not to declare victory and to agree to a partial recount of
votes in an election tainted by massive fraud.
Administration officials said the U.S. ambassador to Kabul, Karl
Eikenberry, pressed Mr. Karzai in meetings Monday and Tuesday to allow
the fraud investigation to play out before claiming publicly that he has
been re-elected. An Afghan-run election commission said that with more
than 90 percent of the votes counted, Mr. Karzai had 54 percent, enough
to avoid a runoff.
At the same time, the U.N.-backed Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC)
- an independent body with the power to investigate and nullify
fraudulent votes - ordered a recount at hundreds of polling stations
where it said it had found "clear and convincing evidence of fraud"
during the Aug. 20 election.
> Legally raping women one week, beheading a bit later..
Non sequitur.
>>
>>>>> Your very satisfied that women can now be legally raped in a
>>>>> country you helped 'liberate'?
>>>>
>>>> I can't think of much about either nation that satisfies ME, no.
>>>
>>> What will it take to satisfy you? Them to fly the Stars and Stripes
>>> above their government buildings?
>>
>> I love your America-hating bile, it drips with delicious cycnicism,
>> bred no doubt over a guilt complex regarding how we aided the UK in
>> the past.
>>
>
>
> <yawn>
>
> No aid whatsoever. Loans, payed pack in full.
Um...ever hear of lend-lease?
Yes, there was plenty of aid to the UK.
http://www.classbrain.com/artteenst/publish/article_83.shtml
The Senate passed the $5.98 billion supplemental Lend-Lease bill on
October 23, 1941, bringing the United States one step closer to direct
involvement in World War II. The Lend-Lease Act, approved by Congress in
March 1941, gave President Roosevelt virtually unlimited authority to
direct material aid such as ammunition, tanks, airplanes, trucks, and
food to the war effort in Europe without violating the nation's official
position of neutrality.
The United States formally entered the war in December 1941 following
the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Initially intended to help Great Britain, within months, the Lend-Lease
program was expanded to include China and the Soviet Union. By the end
of the war, the United States had extended $49,100,000,000 in Lend-Lease
aid to more than 40 nations.
>> Are you one of those new Brit-muzzies?
>>
>>
>
> White Atheist.
Unsurprising that you'd be a Godless heathen...
Did your parents appease the Nazis like your traitor King Leopold?
Are you the rape-child offspring of a Nazi storm trooper and your slut
mother?
>>>>
>>>> But they both have, within a single generation now, a shot at
>>>> evolving, something that was NOT going to happen before.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Obviously not when your country tries to starve them into submission.
>>
>> We're not doing any such thing, liar.
>>
>
> Was. And planning to increase sanctions in Iran.
Nope sorry, those were UN sanctions.
Try again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How shameless of us...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then why not liberate billions in China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe,
>>>>>>> Burma and N. Korea from oppressive regimes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.) It's expensive
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Even Zimbabwe?
>>>>
>>>> Sure.
>>>
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Supply lines, logistics in a land-locked nation, occupation, etc.
>>
>> Why don't YOU go liberate them, eh?
>>
>> You love liberation so much...or do you?
>>
>
> Nope, I wasn't for liberating a million Iraqis of their lives,
What about the 26 million enslaved under Sod-em?
> especially as they never attacked or invaded anyone since the 90s.
No, they were too busy killing their own Kurds off.
> Go on, I dare you to say they were behind 9/11.
Of course you do.
Your whole act is one giant "I hate the US" game.
Here's a clue, Nazi appeaser, fuck off, eat shit, and DIE.
>>>>
>>>>> Oh yeah, no oil.
>>>>
>>>> You do realize that US oil imports from Iraq _never_ exceeded 6-8%
>>>> regardless of the war, don't you?
>>>>
>>>
>>> 6-8% of..?
>>
>> Our total crude oil imports annualized.
>>
>
>> For a time we were down to about 2%.
>>
>
> How many billions of dollars was that?
Who really cares.
It's a pittance compared to the total, isn't it?
You see if we'd wanted Iraq's oil we'd have had it, wouldn't we?
Yet somehow that charge withers under the reality that our imports from
Iraq never increased.
Oh well...
Another lie disabused.
>>
>>>> Meanwhile:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/af/zi/p0005.htm
>>>>
>>>> Although it has huge deposits of coal, the landlocked southern
>>>> African country of Zimbabwe has no proven oil or natural gas
>>>> reserves. However, it has been established that it has good
>>>> potential for coal-bed methane gas production.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So no oil reserves, as I said.
>>
>> So what, the coal bed methane is equally attractive.
>
>
> Drill baby, drill.
Excellent idea, we are - all over North Dakota, Texas, Pennsylvania, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_Formation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcellus_Formation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Shale
Great stuff, love it!
>>
>>>> [we're doing a lot of that domestically now]
>>>>
>>>>>> 2.) No one else wants to help out
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Too fukin' right, the world has seen what pricks you are when
>>>>> invading other countries
>>>>
>>>> Right, the Marshall Plan and W. Edwards Deming just stuck it to
>>>> Germany and Japan...
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, images of Japaneses women throwing themselves of cliffs rather
>>> than being captured by US force in WWII.
>>
>> Yeah, images of a Japanese economy WE rebuilt from the ground up.
>
> After using WMD on them.
Quick way to save the slaughter of another 1/2 million of our troops, yes.
Sensible move.
>>
>>> The pictures of young girls burnt with Napalm in Vietnam too.
>>
>> See how you can't stay on topic.
>>
>> The bile and hatred just flows from you.
>>
>
> Are you going to 'shock and awe' me?
I've not needed any more than your own poisoned hypocrisy thus far,
Nazi-appeaser!
Why are all you mussel-eaters such gutless pukes anyway?
>> So...the Rape of Nanking, Auschwitz, etc.
>>
>> War is always Hell.
>>
>
> Sure is, ten times worse when the most powerful nation on earth wages
> war on a defenseless one. For no reason.
Oh come on, we forgave the Soviets, why can't you?
Why is it all you Nazi-appeasers have such a global inferiority complex
anyway?
Could it be because you're all gutless cunts who can't win your own fights?
>>>>
>>>>>> 3.) Why do libitards always decry one war by asking for another?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You right-wing pricks talk about democracy and freedom, why not
>>>>> give the people in N. Korea freedom?
>>>>
>>>> That's not an answer, dimmy.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question.
>>> -Buddha
>>
>> You can't win on any given topic so you seek to scattershot like a
>> deranged nitwit, it's amusing to watch.
>
>
> Yeah.
Well OK, it's really appalling, but in a perversely amusing sense.
> While you quote hearsay from someone scared to show their face.
While your parents appeased the Nazis, you gutless cunt.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Oh.... They're not worth it as it costs too.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't it more humane to leave them alone with dear leader?
>>>
>>> Much more than bombing the fuck out of it, yeah.
>>
>> Maybe you would like to travel there, stay for a while, see how it
>> works out?
>>
>
> Why? planning to invade?
No, afraid to see if your "dear leader" is humane to travelers?
Go on cunt, live your rhetoric in person for a change.
http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=4889
AK-47 blows up on a security contractor at a range in Fallujah - Iraq
Eat hot lead, Belgian cunt.
>>
>>> Bet they were scrap after a month or two.
>>
>> Based on what?
>>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCzUvCRiBZs
http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=4889
AK-47 blows up on a security contractor at a range in Fallujah - Iraq
Eat hot lead, Belgian cunt.
>
>> Ever use one?
>>
>>> AK's are so simple not much can go wrong.
>>
>> You'd be surprised, ever fire one?
>>
>> There are some issues with the magazine release and safety.
>>
>> As well the AK is cheap stamped crap, the Colt is far more accurate,
>> albeit requiring lubrication more regularly.
>
> Who needs to be accurate when on full auto? Point, shoot and hope you hit.
Guess you never saw any combat, unsurprisingly...you gutless Belgian cunt.
Full auto is only useful in certain engagements.
>>
>> Regardless the arms they used were Soviet and Chicom, period.
>
> Yep, not one single US munition, they beat the Ruskies all on their
> lonesome.
Largely Soviet and Chicom stuff, deal.
>>
>>>>>>>> > Iran doesn't have military bases established in foreign
>>>>>>>> countries, we do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...and that's a GOOD thing!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, thankfully most Yank bases around here have gone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Here"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep.. Here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Need a dictionary?
>>>>
>>>> Just a place setting.
>>>
>>> Postcode or country?
>>
>> Country is fine, Brit.
>>
>
> Britain is not a country.
You're a gutless Belgian puke _pretending_ to be English, aren't you?
>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, are you one of those milquetoast boutique-nations whose bacon
>>>>>> we saved in WW2?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like fuck....
>>>>
>>>> No?
>>>>
>>>>> The Soviets and French resistance helped more than the US.
>>>>
>>>> Belgian?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep. It was a combined effort, no one country should take credit,
>>> especially one that waited a few years then took it.
>>
>> Then why do I find you in another group pretending to be from the UK
>> and whining about the British East India Co?
>>
>
> What the fuck has that got to do with the US taking credit for winning
> WWII?
Oh my...
Did you think you'd gin up a nym, deploy it across the Usenet and not be
researched for your background, cunt?
> As you like to say, non sequitur
Non.
"EVERY society has its wankers. including ours.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8261117.stm
He's not Black or Muslim. He's the sort of person who would be welcomed
by the BNP, A NATIVE INDIGENOUS BRIT!"
So which is it,pretender?
Are you a Belgian or a Brit?
Looks like you've been caught playing both sides of the channel, cunt.
>> Are you a liar?
>>
>
> Go look at one of the names of the groups you're cross-postin to,
> alt.politics.british, then look at the post about East India Co, is it
> alt.politics.british by chance?
So which are you, Belgian or Brit?
>>>>>>>> > Iran has not attacked, invaded, bombed any country, we have.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To end Nazism and the Axis alliance, shameful stuff!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That ended 64 years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well there was a similar resurgence of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo,
>>>>>> which WE had to get called in to put down...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Half a million Muslim kids, killed by US sanctions....
>>>>
>>>> Your penchant for misrepresentation and outright LYING is sensational.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not me, Unicef and lots of others.
>>
>> Hearsay.
>>
>
> Wow, from someone quoting anonymous/military sources that's a bit
> hypocritical.
Wow, have you decided if you're a Belgian Nazi-appeaser or a British
traitor, which is it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > So who are we to tell Iran not to have a nuclear bomb?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We are the BIG DOG, deal!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Big bully..!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kiss my ass, wimp.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would I want to kiss your donkey?
>>>>
>>>> He might be the smartest partner you'll ever stand a chance at...
>>>
>>> Nope, I don't want your sloppy seconds.
>>
>> You already have them, LOL!
>
> Nope. You must have sent it to the wrong address, no donkeys within 2
> miles from here.
Gutless cunt, you got caught LYING about which nation you misrepresent.
You sad little fraud artist.
Alex DeLarge
Oh so the French were signing HUGE contracts to develop new fields in
Iraq while the US wasn't?
http://frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=13371
If you read the French press, or the glowing accounts of Chirac's
opposition to the U.S. effort to build an international coalition to
oust Saddam Hussein that appeared here in America, you might actually
believe that the French were standing on principle.
I reveal that Chirac was defending something quite different when he
sent his erstwhile foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, around the
world to buy votes against America at the United nations. Chirac was
determined to maintain Saddam Hussein in power so that two
extraordinarily lucrative oil contracts, negotiated by the French, could
go into effect. Very little has been written about this until now.
The deals were negotiated separately by CFP Total and by Elf Aquitaine
during the mid to late 1990s. At the time, both companies were
state-controlled. They have since been privatized and combined into the
world�s second largest oil giant, TotalFinalElf.
Through my sources, I obtained a copy of one of these contracts. It
spans 154 pages, and grants the French exclusive right to exploit one of
Iraq�s largest oil fields at Nahr al-Umar for a period of twenty years.
Under the deal, the French were given 75% of the revenue from every
barril of oil they extracted � 75%! That is absolutely stunning. Not
even during the pre-OPEC days were foreign oil operators granted such
extravagant terms.
I discussed the contract with an independent oil analyst, Gerald
Hillman, who estimated that during the first seven years alone, it would
earn the French around $50 billion. Elf-Aquitaine negotiated a virtually
identical deal with Saddam to expand the gigantic Majnoon oil field as
well. Put together, those two deals were worth $100 billion to the
French. That�s 100 billion good reasons for Mr. Chirac to keep Saddam in
power.
Because of the United Nations sanctions, the French were allowed to do
some initial scoping out work on the oil fields, but they couldn�t begin
actual production until the sanctions were lifted. So this was a clear
quid pro quo. As Hillman told me, what the French were saying in this
contract was very simple: �We will help you get the sanctions lifted,
and when we do that, you give us this.� And that is precisely what the
French were trying to do at the UN. I�ve called these $100 billion deals
from Saddam to Chirac the largest bribe ever paid in history. It was
Chirac�s War for Oil.
> And you say they have a bigger stake.
They certainly did in future oil field development,yes.
http://www.kentimmerman.com/news/tnr_french-twist.htm
It's no secret that France has significant oil interests in Iraq.
According to Richard Perle, who heads the Pentagon's unofficial Advisory
Defense Policy Board, the French national oil giant TotalFinaElf
recently negotiated a contract with Baghdad to expand Iraq's huge
southern oil fields worth an estimated $40 to $60 billion. That contract
can only come to fruition if Saddam remains in power. "One can suspect
that there is something there; that in between the real value of the
contract and the cash value of that contract there is a certain amount
of political support," Perle says. "It's entirely possible that Saddam
negotiated that deal because he thought that along with the revenues . .
. . he'd get something else."
TotalFinaElf has not publicly announced the deal mentioned by Perle, yet
a former Iraqi trade official who recently defected told me that Baghdad
was seeking "to reward France through lucrative oil contracts" for its
political support. He also pointed out that Iraqi intermediaries
regularly arranged payment from French oil companies under the U.N.'s
oil-for-food program and that these oil firms send some of the cash to
Saddam's inner circle. "Ten percent of contract value is regularly
kicked back to Saddam Hussein and his sons, Uday and Qusay, for use in
purchasing equipment for their illicit weapons programs," he said.
Worse than oil deals, Iraq turns to France for telecommunications
products, pesticides, and other items ostensibly imported to rebuild
Iraq's civilian infrastructure but which cold be used for Iraqi weapons
programs. Since 1997, the U.N. Office of the Iraq Programme (OIP) has
catalogued Iraq's foreign contract in a database that shows a wealth of
French deals.
For instance, a review of export-license applications catalogued by the
OIP reveals that, over the past four years, French telecommunications
giant Alcatel has signed contracts worth more than $65 million to
upgrade Iraq's fiber optic infrastructure, which American intelligence
complains helps Baghdad evade electronic eavesdropping. During the Gulf
war, most of Saddam's military communications were carried over
microwave relays, or more simply by radio, and were easily tapped by
American intelligence from afar. But fiber-optic landlines must be
physically tapped into by agents on the ground, putting these agents at
serious risk. Fiber optics, accordingly, would provide the Iraqi regime
with better security over its operational planning, allowing Saddam to
more easily relay his orders to commanders in the field in the event of war.
Over the same time period, many other French companies have made the
pilgrimage to Baghdad. French firms have supplied specialized pumps and
other equipment that could potentially be sued for Iraq's centrifuge or
uranium-enrichment programs. Indeed, an October 2001 intelligence
analysis by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory indicated that
Iraq was importing large quantities of equipment from France and
elsewhere that was specially coated to allow it to be used with highly
corrosive uranium hexafluoride gas, which is used in uranium enrichment.
Meanwhile, French automakers Renault and Peugeot have signed deals to
supply Iraq with trucks, including tractor-trailers, that can be
modified and used to launch Scud missiles. The medical company Karl
Storz Endoscopic France S.A. has inked a contract to sell Iraq
lithotripsy machines, which can be used for treating kidney stones. But
these machines also employ a high-speed krytron switch similar to those
used to trigger nuclear warheads, and, according to published reports,
Baghdad sought to import an additional 120 "spare" krytrons that might
then be utilized in military programs. Indeed, former Iraq officials say
that an Iraqi intermediary named Faiz Nahab, who now lives in Britain,
has repeatedly sought to import banned equipment for Iraq's weapons
programs under the guise of medical devices.
Given the potential dual use of items like the lithotripsy machines, the
United States, using its power over sanctions on Iraq, has placed a hold
on the Karl Storz deal. That deal, unfortunately, is hardly unique. A
recent $40 million contract with the French subsidiary of the German
company Siemens to supply unspecified "engineering services" to Iraq was
put on hold by the American mission at the United Nations because of its
potential to feed directly into Iraq's proscribed weapons programs. In
fact, Washington has placed holds on 93 French contracts because of
their potential to be utilized in producing weapons of mass destruction.
Many times, including in the case of Karl Storz, the French government
has simply turned around and resubmitted similar contracts to the United
Nations, which have gone through.
In private, French officials vigorously deny that commercial motives are
driving their alliance with Germany against using force to disarm Iraq.
Yet, even as the drums of war beat louder and the world focuses on
Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, French firms have continued their
potentially dangerous trade with Baghdad. According to OIP information,
in 2002 French agricultural-equipment supplies Dow AgroSciences and
Levant Overseas Development Ltd., signed deals providing Iraq with
pesticides, a catchall category of chemicals that American officials and
nonproliferation experts point out includes chemicals that are direct
precursors of chemical weapons.
If Iraq's past behavior is any guide, even more dangerous contracts
signed in secret may come out in the wake of a conflict with the United
States. Which is one more reason Paris would prefer Saddam remain in power.
> Moron, your not worth typing to any more.
Fraudulent cunt, did you decide yet if you're a Belgian Nazi-appeaser or
a traitorous Brit?