ATTACK OF THE U.S.
J.C. Bond
Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
view. I wish to read yours too.
Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc I
support.
When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he delivered a
good message to the American people and of recently had made good on his
commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end, I
believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
Destruction.
Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
does not anymore.
Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
Have they used any since? No.
Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
Are they using these weapons now? No.
Have they found any? No.
In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons to
Kill Iranians? Yes.
1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
Why not? Who is going to impose them?
The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
benefits.
Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
George Bush wrong?
When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein disarmed.
Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has them
why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support against
the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to use
them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he is
to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
a far stretch from the truth. I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are from
Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good terms
with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
another? Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since 91
and no indication that he will. Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will end up
even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with chemical
weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US? How will these weapons
reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it wants
to because it can.
The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction on
another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed? They have also proven
to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it chooses at
the cost of thousands of innocent lives. How many people died in 911?
3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
directly and indirectly responsible for.
In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah
as Dictator.
1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and 4
U.S. nuns are killed.
1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans
die.
1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
Iranians.
1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
disobeys orders from Washington.
U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
casualites.
1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates Dictator of Kuwait.
1998: Clinton bombs weapons factory in Sudan. Factory turns out to be
making aspirin.
1991- present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. Estimates
500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban Ruled Afghanistan $245 Million in aid.
September 11th 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to
murder 3,000 people.
2003: U.S. Invades Iraq breaking International Law in order to change
regime and remove Saddam Hussein and install Democracy.
Norm Loewen
Maybe Bush shoulda studied the Art of Iraq?
Maybe Bush shouldn't have put soo much faith in that crazy Jedi clone
Rumsfeld.
I dunno....guess we will just have to see how it all ties together in Ep3.
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
alex
bit of guessing, America made some mistakes in its choices of allies for a
few years, i think the decsions process centered around, " Oh well you hate
the russians too.............." there was alot of fear between russia and
the USA from post WW2 to the fall of Russia. I think that Russia fell
because we were both in this arms race of flexing muscles and baring
genitals to scare the other off and it burned out the Russian economy. Fear
of global nuclear war can make you do some crazy stuff, especially if you
think that you are saving the world. I am not totally for this war in Iraq,
but hell why wait for Hussien to do something bad again, he is a evil
dictator and the people of Iraq will be better off after having democracy
pushed down their throats ( I'm quite sure of it) Maybe Bush is tired of
watching the US covertely back some loser that might be able to topple the
regimes that we can't stand for one reason or another and has decided the we
will take a more personal approach. from your message i guess that you are
not american and from your email address i guess that you are from Canada.
neither one of us knows what it is like to live in the less democratic sides
of the earth and what kind of people live there and what they are willing to
do to us for whatever reason. 9/11 was a brutal lesson for the world and
that kind of shit can happen anywhere, anytime.....so why not make the whole
planet safer by rooting out a nutcase or two that has too much power and
influence over their citizens.
alex
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
>
Bill Kohlleppel
> Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
>
How about not posting if you know it is not going to be well recieved. Damn
Bond, you are quite the idiot that everyone takes you for, aren't you?
>
> I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> view. I wish to read yours too.
>
No they didn't. The UN Resolutions restricted the US from doing so. The
mandate was to liberate Iraq, no more.
>
> Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc I
> support.
Wouldn't this be a "secondly" since the above was a "firstly"?
>
> When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he delivered a
> good message to the American people and of recently had made good on his
> commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
> However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end, I
> believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
>
I think you are... but then again I think you are wrong about a great many
things.
>
> George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> Destruction.
Which we did find evidence of, or at least some chemical in nature. Which is
just as bad, and just as illegal. Thanks for playing.
>
> Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
> does not anymore.
I'll believe it when I can see the proof. Saddam had been lying to and
manipulating the world for 12 years now. I don't believe a word from that
camp, whatsoever.
>
> Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
Yes. We found those illegal missles just prior to the war. Also found all
that chemical stuff in that hospital just a couple weeks ago.
>
> Have they used any since? No.
You mean other than on his own people and the Kurds? If that is what you mean
then your "no" is valid.
>
> Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
Doesn't mean that he didn't have them. Hell he doesn't even recognize the
fact that he lost that war. But he probably thought that had he used said
weapons the focus of that war would have been drastically changed.
>
> Are they using these weapons now? No.
For good reason. They were put on public notice that if they did so the
nice-guy tactics we are using now will go out the window. The hell with
reducing collateral damage as much as possible.
>
> Have they found any? No.
Yes. See above statement as it pertains to missles found just prior to the
war and all the chemical stuff found at the hospital.
>
> In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons to
> Kill Iranians? Yes.
That is the past. Quit whining over it and deal with the present. Yes we
messed up in dealing with this man. That is why we are taking care of
business now.
>
> 1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
Is someone forgetting that the Soviets were doing the same to both sides? But
lets be clear on this point. Not only did we give weapons to the Iraqis
because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians, but it went vice-versa too.
And let's not forget another reason the Iranians were given military supplies
to fight the Iraqis.... we were buying back US hostages!!!
>
> Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
No we didn't. We are enforcing a UN Resolution which is still in effect.
>
> Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
No, because they are enforcing UN Resolution 1441.
>
> Why not? Who is going to impose them?
> The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
> Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> benefits.
> Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
> disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
> George Bush wrong?
No, the man needed to be removed anyway. He'd been jerking the world around
for 12 years with his non-compliance of the 12 UN Resolutions that are still
on the table and in effect.
>
> When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein disarmed.
And he hasn't, now has he. al-Samoud and SCUD missiles are illegal as per UN
Resolutions. He still has them, because he is still using them as we speak.
So much for using the argument that the man has disarmed.
>
> Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has them
> why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
Are you that much of a dumbass? Have you not paid attention to the news
coverage of the war at all? Those illegal missiles that I just mentioned.....
he's used them. They have been firing them off from Basra to Kuwait city.
Well, they were anyway.
>
> What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support against
> the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to use
> them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he is
> to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
>
God I hope so!
>
> George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
> a far stretch from the truth.
You know this first hand? There has been an established connection between
one of Saddam's hig ranking officials to the hierarchy of al-Quaeda.
> I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
> truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are from
> Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good terms
> with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
> supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
> another?
No. First of all, those Saudis are, if they were like bin Laden, were
nationals who were kicked out of their country and had their citizenship
revoked. Meaning they are no longer Saudi citizens. Which means the sovereign
State of Saudi Arabia is not associated or affiliated with these individuals.
If you know something the rest of us don't, educate us and cite the
reference.
> Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
> a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since 91
> and no indication that he will.
So using chemical weapons on his people for the purpose of weapons testing
isn't worthy? I'd sure hate to think what you consider worthy of war. Good
grief.
> Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
> maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will end up
> even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with chemical
> weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US?
If it threatens the world at large, it is a threat to the US. But more
importantly, it threatens our allies in the region. It threatens the global
community. That makes it our business to ensure the safety of said community.
> How will these weapons
> reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
No, but he can attack our allies in that region. And that is threatening
enough.
>
> Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
> Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it wants
> to because it can.
Bullshit.
>
> The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction on
> another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed?
Because we've also proved that we can settle conflicts "rationally", meaning
without the use of WMD. If the otherwise were the case, then we'd have
dropped nukes on Korea back in the 1950's or on Vietnam back in the 1960's.
> They have also proven
> to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it chooses at
> the cost of thousands of innocent lives.
Really? And which government leaders have we taken out in the past that
resulted in the taking of many innocent lives. Hell for that matter, when has
the US ever killed a government leader?
> How many people died in 911?
> 3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
> directly and indirectly responsible for.
And how do you figure?
>
> In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
> their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
You know this first hand? Did you initiate an study on the subject, how do
you come up with this information? I'd like to see it first hand. I am
suspecting you are pulling this shit out of your ass, which wouldn't surprise
me coming from a pathetic little troll such as yourself.
>
> More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
And your point is what?
>
>
> A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
>
> 1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah
> as Dictator.
>
> 1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
> Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
>
> 1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
>
> 1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
>
And where does this number come from?
>
> September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
> President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
> installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
>
So the guy is assassinated.... was the US behind it? Prove it.
>
> 1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and 4
> U.S. nuns are killed.
>
I happen to know for a fact that this situation the US had nothing to do
with. Nice try asshole. It was the Salvadorans who did all that themselves.
>
> 1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
> The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
>
Exactly.... pay close attention to what you just said, "to kill Soviets". In
case you had forgotten, the Afghanis were at war with the Soviets who were
trying to control that country. We trained men like bin Laden to resist the
efforts of the Soviets.
>
> 1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans
> die.
>
Hmmm, Contras fighting a communist regime that they wanted to overthrow,
right? Correct me where I am wrong.
>
> 1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
> Iranians.
>
Right because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians.
>
> 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
>
Right, in exchange for the release of American hostages.
>
> 1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
> disobeys orders from Washington.
>
He was never an agent. He was what they call a paid "informant". However he
used his status with the CIA to boost himself into a kingpen in the drug
business. And he wasn't a president of Panama, he was just a military
dictator. We served a Federal Arrest Warrant on him, that is why we went in
there to get him.
>
> U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
> casualites.
>
I doubt that. 3,000 Panamanian combatants? That I can believe.
>
> 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
>
You mean all those Soviet tanks that the Iraqis were using? Hardly US, don't
you think?
>
> 1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates Dictator of Kuwait.
Liberated the sovereign nation of Kuwait from the occupation of the Iraqi
military.
>
>
> 1998: Clinton bombs weapons factory in Sudan. Factory turns out to be
> making aspirin.
>
Clinton actually did something for a change?
>
> 1991- present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. Estimates
> 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
Bombing military sites due to non-compliance of the no-fly zone and such? UN
estimates, or you estimate? Seems to me that is about the same number that is
thrown around that have died under Saddam's regime.
>
>
> 2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban Ruled Afghanistan $245 Million in aid.
>
Relief aid for the people is different than giving money to an evil
government. Mark your own words, "$245 million in aid". And that was prior to
the attacks, now wasn't it? Yeah, you really need to think shit through
before you go spouting off.
>
> September 11th 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to
> murder 3,000 people.
>
Any idiot could have devised such a plan. It didn't require CIA training to
come up with such a deliberate attack on the sovereignty of a nation. How
best can you demoralize a nation, you attack their military, leadership and
financial institutions. I'm no military genius and I certainly have never
been CIA trained and even I can see the logistics of the way he had
implemented his planned attacks.
>
> 2003: U.S. Invades Iraq breaking International Law in order to change
> regime and remove Saddam Hussein and install Democracy.
Not breaking international law, enforcing it. It is called UN Resolution
1441.
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
http://kohlleppel.home.attbi.com/
http://www.geocities.com/mgunner75/
http://strael.home.attbi.com/
Bill Kohlleppel
> ya know there might be some fact to what you wrote, and probally a little
> bit of guessing, America made some mistakes in its choices of allies for a
> few years, i think the decsions process centered around, " Oh well you hate
> the russians too.............." there was alot of fear between russia and
> the USA from post WW2 to the fall of Russia. I think that Russia fell
> because we were both in this arms race of flexing muscles and baring
> genitals to scare the other off and it burned out the Russian economy. Fear
> of global nuclear war can make you do some crazy stuff, especially if you
> think that you are saving the world. I am not totally for this war in Iraq,
> but hell why wait for Hussien to do something bad again, he is a evil
> dictator and the people of Iraq will be better off after having democracy
> pushed down their throats ( I'm quite sure of it) Maybe Bush is tired of
> watching the US covertely back some loser that might be able to topple the
> regimes that we can't stand for one reason or another and has decided the we
> will take a more personal approach. from your message i guess that you are
> not american and from your email address i guess that you are from Canada.
> neither one of us knows what it is like to live in the less democratic sides
> of the earth and what kind of people live there and what they are willing to
> do to us for whatever reason. 9/11 was a brutal lesson for the world and
> that kind of shit can happen anywhere, anytime.....so why not make the whole
> planet safer by rooting out a nutcase or two that has too much power and
> influence over their citizens.
>
> alex
>
Well said, Alex.
J.C. Bond
> So whats your point? Think Thrawn would have done better?
> Maybe Bush shoulda studied the Art of Iraq?
> Maybe Bush shouldn't have put soo much faith in that crazy Jedi clone
> Rumsfeld.
>
> I dunno....guess we will just have to see how it all ties together in Ep3.
>
Underneath all that is something intelligent. I like it.
JC
J.C. Bond
> ya know there might be some fact to what you wrote, and probally a little
> bit of guessing, America made some mistakes in its choices of allies for a
> few years, i think the decsions process centered around, " Oh well you hate
> the russians too.............." there was alot of fear between russia and
> the USA from post WW2 to the fall of Russia. I think that Russia fell
> because we were both in this arms race of flexing muscles and baring
> genitals to scare the other off and it burned out the Russian economy. Fear
> of global nuclear war can make you do some crazy stuff, especially if you
> think that you are saving the world. I am not totally for this war in Iraq,
> but hell why wait for Hussien to do something bad again, he is a evil
> dictator and the people of Iraq will be better off after having democracy
> pushed down their throats ( I'm quite sure of it) Maybe Bush is tired of
> watching the US covertely back some loser that might be able to topple the
> regimes that we can't stand for one reason or another and has decided the we
> will take a more personal approach. from your message i guess that you are
> not american and from your email address i guess that you are from Canada.
> neither one of us knows what it is like to live in the less democratic sides
> of the earth and what kind of people live there and what they are willing to
> do to us for whatever reason. 9/11 was a brutal lesson for the world and
> that kind of shit can happen anywhere, anytime.....so why not make the whole
> planet safer by rooting out a nutcase or two that has too much power and
> influence over their citizens.
>
> alex
Because he had nothing to do with 911. But Saudi Arabians did. Why not go
to war against Saudi Arabia? Because the U.S. buys oil from them.
I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last thing
theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever come
from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The U.S.
might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
will be in the long run. But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to Israel
and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without Hussein.
But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
Canada.
JC
Bill Kohlleppel
Well I don't know about the other Saudis that were involved but bin Laden had his
citizenship revoked long before 9/11. That means that he was kicked out of the
country, disavowed. It means that he is no longer a citizen of that nation. So
what good does it do to go to war against a country because of a man who used to
have citizenship of that nation? Doesn't make sense does it? That's like saying
we should have annihilated Austria because that country produced Adolf Hitler.
Grow a brain, Bond!
>
> I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last thing
> theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever come
> from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The U.S.
> might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
> will be in the long run.
So we should just sit on our laurels and do nothing? You are an idiot.
> But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
> will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to Israel
> and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without Hussein.
Then shut up already. We grow tired of your babblings anyway!
>
> But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
Yeah like that will ever happen. A nice little fairy tale that it is.
>
> Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> Canada.
> JC
>
>
To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of Canada.....
I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
J.C. Bond
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> > Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> > Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> > direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
> >
>
> How about not posting if you know it is not going to be well recieved. Damn
> Bond, you are quite the idiot that everyone takes you for, aren't you?
>
Yes but the idiot you are you cannot help yourself to both read my
postings and all my postings and of course respond to them. Who is the
idiot for contradicting yourself? Get a grip of yourself Billy.
Or at least stand up for what you believe in by not responding to my
posts.
> >
> > I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> > Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> > belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> > missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> > comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> > view. I wish to read yours too.
> >
>
> No they didn't. The UN Resolutions restricted the US from doing so. The
> mandate was to liberate Iraq, no more.
>
> >
> > Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc I
> > support.
>
> Wouldn't this be a "secondly" since the above was a "firstly"?
>
What are you grading my post? I expect grammar and spell checking too
please. At least be thorough.
> >
> > When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he delivered a
> > good message to the American people and of recently had made good on his
> > commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
> > However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end, I
> > believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
> >
>
> I think you are... but then again I think you are wrong about a great many
> things.
>
We will see. You assume too much.
> >
> > George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> > Destruction.
>
> Which we did find evidence of, or at least some chemical in nature. Which is
> just as bad, and just as illegal. Thanks for playing.
>
Pesticides do not count but thank you for trying.
> >
> > Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
> > does not anymore.
>
> I'll believe it when I can see the proof. Saddam had been lying to and
> manipulating the world for 12 years now. I don't believe a word from that
> camp, whatsoever.
>
And you think the US does not lie to the world? Are you that naive.
How do you prove you do not have something?
> > Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
>
> Yes. We found those illegal missles just prior to the war. Also found all
> that chemical stuff in that hospital just a couple weeks ago.
Missles. Big deal. Not enough to go to war over.
What Chemical stuff? What are you making shit up now?
>
> >
> > Have they used any since? No.
>
> You mean other than on his own people and the Kurds? If that is what you mean
> then your "no" is valid.
>
I meant since then. And it was Chemical Ali who did that.
But nevertheless, that was horrible. Perhaps even more gruesome than when
the US used agent Orange on their own people too.
> >
> > Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
>
> Doesn't mean that he didn't have them. Hell he doesn't even recognize the
> fact that he lost that war. But he probably thought that had he used said
> weapons the focus of that war would have been drastically changed.
>
> >
> > Are they using these weapons now? No.
>
> For good reason. They were put on public notice that if they did so the
> nice-guy tactics we are using now will go out the window. The hell with
> reducing collateral damage as much as possible.
POINT IS IF HE IS GOING TO USE THEM NOW IS THE TIME
what does he have to lose?
he is finished anyways>
> >
> > Have they found any? No.
>
> Yes. See above statement as it pertains to missles found just prior to the
> war and all the chemical stuff found at the hospital.
>
maybe you could elaborate on this>|
> >
> > In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons to
> > Kill Iranians? Yes.
>
> That is the past. Quit whining over it and deal with the present. Yes we
> messed up in dealing with this man. That is why we are taking care of
> business now.
>
seems like you messed up a lot more than you admit>
seems like the us is whining over their own economy and saddam"s alleged
weapons of mass destruction>
> >
> > 1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
>
> Is someone forgetting that the Soviets were doing the same to both sides? But
> lets be clear on this point. Not only did we give weapons to the Iraqis
> because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians, but it went vice-versa too.
> And let's not forget another reason the Iranians were given military supplies
> to fight the Iraqis.... we were buying back US hostages!!!
>
> >
> > Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
>
> No we didn't. We are enforcing a UN Resolution which is still in effect.
>
sorry us broke international law>
> >
> > Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
>
> No, because they are enforcing UN Resolution 1441.
>
tell me where in that article it mentions war?
> > Why not? Who is going to impose them?
> > The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
> > Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> > benefits.
> > Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
> > disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
> > George Bush wrong?
>
> No, the man needed to be removed anyway. He'd been jerking the world around
> for 12 years with his non-compliance of the 12 UN Resolutions that are still
> on the table and in effect.
>
hmmm and who did the us jerk around? oh i can name a few>
> >
> > When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein disarmed.
>
> And he hasn't, now has he. al-Samoud and SCUD missiles are illegal as per UN
> Resolutions. He still has them, because he is still using them as we speak.
> So much for using the argument that the man has disarmed.
>
so the us is crying over some scud missles> its not enough to go to war
over>
> >
> > Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has them
> > why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
>
> Are you that much of a dumbass? Have you not paid attention to the news
> coverage of the war at all? Those illegal missiles that I just mentioned.....
> he's used them. They have been firing them off from Basra to Kuwait city.
> Well, they were anyway.
>
yes< and what damage did they do? how many were killed?
a hell of a lot less than the us precision bombs> again innocent civilians
suffer more from us attacks than from some lil ol scud missles>
> >
> > What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support against
> > the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to use
> > them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he is
> > to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
> >
>
> God I hope so!
>
> >
> > George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> > connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
> > a far stretch from the truth.
>
> You know this first hand? There has been an established connection between
> one of Saddam's hig ranking officials to the hierarchy of al-Quaeda.
>
bullshit! you are really trying here but lose all integrity with this
statement>
> > I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> > before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
> > truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are from
> > Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good terms
> > with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
> > supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
> > another?
>
> No. First of all, those Saudis are, if they were like bin Laden, were
> nationals who were kicked out of their country and had their citizenship
> revoked. Meaning they are no longer Saudi citizens. Which means the sovereign
> State of Saudi Arabia is not associated or affiliated with these individuals.
> If you know something the rest of us don't, educate us and cite the
> reference.
first prove to me they were kicked out of saudi arabia> if you know
something here which i know you dont lets hear it>
>
> > Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
> > a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since 91
> > and no indication that he will.
>
> So using chemical weapons on his people for the purpose of weapons testing
> isn't worthy? I'd sure hate to think what you consider worthy of war. Good
> grief.
now who is crying about the past> if it was worthy of war why not go to
war then immediately after the chemical attacks on the kurds?
why wait?
>
> > Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
> > maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will end up
> > even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with chemical
> > weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US?
>
> If it threatens the world at large, it is a threat to the US. But more
> importantly, it threatens our allies in the region. It threatens the global
> community. That makes it our business to ensure the safety of said community.
>
i agree it threatens the allies in the region and americans in saudi
arabia and israel>
> > How will these weapons
> > reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
>
> No, but he can attack our allies in that region. And that is threatening
> enough.
>
agreed> but why has he not done so? why after !@ years has he not done so?
> > Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
> > Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it wants
> > to because it can.
>
> Bullshit.
>
no its not>
> >
> > The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction on
> > another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed?
>
> Because we've also proved that we can settle conflicts "rationally", meaning
> without the use of WMD. If the otherwise were the case, then we'd have
> dropped nukes on Korea back in the 1950's or on Vietnam back in the 1960's.
>
same could be said about iraq> it settled its conflict in kuwait without
using wmd>
> > They have also proven
> > to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it chooses at
> > the cost of thousands of innocent lives.
>
> Really? And which government leaders have we taken out in the past that
> resulted in the taking of many innocent lives. Hell for that matter, when has
> the US ever killed a government leader?
>
> > How many people died in 911?
> > 3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
> > directly and indirectly responsible for.
>
> And how do you figure?
>
> >
> > In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
> > their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
>
> You know this first hand? Did you initiate an study on the subject, how do
> you come up with this information? I'd like to see it first hand. I am
> suspecting you are pulling this shit out of your ass, which wouldn't surprise
> me coming from a pathetic little troll such as yourself.
>
you know you might want to consider that hussein while evil has done some
good for his country> he has spent a lot of money on education> why dont
you learn to read yourself and find the truth>
> >
> > More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
>
> And your point is what?
>
> >
> >
> > A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
> >
> > 1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah
> > as Dictator.
> >
> > 1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
> > Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
> >
> > 1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
> >
> > 1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
> >
>
> And where does this number come from?
>
do your own homework> this is all fact man> so ignorant and arrogant the
american can be>
> >
> > September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
> > President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
> > installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
> >
>
> So the guy is assassinated.... was the US behind it? Prove it.
>
fuck you really dont know shit do you> you might want to learn about the
cia and learn to realize the the us even attempted to assasinate the prime
minister of australia at one time in recent years>
> >
> > 1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and 4
> > U.S. nuns are killed.
> >
>
> I happen to know for a fact that this situation the US had nothing to do
> with. Nice try asshole. It was the Salvadorans who did all that themselves.
>
you are a vulgar bitch>
> >
> > 1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
> > The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
> >
>
> Exactly.... pay close attention to what you just said, "to kill Soviets". In
> case you had forgotten, the Afghanis were at war with the Soviets who were
> trying to control that country. We trained men like bin Laden to resist the
> efforts of the Soviets.
>
look what training a man like bin laden did for america>
it all comes back to haunt you>
> >
> > 1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans
> > die.
> >
>
> Hmmm, Contras fighting a communist regime that they wanted to overthrow,
> right? Correct me where I am wrong.
>
> >
> > 1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
> > Iranians.
> >
>
> Right because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians.
>
> >
> > 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> >
>
> Right, in exchange for the release of American hostages.
>
> >
> > 1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
> > disobeys orders from Washington.
> >
>
> He was never an agent. He was what they call a paid "informant". However he
> used his status with the CIA to boost himself into a kingpen in the drug
> business. And he wasn't a president of Panama, he was just a military
> dictator. We served a Federal Arrest Warrant on him, that is why we went in
> there to get him.
>
> >
> > U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
> > casualites.
> >
>
> I doubt that. 3,000 Panamanian combatants? That I can believe.
>
no it is three thousand civilians>
> >
> > 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
> >
>
> You mean all those Soviet tanks that the Iraqis were using? Hardly US, don't
> you think?
Who gave them the money to buy the weapons?
> >
> > 1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates Dictator of Kuwait.
>
> Liberated the sovereign nation of Kuwait from the occupation of the Iraqi
> military.
>
> >
> >
> > 1998: Clinton bombs weapons factory in Sudan. Factory turns out to be
> > making aspirin.
> >
>
> Clinton actually did something for a change?
>
> >
> > 1991- present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. Estimates
> > 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
>
> Bombing military sites due to non-compliance of the no-fly zone and such? UN
> estimates, or you estimate? Seems to me that is about the same number that is
> thrown around that have died under Saddam's regime.
>
UN Estimates.
> >
> >
> > 2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban Ruled Afghanistan $245 Million in aid.
> >
>
> Relief aid for the people is different than giving money to an evil
> government. Mark your own words, "$245 million in aid". And that was prior to
> the attacks, now wasn't it? Yeah, you really need to think shit through
> before you go spouting off.
>
> >I though you would understand this is what I meant. Boy you can really
read.
> > September 11th 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to
> > murder 3,000 people.
> >
>
> Any idiot could have devised such a plan. It didn't require CIA training to
> come up with such a deliberate attack on the sovereignty of a nation. How
> best can you demoralize a nation, you attack their military, leadership and
> financial institutions. I'm no military genius and I certainly have never
> been CIA trained and even I can see the logistics of the way he had
> implemented his planned attacks.
Yeah lets see you get away with it you arrogant smuck. Please.
You are ridiculous to claim anyone could accomplish such a task.
> >
> > 2003: U.S. Invades Iraq breaking International Law in order to change
> > regime and remove Saddam Hussein and install Democracy.
>
> Not breaking international law, enforcing it. It is called UN Resolution
> 1441.
>
>
>
Well Billy boy you are a bitter little man who needs to learn more facts.
Arturo Fuente
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
>
> Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
>
> I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> view. I wish to read yours too.
>
Sour Grapes anyone?
Fact - Some Iraqi troops were carrying gas masks and Cipro
Fact - Cyanide and Mustard Gas compounds were found dumped in the Euphrates
River
Fact - Al Quida fighters were in with the Iraqis
Fact - There are terrorist training facilities in northern Iraq and Salman
Pak (which included a Boeing 737? fuselage for hijack training) Mohammed
Atta met with Iraqi agents in Prauge about 6 weeks before 9/11
Most of Saddams WMD Technology came from the French and Russians, hence
their maniacal opposition to disarming and liberation of Iraq.
The left always has been and will continue to be an the wrong side of
history.
Ford Prefect
"Arturo Fuente" <dwpe...@NOSPAMnetscape.net> wrote in message
news:v9aqbr1...@corp.supernews.com...
Good facts!! I got tired of trying to explain to these anti-americans why
we are there. Yesterday, 4/9 was proof we are doing the right thing. When
the supply lines are fully up and working from the seaport to Basra, there
will be more and more of the Iraqis thanking the US and British troops for
freeing them. Once they get the water and food in Basra, things will improve
and there will be many happy people.
What I wish these people would stop doing is putting what was done in the
past into this mix. It doesnt matter what other government officials did
with these countries, we have a new person running the country now and
changing things, doing what the other presidents should have done, cleaning
up the mistakes that others have done in the past.
When the first war happened, Bush the first wanted to finish the job, but it
wasnt his decision to make. The cease fire agreement stated that Iraq
disarm. They didnt, over a 12 year period, 911 happened, changed the way
Bush 2 thinks and Iraq became a target on our list of terroist nations, and
now is being taken care of. If you dont like it tough shit, it wasnt your
country that was attacked. History shows you attack the US mainland, you
will become a target yourself. Those who were against this will have egg on
their face when it is all over. Proof is coming about what we stated.
Chemicals were found, and more will be found. A terrorist camp was found,
traces of Ricen and Botulin were found, more will probably be found as well.
The war isnt over yet, but when it is, the things we were saying they have
will be found, once the people there realize they can speak out without
getting killed, information will be had, and all this will be proven.
--
Dont PANIC!!!! :)
I fart in OPEC's general direction! I would like to wave my private parts
at their aunties,
those cheesy load of secondhand electric camel-bottom fuckers!
J.C. Bond
And why was his citizenship revoked?
> >
> > I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last thing
> > theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever come
> > from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The U.S.
> > might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
> > will be in the long run.
>
> So we should just sit on our laurels and do nothing? You are an idiot.
>
> > But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
> > will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to Israel
> > and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without Hussein.
>
> Then shut up already. We grow tired of your babblings anyway!
>
> >
> > But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
>
> Yeah like that will ever happen. A nice little fairy tale that it is.
>
> >
> > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > Canada.
> > JC
> >
> >
>
> To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of Canada.....
> I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
>
>
You are an arrogant piece of shit for saying such a comment.
You forgot to mention, Jim Carrey, Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Kiefer and
Donald Sutherland, Kneanu Reeves, Rick Moranis, Monty Hall, Whayne
Gretsky, and Kids in the Hall.
Not to mention inventing Jet airplanes which the US stole from us along
with Hockey.
:)
J.C. Bond
>
> "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> >
> >
> > Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> > Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> > direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
> >
> > I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> > Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> > belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> > missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> > comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> > view. I wish to read yours too.
> >
>
> Sour Grapes anyone?
>
> Fact - Some Iraqi troops were carrying gas masks and Cipro
True.
>
> Fact - Cyanide and Mustard Gas compounds were found dumped in the Euphrates
> River
>
Heard such but nothing seemed to be proven.
Do you believe everything on CNN?
> Fact - Al Quida fighters were in with the Iraqis
>
BULLSHIT!
> Fact - There are terrorist training facilities in northern Iraq and Salman
> Pak (which included a Boeing 737? fuselage for hijack training) Mohammed
> Atta met with Iraqi agents in Prauge about 6 weeks before 9/11
>
BuLLSHIT!
> Most of Saddams WMD Technology came from the French and Russians, hence
> their maniacal opposition to disarming and liberation of Iraq.
>
Possible but where is the proof of this?
I know these countries have money tied up with oil, which supports their
motivation.
Deborah Proctor
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
>
> Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
>
> I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> missed it.
The US didn't have a mandate from the UN in 1991 to rid Iraq from Saddam.
> George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> Destruction.
> Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
> does not anymore.
We don't know that yet... There just came across the wire a possibility of
weapons grade plutonium find.
> Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
Huh? Are you saying that it was okay for them to invade Kuwait?
> Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
What international law? Resolution 1441 from the UN was enough.
> Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> benefits.
We don't have a socialized form of health care... What are you talking
about? Bush has proposed more spending for Veterans benefits... I believe
the House just approved a bill recently that included a bigger death
insurance benefit and it was sent to the Senate.
> I personally do not believe he is dead.
So?
> George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
> a far stretch from the truth. I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> before?
The Marines have already found camps where Bin Laden supporters were trained
in Iraq and have the documents to prove it.
> In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
> their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
> More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
In Iraq a lot more were killed by Saddam each year.
Did you know that Iraq under Saddam had the fifth highest mortality rate of
children under the age of five in the world?
The people of Iraq are happy we went... Shouldn't it be for them to decide?
Have you even been watching the news for the past couple of days?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
J.C. Bond
By God I hope you are right and matters do not become worse.
A thing about the past is that if they never messed up so bad the world
wouldnt be in this mess. A lot of this has to do with THe US Foreign
Policy and the Israel and Palastine conflict. This is the root of the
problem, avoiding it makes it worse. In addition to this what about North
Korea? An even bigger problem. What I am afraid of is this war escalating
into something that is so out of control The fire cannot be put out.
Like I always said the world may be beter without Hussein, but after the
war things might get out of hand. Things on paper rarely work out to be
picture perfect in reality. Hopefully Democracy will work in Iraq. I hope
the people accept what has been done. Not all feel that way which invites
terrorism.
Deborah Proctor
Bush and Blair have already publicly stated that tackling the Palestinian
state issue is next. What is Canada doing to help to resolve it?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
Um... I hate to tell you but its true... Do you believe everything you hear
on CNN?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
J.C. Bond
Firstly, I am sure Canada will support any initiative to solve this
problem if it doesnt involve whiping out Palastine. But if you think this
will be easy. I just dont see it happening.
Canada is involved in this war in terms of peace keeping in Afghanistan
and Bosnia as well as contributing in Iraq. Only we are not involved in the
fight. Canada's total involvement in this war would only be a symbolic effort
at most anyway. The US are fully capable without us. We free up other troops by
replacing other peacekeeping duties. Canada is not one to break
international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
guaranteed. However, The US took action on its own. In a sense its good
that Canada is not involved, perhaps preventing terrorist attacks on
Canada. Our Country does not need that. I hope England does not receive
attacks either. I hope it all works out. I hope Iraq becomes a better
place. One thing that bothers me is this Anti Canada bullshit that comes
from Americans because we are not fully involved in this war, and how our
precious relationship will be damaged as a result. Well, Canada does not
always have to do as the US does and can sometimes disagree. This is what
being free is all about. Most countries were payed Billions for their
support or forgiven Billions of debt. All of this at the expense of the
American People. We were not in Vietnam. And many fail to realize
that Canada fought THREE YEARS in World War 2 before the Americans became
involved. It was only after they were attacked themselves that they made
an effort and aknowledged the War. Did Canada give Americans a hard time
then? So, lets hope this war wraps up quick, and the beginnings of a
brighter Iraq surface.
JC
PS: Isnt North Korea perhaps an even bigger problem?
>
> Deborah Proctor
> marask...@earthlink.net
>
>
>
Deborah Proctor
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Deborah Proctor wrote:
>
> >
> > "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Ford Prefect wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "Arturo Fuente" <dwpe...@NOSPAMnetscape.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:v9aqbr1...@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> > > > >
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> >
Palestinian
> > state issue is next. What is Canada doing to help to resolve it?
>
> Firstly, I am sure Canada will support any initiative to solve this
> problem if it doesnt involve whiping out Palastine. But if you think this
> will be easy. I just dont see it happening.
You keep underestimating Bush... It just makes him better...
> The US are fully capable without us.
Ain't that a pity...
>Canada is not one to break
> international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
> guaranteed. However, The US took action on its own.
You still haven't documented by law how in your opinion that what the US did
in Iraq was illegal is correct...
You act like we were alone... we had the support of 50-60 some other
countries in Iraq...
> PS: Isnt North Korea perhaps an even bigger problem?
No, its not. North Korea doesn't have any resources like Iraq did... Bush
will take care of North Korea too... Why isn't Canada concerned about North
Korea? Why does the US have to take unilateral against North Korea? Don't
find an inconsistency there? Bush wanted to go through the UN for both Iraq
and North Korea... it seems Canada wanted us to use the UN for Iraq but not
North Korea?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Arturo Fuente
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html
>
>
> > Most of Saddams WMD Technology came from the French and Russians, hence
> > their maniacal opposition to disarming and liberation of Iraq.
> >
> Possible but where is the proof of this?
> I know these countries have money tied up with oil, which supports their
> motivation.
>
>
> > The left always has been and will continue to be an the wrong side of
> > history.
> >
Face it, the only reason people oppose this war is their seething hatred of
Pres. Bush. Pres. Clinton proposed doing the same things in '98 and no one
raised a peep. He bombed Kosovo and there was not a word of protest.
Carlos cmsahe
Thank you JC Bond, I can imagine how difficult it must be for you to
defend this point of view in America nowadays, but you are a free
thinker not adoctrinated by CNN, CBS, etc. Allow me to recommend you
the following website: http://www.rense.com
Carlos
Deborah Proctor
"Carlos cmsahe" <cms...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f6ad2388.03041...@posting.google.com...
Just like the point of view in Ep. IV of Obi Wan, i.e., about Vader killing
Anakin...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Jimmy Dahlqvist
You sadly won't get many supporters for those opinions here. I'm not one of
those, but I'm in the minority. Most people here, at least the americans,
supports Bush and apparently would support Bush no matter how wrong he is,
no matter how stupidly he acts or no matter how many laws he breaks.
Whenever a person decides to divide the world into one good side and one bad
side and announce that you are either with us or against us I get terrified.
I am honestly afraid of what George W. Bush could do. Hopefully americans
will realise this and NOT re-elect him next year.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we
are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and
servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt
or to really put a spin on things...
[...] voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding
of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing
the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
- Hermann Goering
/Jimmy
Deborah Proctor
"Jimmy Dahlqvist" <jimmy.d...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:mFlla.5145$sJ3....@newsb.telia.net...
> "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote:
>
> You sadly won't get many supporters for those opinions here. I'm not one
of
> those, but I'm in the minority. Most people here, at least the americans,
> supports Bush and apparently would support Bush no matter how wrong he is,
> no matter how stupidly he acts or no matter how many laws he breaks.
Again, what law has he broken?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Kai Ponte
"Deborah Proctor" <marask...@earthlink.net>
> Again, what law has he broken?
>
True. Unlike Clinton or Reagan, neither he nor his workers have been
proscecuted.
:)
I'll bet he's evil, however, because he doesn't believe Carrie Fisher's
bootie in EP VI was cute enough.
K
coordination kid
"Bill Kohlleppel" <kohll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3E953E3A...@attbi.com...
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > Canada.
> > JC
> >
> >
>
> To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of
Canada.....
> I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
>
There is a long list of things that have come out of Canada, but to list a
few of them:
The Phone, hovercrafts, the zipper, wireless comunications, atomic energy,
hockey, basketball, limb reatachments, open heart surgery, velcro,
penicillin and insulin.
There are alot more but those are just a few.
C_K
Bill Kohlleppel
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Bill Kohlleppel wrote:
>
> > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> >
> > > Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> > > Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> > > direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
> > >
> >
> > How about not posting if you know it is not going to be well recieved. Damn
> > Bond, you are quite the idiot that everyone takes you for, aren't you?
> >
> Yes but the idiot you are you cannot help yourself to both read my
> postings and all my postings and of course respond to them. Who is the
> idiot for contradicting yourself? Get a grip of yourself Billy.
> Or at least stand up for what you believe in by not responding to my
> posts.
I haven't contradicted myself, moron. I offered a counter-point to your points.
Deal with it. And don't call me Billy, only my closest friends are allowed such
priviledge. And you are not one of them!
>
> > >
> > > I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> > > Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> > > belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> > > missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> > > comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> > > view. I wish to read yours too.
> > >
> >
> > No they didn't. The UN Resolutions restricted the US from doing so. The
> > mandate was to liberate Iraq, no more.
> >
> > >
> > > Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc I
> > > support.
> >
> > Wouldn't this be a "secondly" since the above was a "firstly"?
> >
> What are you grading my post? I expect grammar and spell checking too
> please. At least be thorough.
Just making a point of observation.
>
> > >
> > > When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he delivered a
> > > good message to the American people and of recently had made good on his
> > > commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
> > > However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end, I
> > > believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
> > >
> >
> > I think you are... but then again I think you are wrong about a great many
> > things.
> >
> We will see. You assume too much.
>
Not at all. I just call them as I see them.
>
> > >
> > > George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> > > Destruction.
> >
> > Which we did find evidence of, or at least some chemical in nature. Which is
> > just as bad, and just as illegal. Thanks for playing.
> >
> Pesticides do not count but thank you for trying.
>
Who said anything about pesticides. And what do you think was used on the Kurds
and other Iraqi people, pesticides? Give me a break. And why would pesticides me
stored at a hospital of all places?
>
> > >
> > > Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
> > > does not anymore.
> >
> > I'll believe it when I can see the proof. Saddam had been lying to and
> > manipulating the world for 12 years now. I don't believe a word from that
> > camp, whatsoever.
> >
> And you think the US does not lie to the world? Are you that naive.
> How do you prove you do not have something?
>
Well there would be documented records..... something that Iraq has failed to show
in their defense as well. I am not saying that the US is blameless in anything.
But at least we haven't been jerking the with around fro 12 years in violation of
12 UN Resolutions that have been imposed against us, now have we? Hmmm, No.
>
> > > Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
> >
> > Yes. We found those illegal missles just prior to the war. Also found all
> > that chemical stuff in that hospital just a couple weeks ago.
>
> Missles. Big deal. Not enough to go to war over.
Yes it is. They have been in violation for 12 years and something needed to be
done. Missiles are a big deal.... or at least you'd have a different take if you
lived closer to the strike zone.
>
> What Chemical stuff? What are you making shit up now?
No I am not. I can't remember which city it was, but we secured a hospital a week
or so ago ( a couple weeks I think) and found chemical containment suits and other
like items, including manuels on how to use chemical weapons. Someone hasn't been
paying attention to the news, have they?
>
> >
> > >
> > > Have they used any since? No.
> >
> > You mean other than on his own people and the Kurds? If that is what you mean
> > then your "no" is valid.
> >
> I meant since then. And it was Chemical Ali who did that.
> But nevertheless, that was horrible. Perhaps even more gruesome than when
> the US used agent Orange on their own people too.
>
Do you even know what the intended use of Agent Orange was? Somehow I doubt it. It
wasn't meant to be a chemical weapon, it was thought to be a non-hazardous
herbicide, meaning they were using it to kill the lush vegetation that is dominant
in Vietnam.
>
> > >
> > > Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
> >
> > Doesn't mean that he didn't have them. Hell he doesn't even recognize the
> > fact that he lost that war. But he probably thought that had he used said
> > weapons the focus of that war would have been drastically changed.
> >
>
> > >
> > > Are they using these weapons now? No.
> >
> > For good reason. They were put on public notice that if they did so the
> > nice-guy tactics we are using now will go out the window. The hell with
> > reducing collateral damage as much as possible.
>
> POINT IS IF HE IS GOING TO USE THEM NOW IS THE TIME
> what does he have to lose?
> he is finished anyways>
Not necessarily so. If he uses them there will be no mercy for his military. If he
doesn't, we will show clemancy.
>
> > >
> > > Have they found any? No.
> >
> > Yes. See above statement as it pertains to missles found just prior to the
> > war and all the chemical stuff found at the hospital.
> >
> maybe you could elaborate on this>|
>
I did, see above.
>
> > >
> > > In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons to
> > > Kill Iranians? Yes.
> >
> > That is the past. Quit whining over it and deal with the present. Yes we
> > messed up in dealing with this man. That is why we are taking care of
> > business now.
> >
> seems like you messed up a lot more than you admit>
> seems like the us is whining over their own economy and saddam"s alleged
> weapons of mass destruction>
The only whining I see here is coming from you.
>
>
> > >
> > > 1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> >
> > Is someone forgetting that the Soviets were doing the same to both sides? But
> > lets be clear on this point. Not only did we give weapons to the Iraqis
> > because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians, but it went vice-versa too.
> > And let's not forget another reason the Iranians were given military supplies
> > to fight the Iraqis.... we were buying back US hostages!!!
> >
> > >
> > > Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
> >
> > No we didn't. We are enforcing a UN Resolution which is still in effect.
> >
> sorry us broke international law>
>
No they didn't. You can't break international law if you are, in fact, enforcing
it. When all is said and done will the US be held for breaking international law?
No. And why is that? Because it will be shown that we are enforcing the said law.
That's like saying that a cop is breaking the law by putting a suspect in jail.
Anyone know which law could possibly be broken here? Yes, that's right, that would
be considered kindnapping! But they aren't held liable now are they? No, and it is
because they are enforcing the law that gives them that right to do so. Give me a
break here. The war in Iraq is no different than the analogy I just gave about the
cop and the suspect.
>
> > >
> > > Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
> >
> > No, because they are enforcing UN Resolution 1441.
> >
> tell me where in that article it mentions war?
>
It states that Iraq will suffer severe consequences. I'd say war would be severe.
>
> > > Why not? Who is going to impose them?
> > > The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
> > > Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> > > benefits.
> > > Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
> > > disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
> > > George Bush wrong?
> >
> > No, the man needed to be removed anyway. He'd been jerking the world around
> > for 12 years with his non-compliance of the 12 UN Resolutions that are still
> > on the table and in effect.
> >
> hmmm and who did the us jerk around? oh i can name a few>
>
Then start naming or shut up..... of course you will pull nothing but names out of
your ass, but go ahead.
>
> > >
> > > When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein disarmed.
> >
> > And he hasn't, now has he. al-Samoud and SCUD missiles are illegal as per UN
> > Resolutions. He still has them, because he is still using them as we speak.
> > So much for using the argument that the man has disarmed.
> >
> so the us is crying over some scud missles> its not enough to go to war
> over>
>
Yes it is. They are illegal as per UN Resolutions. Iraq is in violation and they
refused to destroy these weapons when they said they would. They declared that no
such weapons existed and they were caught in their own lies. The regime was given
a peaceful way out, they chose poorly.
>
> > >
> > > Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has them
> > > why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
> >
> > Are you that much of a dumbass? Have you not paid attention to the news
> > coverage of the war at all? Those illegal missiles that I just mentioned.....
> > he's used them. They have been firing them off from Basra to Kuwait city.
> > Well, they were anyway.
> >
>
> yes< and what damage did they do? how many were killed?
I don't. I don't know that a number was released.
>
> a hell of a lot less than the us precision bombs> again innocent civilians
> suffer more from us attacks than from some lil ol scud missles>
>
Bullshit. Very few innocents have been lost at the hands of US bombs. And if you
are citing those incidents where Iraqis were blaming US bombs for killing
innocents that the US wasn't even anywhere near that time of the bombing, then you
are barking up the wrong tree, as usual.
>
> > >
> > > What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support against
> > > the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to use
> > > them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he is
> > > to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
> > >
> >
> > God I hope so!
> >
> > >
> > > George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> > > connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
> > > a far stretch from the truth.
> >
> > You know this first hand? There has been an established connection between
> > one of Saddam's hig ranking officials to the hierarchy of al-Quaeda.
> >
>
> bullshit! you are really trying here but lose all integrity with this
> statement>
>
Bullshit yourself. It was on the evening news, what a couple weeks ago? Here's a
novel concept for you, Bond. Try watching the news coverage for a change. You just
might stop embarrassing yourself that way. I actually watch the coverage, I am
informed. You, obviously, are not!
>
> > > I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> > > before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
> > > truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are from
> > > Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good terms
> > > with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
> > > supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
> > > another?
> >
> > No. First of all, those Saudis are, if they were like bin Laden, were
> > nationals who were kicked out of their country and had their citizenship
> > revoked. Meaning they are no longer Saudi citizens. Which means the sovereign
> > State of Saudi Arabia is not associated or affiliated with these individuals.
> > If you know something the rest of us don't, educate us and cite the
> > reference.
>
> first prove to me they were kicked out of saudi arabia> if you know
> something here which i know you dont lets hear it>
> >
>
Like I said, I do not know about the others. But bin Laden was. His citizenship
was revoked long before 9/11. This is why he was living in Afghanistan and not
Saudi Arabia. Perhaps if you paid more attention to the news of the world instead
of watching liberal based documentaries rather than documentaries that give all
the facts from both sides of the issue, you may educate yourself.
>
> > > Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
> > > a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since 91
> > > and no indication that he will.
> >
> > So using chemical weapons on his people for the purpose of weapons testing
> > isn't worthy? I'd sure hate to think what you consider worthy of war. Good
> > grief.
>
> now who is crying about the past> if it was worthy of war why not go to
> war then immediately after the chemical attacks on the kurds?
> why wait?
>
The immediate past has a direct connection to what is happening now. Something
that happened over twenty years ago is bad, yes. But it is just that, the past.
What has been happening in recent years, and still happening today is cause to
settle things up. Why wait... something called the UN and pansy for a President.
>
> >
> > > Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
> > > maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will end up
> > > even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with chemical
> > > weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US?
> >
> > If it threatens the world at large, it is a threat to the US. But more
> > importantly, it threatens our allies in the region. It threatens the global
> > community. That makes it our business to ensure the safety of said community.
> >
> i agree it threatens the allies in the region and americans in saudi
> arabia and israel>
>
> > > How will these weapons
> > > reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
> >
> > No, but he can attack our allies in that region. And that is threatening
> > enough.
> >
> agreed> but why has he not done so? why after !@ years has he not done so?
>
Something called the US and a pansy for President who was more concerned about
getting his job done rather than getting the job done!
>
> > > Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
> > > Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it wants
> > > to because it can.
> >
> > Bullshit.
> >
> no its not>
>
Yes, it is.
>
> > >
> > > The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction on
> > > another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed?
> >
> > Because we've also proved that we can settle conflicts "rationally", meaning
> > without the use of WMD. If the otherwise were the case, then we'd have
> > dropped nukes on Korea back in the 1950's or on Vietnam back in the 1960's.
> >
> same could be said about iraq> it settled its conflict in kuwait without
> using wmd>
>
It didn't settle its conflict, we did. Big difference.
>
> > > They have also proven
> > > to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it chooses at
> > > the cost of thousands of innocent lives.
> >
> > Really? And which government leaders have we taken out in the past that
> > resulted in the taking of many innocent lives. Hell for that matter, when has
> > the US ever killed a government leader?
> >
> > > How many people died in 911?
> > > 3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
> > > directly and indirectly responsible for.
> >
> > And how do you figure?
> >
> > >
> > > In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
> > > their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
> >
> > You know this first hand? Did you initiate an study on the subject, how do
> > you come up with this information? I'd like to see it first hand. I am
> > suspecting you are pulling this shit out of your ass, which wouldn't surprise
> > me coming from a pathetic little troll such as yourself.
> >
> you know you might want to consider that hussein while evil has done some
> good for his country> he has spent a lot of money on education> why dont
> you learn to read yourself and find the truth>
>
So the senseless killing of innocent people of the thousands makes up for all the
so-called good? I wonder of all those who are "educated", how many of them are not
of the Baath Party? Here's a novel concept, educate yourself on what is really
going on in the world.
>
> > >
> > > More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
> >
> > And your point is what?
> >
Yeah I didn't think you had a point here. Just spouting off bullshit as usual.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
> > >
> > > 1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah
> > > as Dictator.
> > >
> > > 1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
> > > Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
> > >
> > > 1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
> > >
> > > 1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
> > >
> >
> > And where does this number come from?
> >
> do your own homework> this is all fact man> so ignorant and arrogant the
> american can be>
One could say the same about you... 444,000 is a far cry from 4 million.
>
> > >
> > > September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
> > > President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
> > > installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
> > >
> >
> > So the guy is assassinated.... was the US behind it? Prove it.
> >
> fuck you really dont know shit do you> you might want to learn about the
> cia and learn to realize the the us even attempted to assasinate the prime
> minister of australia at one time in recent years>
>
Like I said, back the claims up or shut up. You are uttering bullshit.
>
> > >
> > > 1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and 4
> > > U.S. nuns are killed.
> > >
> >
> > I happen to know for a fact that this situation the US had nothing to do
> > with. Nice try asshole. It was the Salvadorans who did all that themselves.
> >
> you are a vulgar bitch>
>
Proved wrong and you call me a vulger bitch? Hmmmm. But perhaps maybe you'd like
to ask me how I would know something personal about this situation? Ask nicely and
I'll tell you.
>
> > >
> > > 1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
> > > The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
> > >
> >
> > Exactly.... pay close attention to what you just said, "to kill Soviets". In
> > case you had forgotten, the Afghanis were at war with the Soviets who were
> > trying to control that country. We trained men like bin Laden to resist the
> > efforts of the Soviets.
> >
> look what training a man like bin laden did for america>
> it all comes back to haunt you>
>
Well you have a point there. I think it is time for the US to re-evaluate who they
train for specific purposes. But for now, we are going to get him and when we do
it won't be pretty.
>
> > >
> > > 1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans
> > > die.
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm, Contras fighting a communist regime that they wanted to overthrow,
> > right? Correct me where I am wrong.
> >
> > >
> > > 1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
> > > Iranians.
> > >
> >
> > Right because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians.
> >
> > >
> > > 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> > >
> >
> > Right, in exchange for the release of American hostages.
> >
> > >
> > > 1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
> > > disobeys orders from Washington.
> > >
> >
> > He was never an agent. He was what they call a paid "informant". However he
> > used his status with the CIA to boost himself into a kingpen in the drug
> > business. And he wasn't a president of Panama, he was just a military
> > dictator. We served a Federal Arrest Warrant on him, that is why we went in
> > there to get him.
> >
>
> > >
> > > U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
> > > casualites.
> > >
> >
> > I doubt that. 3,000 Panamanian combatants? That I can believe.
> >
> no it is three thousand civilians>
>
Really? Cite the source. A friend's brother was there. He saw the action, he
fought Panamanian combatants. In fact he was the US soldier that was sniped at the
Vatican's Embassy.
>
> > >
> > > 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
> > >
> >
> > You mean all those Soviet tanks that the Iraqis were using? Hardly US, don't
> > you think?
>
> Who gave them the money to buy the weapons?
The Soviets armed them. It wasn't our money that bought it.
Did I say that I wished to? No, I was stating a mere fact that anyone with half a
brain could have plotted that attack without CIA training. Arrogance has nothing
to do with it.
>
> You are ridiculous to claim anyone could accomplish such a task.
You are ignorant to think otherwise. Like I said, anyone with half a brain could
have devised such a plan of attack. It all comes down to studying your enemy and
knowing what makes them weak or vulnerable.
>
> > >
> > > 2003: U.S. Invades Iraq breaking International Law in order to change
> > > regime and remove Saddam Hussein and install Democracy.
> >
> > Not breaking international law, enforcing it. It is called UN Resolution
> > 1441.
> >
> >
> >
> Well Billy boy you are a bitter little man who needs to learn more facts.
>
Bitter, me? ON the contrary, As far as he who is in need to learn more facts...
that would be you, Bond. And don't call me Billy, your pathetic canuk ass hasn't
deserved such an honor.
Bill Kohlleppel
Thank you Arturo, I couldn't have said it any better.
TheMachine
April 2003. Coalition forces liberate Baghdad and Iraqi's are seen dancing
in the steets shouting Saddam Bad! Bush #1.
How can you dispute what we've done is not the right thing to have done.
The UN would not and would never act upon the security resolution that Iraq
had been in violation of. It is clear France, Germany and Russia have
economic interests with the deposed regime and that's why they wouldn't give
in. The UN does not work anymore. Iraq was supposed to give proof as to
where all of the WMD went - they never have and still haven't to this day.
11 yeasr of being in violation of the security resolution. Just because
you don't see it, it doesn't mean it isn't there. In time, generals will
turn. In time, citizens will point out the hiding places.
Even if we don't find WMD, it's worth it because the attrocities of that
regime will have been stopped. Some times a people can't get out from
under the boot of a dictator. We just gave them a helping hand. It's
better for the region in the long run.
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
>
> Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
>
> I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> view. I wish to read yours too.
>
> Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc I
> support.
> When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he delivered a
> good message to the American people and of recently had made good on his
> commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
> However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end, I
> believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
>
> George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> Destruction.
> Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war, but
> does not anymore.
> Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
> Have they used any since? No.
> Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
> Are they using these weapons now? No.
> Have they found any? No.
> In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons to
> Kill Iranians? Yes.
> 1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
> Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
> Why not? Who is going to impose them?
> The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
> Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> benefits.
> Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
> disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
> George Bush wrong?
> When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein disarmed.
> Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has them
> why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
> What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support against
> the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to use
> them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he is
> to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
>
>
> George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say so is
> a far stretch from the truth. I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
> truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are from
> Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good terms
> with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
> supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
> another? Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
> a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since 91
> and no indication that he will. Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
> maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will end up
> even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with chemical
> weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US? How will these weapons
> reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
> Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
> Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it wants
> to because it can.
> The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction on
> another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed? They have also proven
> to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it chooses at
> the cost of thousands of innocent lives. How many people died in 911?
> 3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
> directly and indirectly responsible for.
> In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S. and
> their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
> More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
>
> A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
>
> 1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah
> as Dictator.
>
> 1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
> Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
>
> 1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
>
> 1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
>
> September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
> President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
> installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
>
> 1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and 4
> U.S. nuns are killed.
>
> 1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
> The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
>
> 1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans
> die.
>
> 1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
> Iranians.
>
> 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
>
> 1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
> disobeys orders from Washington.
>
> U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
> casualites.
>
> 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
>
> 1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates Dictator of Kuwait.
>
> 1998: Clinton bombs weapons factory in Sudan. Factory turns out to be
> making aspirin.
>
> 1991- present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. Estimates
> 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
>
> 2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban Ruled Afghanistan $245 Million in aid.
>
> September 11th 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to
> murder 3,000 people.
>
Bill Kohlleppel
Well said.
Bill Kohlleppel
The best that I can understand he was undertaking some radical views and pursuing
drastic means that the Saudi government wouldn't tolerate. I really don't remember
what all was involved and, unlike you, I'd rather report on what is factual rather
than a "best guess".
>
> > >
> > > I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last thing
> > > theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever come
> > > from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The U.S.
> > > might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
> > > will be in the long run.
> >
> > So we should just sit on our laurels and do nothing? You are an idiot.
> >
> > > But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
> > > will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to Israel
> > > and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without Hussein.
> >
> > Then shut up already. We grow tired of your babblings anyway!
> >
> > >
> > > But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
> >
> > Yeah like that will ever happen. A nice little fairy tale that it is.
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > > Canada.
> > > JC
> > >
> > >
> >
> > To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of Canada.....
> > I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
> >
> >
> You are an arrogant piece of shit for saying such a comment.
>
Me arrogant? No. Just asking a simple question. I've never had much respect for
Canadiens as a whole. They seem to be extremely wishy-washy with a few noteable
exceptions.
>
> You forgot to mention, Jim Carrey, Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Kiefer and
> Donald Sutherland, Kneanu Reeves, Rick Moranis, Monty Hall, Whayne
> Gretsky, and Kids in the Hall.
>
Hmmm, The Sutherlands I can see. Reeves is ok. Fox I can appreciate. The rest.... well
I said good. The others don't rank so high.
>
> Not to mention inventing Jet airplanes which the US stole from us along
> with Hockey.
> :)
>
Invented Jet airplanes? Can't claim that one either, moron. The Germans had that
BEFORE the end of WWII. And hockey? You can have it.
Bill Kohlleppel
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Arturo Fuente wrote:
>
> >
> > "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> > >
> > >
> > > Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not Star
> > > Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> > > direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
> > >
> > > I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> > > Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics. My
> > > belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> > > missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just invite
> > > comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> > > view. I wish to read yours too.
> > >
> >
> > Sour Grapes anyone?
> >
> > Fact - Some Iraqi troops were carrying gas masks and Cipro
>
> True.
>
> >
> > Fact - Cyanide and Mustard Gas compounds were found dumped in the Euphrates
> > River
> >
> Heard such but nothing seemed to be proven.
> Do you believe everything on CNN?
It is news that is reported as it is, not slanted in any way to fit political
motivations.
>
>
> > Fact - Al Quida fighters were in with the Iraqis
> >
> BULLSHIT!
>
Bullshit yourself. It was reported. The connection has been made. Try watching
the news reports for a change, instead of being so ignorant to the truth.
>
> > Fact - There are terrorist training facilities in northern Iraq and Salman
> > Pak (which included a Boeing 737? fuselage for hijack training) Mohammed
> > Atta met with Iraqi agents in Prauge about 6 weeks before 9/11
> >
> BuLLSHIT!
>
Again, this is not anything new. This is old news... at least the fact that
Mohammed Atta had met with Iraqi intelligence agents in Prague. That was
reported months after 9/11. Like I said, start watching news for a change and
inform yourself instead of making yourself out to be the idiot that you already
are.
>
> > Most of Saddams WMD Technology came from the French and Russians, hence
> > their maniacal opposition to disarming and liberation of Iraq.
> >
> Possible but where is the proof of this?
Remember the nuclear reactor Saddam had? French built it. Thankfully the
Israelis blew it up. It's not secret that the French have been supplying Iraq
with the power to produce its own nuclear means. Same with the Germans who were
selling solid rocket fuel for Saddam's missiles.
>
> I know these countries have money tied up with oil, which supports their
> motivation.
>
Yeah, supprts their motivation to not want to get caught with their underhanded
dealings with Iraq. Even the money that is being tied up in oil is against UN
embargoes. And you criticize the US stating that we are breaking international
law? These other countries have been doing it all along and you are so willing
to just absolve them?
>
> > The left always has been and will continue to be an the wrong side of
> > history.
> >
Bill Kohlleppel
Damn.... this is three that Old Proctor and I are in agreement. This is really
scary. And to answer that last question, Deborah.... probably not.
Bill Kohlleppel
YEah hindsight is always 20/20. Nothing can be done about the past. That is why
we have history... to learn from the past. So stop the whining bit and just learn
from the past mistakes and recognize that we are doing something to prevent that
kind of thing from happening in the future.
> A lot of this has to do with THe US Foreign
> Policy and the Israel and Palastine conflict.
I can't agree with you more. It has more to do with Israel than anything else.
The whole world has gone, then again I don't think they ever stopped being,
anti-sematic. Meaning the world hates Jews. And since the US is the strongest
ally of Israel, we have become targets to those who hate Jews. I suppose that is
the price we pay for allying ourselves with God's "chosen" people.
> This is the root of the
> problem, avoiding it makes it worse. In addition to this what about North
> Korea? An even bigger problem.
We will deal with them in due time.
> What I am afraid of is this war escalating
> into something that is so out of control The fire cannot be put out.
So we sit back and do nothing? Yeah, that's healthy.
>
> Like I always said the world may be beter without Hussein, but after the
> war things might get out of hand. Things on paper rarely work out to be
> picture perfect in reality. Hopefully Democracy will work in Iraq. I hope
> the people accept what has been done. Not all feel that way which invites
> terrorism.
>
You hope people accept what has been done? Turn on the tv, watch the latest news
report. You will see on the tv a rejoicing and close-to-be-liberated Iraqi
people. They are destroying statues of Saddam Hussein and rejoicing at the
freedom that the US is bringing to them. These people would have been shot dead
had they tried to do this before the war started.
>
> > Dont PANIC!!!! :)
> >
> > I fart in OPEC's general direction! I would like to wave my private parts
> > at their aunties,
> > those cheesy load of secondhand electric camel-bottom fuckers!
> >
> >
> >
Bill Kohlleppel
Same as they always did to help resolve it... nothing!
Bill Kohlleppel
Hell, Deborah, it is obvious that he doesn't even pay attention at all. It
seems to me that not only does he not watch CNN, he doesn't watch any news
coverage, whatsoever!
Bill Kohlleppel
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Deborah Proctor wrote:
>
> > Bush and Blair have already publicly stated that tackling the Palestinian
> > state issue is next. What is Canada doing to help to resolve it?
>
> Firstly, I am sure Canada will support any initiative to solve this
> problem if it doesnt involve whiping out Palastine. But if you think this
> will be easy. I just dont see it happening.
It's easy to support an initiative. Supporting an initiative is a far cry easier
than actually rolling up your sleeves and doing some physical labor for a change.
>
> Canada is involved in this war in terms of peace keeping in Afghanistan
> and Bosnia as well as contributing in Iraq.
Funny, I haven't heard of any Canadian military units serving over in the war.
Correct me if I am wrong, although I doubt that I am.
> Only we are not involved in the fight.
Thanks for proving my point.
> Canada's total involvement in this war would only be a symbolic effort
> at most anyway.
Because they can't do much else. Pathetic.
> The US are fully capable without us.
True.
> We free up other troops by replacing other peacekeeping duties. Canada is not
> one to break
> international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
> guaranteed.
Sure. That's a nice little copout there.
> However, The US took action on its own. In a sense its good
> that Canada is not involved, perhaps preventing terrorist attacks on
> Canada.
Do you think that you are immune to terrorism? Wake up and smell the coffee.
Terrorism affects everyone!
> Our Country does not need that.
And ours does? No country needs it. You arrogant little fuck!
> I hope England does not receive attacks either. I hope it all works out. I hope
> Iraq becomes a better
> place. One thing that bothers me is this Anti Canada bullshit that comes
> from Americans because we are not fully involved in this war, and how our
> precious relationship will be damaged as a result.
There was a relationship?
> Well, Canada does not always have to do as the US does and can sometimes
> disagree. This is what
> being free is all about. Most countries were payed Billions for their
> support or forgiven Billions of debt.
Probably because we can see that we will never see a dime of the money that is
owed to us anyway.
> All of this at the expense of the
> American People. We were not in Vietnam. And many fail to realize
> that Canada fought THREE YEARS in World War 2 before the Americans became
> involved.
And your point is what exactly....? Hold on, wait a minute, 3 years? Let's do the
math here. WWII started in September of 1939. France is occupied in 1940. Germany
attacks Russia in 1941. The US enters WWII in 1942. Even England didn't start
fighting until 1940. So you are telling me that Canada was fighting WWII in 1939?
Bullshit! Your facts are wrong, and you've proved yourself an idiot once again.
> It was only after they were attacked themselves that they made
> an effort and aknowledged the War.
Not necessarily so. We sent pilots to fight on behalf of England. It was an
exchange program. So there was some involvement earlier that 1941-2.
> Did Canada give Americans a hard time
> then?
Why would they? We were still offering munitions and other means of support all
along.
> So, lets hope this war wraps up quick, and the beginnings of a
> brighter Iraq surface.
>
> JC
>
> PS: Isnt North Korea perhaps an even bigger problem?
>
They are... but they will be dealt with in due time, I suspect.
>
> >
> > Deborah Proctor
> > marask...@earthlink.net
Bill Kohlleppel
I do beg to differ on one point. I do think that NK does have the resources
like Iraq has. Even more so I think. But the strategy is to take out Saddam
before he can grow any more powerful, thus nipping him in the bud. Then
concentrate full bore on NK. Just a thought. As far as Canada is concered...
well they should feel threatened by NK as well. NK had developed a missile that
can reach the West Coast of the US. So if they can do that they can surely
reach the West Coast of Canada as well. Something to think about there, Bond.
Heaven forbid your precious country ever come under any kind of attack.
Wouldn't that be so terribly tragic!
Bill Kohlleppel
Exactly.
Karrde
> > > Have they used any since? No.
> >
mean
> > then your "no" is valid.
> >
> I meant since then.
He meant has he used chemical weapons any more than a half dozen times since
the '91 war and against any more than half a million people.
> And it was Chemical Ali who did that.
And he also meant has Saddam personally gassed anyone. Directing someone
else to do it doesn't count.
Geesh, aren't you paying attention Bill? ;-)
--K
coordination kid
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> > >
> > > Well I don't know about the other Saudis that were involved but bin
Laden had his
> > > citizenship revoked long before 9/11. That means that he was kicked
out of the
> > > country, disavowed. It means that he is no longer a citizen of that
nation. So
> > > what good does it do to go to war against a country because of a man
who used to
> > > have citizenship of that nation? Doesn't make sense does it? That's
like saying
> > > we should have annihilated Austria because that country produced Adolf
Hitler.
> > > Grow a brain, Bond!
> > >
> >
> > And why was his citizenship revoked?
> >
>
> The best that I can understand he was undertaking some radical views and
pursuing
> drastic means that the Saudi government wouldn't tolerate. I really don't
remember
> what all was involved and, unlike you, I'd rather report on what is
factual rather
> than a "best guess".
>
It was revoked mostly because after the USSR pulled out of Afghanistan, his
ideas and actions turned towards his former suporters, the US. The Saudis
were put under pressure by the US to revoke his citizenship to limmit his
movements. But him saying that the Saudis were living in sin for being to
close to the US and threating to start a revolution there, played a part in
the government making up its mind.
C_K
Bill Kohlleppel
It was a pretty straight forward question. Not having any trouble at all,
Karrde. Why do you ask?
J.C. Bond
> Oh.... you forgot one thing.
>
> April 2003. Coalition forces liberate Baghdad and Iraqi's are seen dancing
> in the steets shouting Saddam Bad! Bush #1.
Simply Propoganda. I would be dancing in the streets also if I were
surrounded by American Soldiers with guns.
But I am sure some were happy about it, but dont think everyone thinks the
same way. As of now, Iraq is in a state of Anarchy. Lets see how the
Americans control it.
>
> How can you dispute what we've done is not the right thing to have done.
> The UN would not and would never act upon the security resolution that Iraq
> had been in violation of. It is clear France, Germany and Russia have
> economic interests with the deposed regime and that's why they wouldn't give
> in. The UN does not work anymore. Iraq was supposed to give proof as to
> where all of the WMD went - they never have and still haven't to this day.
> 11 yeasr of being in violation of the security resolution. Just because
> you don't see it, it doesn't mean it isn't there. In time, generals will
> turn. In time, citizens will point out the hiding places.
>
> Even if we don't find WMD, it's worth it because the attrocities of that
> regime will have been stopped. Some times a people can't get out from
> under the boot of a dictator. We just gave them a helping hand. It's
> better for the region in the long run.
>
You raise some good points here, and believe me I hope it works out. I
just think the U.S. accelerated too quickly into Iraq. If the U.S. had
economic interests to protect I believe it would protect them.
Out of all the alleged good that will come from this war I believe there
will be dire consequences. We will see.
J.C. Bond
Thats right. Only an American would make such an arrogant comment.
I would like that same person to name something bad that has come out of
Canada. I dont count as something bad. :)
J.C. Bond
I never guessed anything. At least I provide back up for my statements. I
have not seen one source of yours.
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last thing
> > > > theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever come
> > > > from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The U.S.
> > > > might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
> > > > will be in the long run.
> > >
> > > So we should just sit on our laurels and do nothing? You are an idiot.
> > >
> > > > But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
> > > > will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to Israel
> > > > and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without Hussein.
> > >
> > > Then shut up already. We grow tired of your babblings anyway!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
> > >
> > > Yeah like that will ever happen. A nice little fairy tale that it is.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > > > Canada.
> > > > JC
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of Canada.....
> > > I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
> > >
> > >
> > You are an arrogant piece of shit for saying such a comment.
> >
>
> Me arrogant? No. Just asking a simple question. I've never had much respect for
> Canadiens as a whole. They seem to be extremely wishy-washy with a few noteable
> exceptions.
>
> >
Youre right but at least we never burned women accusing them to be witches
or enslaved Africans, or killed 4,000,000 people in SOuth East asia. Or at
least 11,000 people do not die each year as a result of handguns, showing
how sophisticated we really are. Its just in your nature to shoot and
kill. In Canada , England and Australia, the number is under 100.
Hell in some banks in the U.S. if you sign up for an account they hand you
a new shotgun right in the bank. Really smart.
> > You forgot to mention, Jim Carrey, Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Kiefer and
> > Donald Sutherland, Kneanu Reeves, Rick Moranis, Monty Hall, Whayne
> > Gretsky, and Kids in the Hall.
> >
>
> Hmmm, The Sutherlands I can see. Reeves is ok. Fox I can appreciate. The rest.... well
> I said good. The others don't rank so high.
>
> >
> > Not to mention inventing Jet airplanes which the US stole from us along
> > with Hockey.
> > :)
> >
>
> Invented Jet airplanes? Can't claim that one either, moron. The Germans had that
> BEFORE the end of WWII. And hockey? You can have it.
>
Sorry what I meant was our Avro Arrow project. We invented the first
plane capable of Mach 2+ ,fly by wire, computer control, and intergral
missile control system. After this project was cancelled most of the top
individuals involved went to NASA and Put the first man on the moon.
Deborah Proctor
This is why it just ticks me off...
Either the US does nothing and gets criticized or the US leads and still
gets criticized... Its no win situation... That's why I support Bush who
does what he thinks is right regardless of what others think... Its called
acting out of conviction... and its quite refreshing... and is what makes
Bush a great leader...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
It appears he gets all his news from Michael Moore... ain't it just a
laugh...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
Bill North Korea has weapons and millions of starving people with no way to
feed them... Iraq has oil...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
And Clinton bombed Iraq for a week... they seem to forget that too... and
again, did we hear one word in disagreement with Clinton for doing it? No,
we didn't. Which proves these dissenters are anti Bush...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, TheMachine wrote:
>
> > Oh.... you forgot one thing.
> >
> > April 2003. Coalition forces liberate Baghdad and Iraqi's are seen
dancing
> > in the steets shouting Saddam Bad! Bush #1.
>
> Simply Propoganda. I would be dancing in the streets also if I were
> surrounded by American Soldiers with guns.
> But I am sure some were happy about it, but dont think everyone thinks the
> same way. As of now, Iraq is in a state of Anarchy. Lets see how the
> Americans control it.
Didn't look forced to me... Have you personally talked to any Iraqi's and
asked them if they were made to dance in the street?
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
J.C. Bond
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Deborah Proctor wrote:
> >
> > > Bush and Blair have already publicly stated that tackling the Palestinian
> > > state issue is next. What is Canada doing to help to resolve it?
> >
> > Firstly, I am sure Canada will support any initiative to solve this
> > problem if it doesnt involve whiping out Palastine. But if you think this
> > will be easy. I just dont see it happening.
>
> It's easy to support an initiative. Supporting an initiative is a far cry easier
> than actually rolling up your sleeves and doing some physical labor for a change.
>
> >
> > Canada is involved in this war in terms of peace keeping in Afghanistan
> > and Bosnia as well as contributing in Iraq.
>
> Funny, I haven't heard of any Canadian military units serving over in the war.
> Correct me if I am wrong, although I doubt that I am.
>
> > Only we are not involved in the fight.
>
> Thanks for proving my point.
We take care of the wounded.
>
> > Canada's total involvement in this war would only be a symbolic effort
> > at most anyway.
>
> Because they can't do much else. Pathetic.
No we dont focus ourselves on killing people.
> > The US are fully capable without us.
>
> True.
>
> > We free up other troops by replacing other peacekeeping duties. Canada is not
> > one to break
> > international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
> > guaranteed.
>
> Sure. That's a nice little copout there.
>
Not really its politics.
> > However, The US took action on its own. In a sense its good
> > that Canada is not involved, perhaps preventing terrorist attacks on
> > Canada.
>
> Do you think that you are immune to terrorism? Wake up and smell the coffee.
> Terrorism affects everyone!
Wake up and smell yourself, you created the problem. I doubt this war will
solve it. I doubt my grandkids will live to see THe U.S> clean up their
mess.
> > Our Country does not need that.
>
> And ours does? No country needs it. You arrogant little fuck!
>
did I say that? No. So, shut the fuck up.
Here is a question for you. Do you ever wonder why all this terrorism
exists? WHy Bin Laden did what he did? WHy Arabs hate Jews? Why American
Foreign Policy is highly criticized? Why these attacks occur against the
U.S.
I am interested in your point of view.
Is there any message they are trying to get across?
> > I hope England does not receive attacks either. I hope it all works out. I hope
> > Iraq becomes a better
> > place. One thing that bothers me is this Anti Canada bullshit that comes
> > from Americans because we are not fully involved in this war, and how our
> > precious relationship will be damaged as a result.
>
> There was a relationship?
Yes, but unfortunately the U.S> always gets the better end of the deal.
>
> > Well, Canada does not always have to do as the US does and can sometimes
> > disagree. This is what
> > being free is all about. Most countries were payed Billions for their
> > support or forgiven Billions of debt.
>
> Probably because we can see that we will never see a dime of the money that is
> owed to us anyway.
True and paying off other nations seems to work too.
>
> > All of this at the expense of the
> > American People. We were not in Vietnam. And many fail to realize
> > that Canada fought THREE YEARS in World War 2 before the Americans became
> > involved.
>
> And your point is what exactly....? Hold on, wait a minute, 3 years? Let's do the
> math here. WWII started in September of 1939. France is occupied in 1940. Germany
> attacks Russia in 1941. The US enters WWII in 1942. Even England didn't start
> fighting until 1940. So you are telling me that Canada was fighting WWII in 1939?
> Bullshit! Your facts are wrong, and you've proved yourself an idiot once again.
Yes back to your history class. I think you need a bterr education.
> > It was only after they were attacked themselves that they made
> > an effort and aknowledged the War.
>
> Not necessarily so. We sent pilots to fight on behalf of England. It was an
> exchange program. So there was some involvement earlier that 1941-2.
>
> > Did Canada give Americans a hard time
> > then?
>
> Why would they? We were still offering munitions and other means of support all
> along.
>
> > So, lets hope this war wraps up quick, and the beginnings of a
> > brighter Iraq surface.
> >
> > JC
> >
> > PS: Isnt North Korea perhaps an even bigger problem?
> >
>
> They are... but they will be dealt with in due time, I suspect.
>
Leaving the bigger problem to las I guess it makes sense unless it gets
out of hand.
Deborah Proctor
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
> > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Bill Kohlleppel wrote:
> > >
> > > > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, alex wrote:
> > >
> Youre right but at least we never burned women accusing them to be witches
> or enslaved Africans, or killed 4,000,000 people in SOuth East asia. Or at
> least 11,000 people do not die each year as a result of handguns, showing
> how sophisticated we really are. Its just in your nature to shoot and
> kill. In Canada , England and Australia, the number is under 100.
> Hell in some banks in the U.S. if you sign up for an account they hand you
> a new shotgun right in the bank. Really smart.
You're losing it... You're just being irrational...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>
> > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Deborah Proctor wrote:
> >
> > Do you think that you are immune to terrorism? Wake up and smell the
coffee.
> > Terrorism affects everyone!
>
> Wake up and smell yourself, you created the problem. I doubt this war will
> solve it. I doubt my grandkids will live to see THe U.S> clean up their
> mess.
Remember, before 9/11 we had previous bombings at the WTC; the USS Cole was
bombed; US Embassies in Africa... These were all before we responded with
military action...
These facts just don't support your argument.
Personally, I'm getting tired of just taking it in the ass...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
J.C. Bond
True I think Bush is a good leader also. I just dont agree on this war.
And you are right its a no win situation.
>
> Deborah Proctor
> marask...@earthlink.net
>
>
>
Bill Kohlleppel
> Oh.... you forgot one thing.
>
> April 2003. Coalition forces liberate Baghdad and Iraqi's are seen dancing
> in the steets shouting Saddam Bad! Bush #1.
>
> How can you dispute what we've done is not the right thing to have done.
> The UN would not and would never act upon the security resolution that Iraq
> had been in violation of. It is clear France, Germany and Russia have
> economic interests with the deposed regime and that's why they wouldn't give
> in. The UN does not work anymore. Iraq was supposed to give proof as to
> where all of the WMD went - they never have and still haven't to this day.
> 11 yeasr of being in violation of the security resolution. Just because
> you don't see it, it doesn't mean it isn't there. In time, generals will
> turn. In time, citizens will point out the hiding places.
>
> Even if we don't find WMD, it's worth it because the attrocities of that
> regime will have been stopped. Some times a people can't get out from
> under the boot of a dictator. We just gave them a helping hand. It's
> better for the region in the long run.
>
Well said.
J.C. Bond
No. I was for CLinton with regards to Kosovo. It was humanitarian
intervention.
>
> Deborah Proctor
> marask...@earthlink.net
>
>
>
Bill Kohlleppel
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, TheMachine wrote:
>
> > Oh.... you forgot one thing.
> >
> > April 2003. Coalition forces liberate Baghdad and Iraqi's are seen dancing
> > in the steets shouting Saddam Bad! Bush #1.
>
> Simply Propoganda. I would be dancing in the streets also if I were
> surrounded by American Soldiers with guns.
What are you smoking, Bond? There aren't any troops around that I can see in the
news footage.
>
> But I am sure some were happy about it, but dont think everyone thinks the
> same way. As of now, Iraq is in a state of Anarchy. Lets see how the
> Americans control it.
>
The only ones opposed are those who are fighting for the regime.
>
> >
> > How can you dispute what we've done is not the right thing to have done.
> > The UN would not and would never act upon the security resolution that Iraq
> > had been in violation of. It is clear France, Germany and Russia have
> > economic interests with the deposed regime and that's why they wouldn't give
> > in. The UN does not work anymore. Iraq was supposed to give proof as to
> > where all of the WMD went - they never have and still haven't to this day.
> > 11 yeasr of being in violation of the security resolution. Just because
> > you don't see it, it doesn't mean it isn't there. In time, generals will
> > turn. In time, citizens will point out the hiding places.
> >
> > Even if we don't find WMD, it's worth it because the attrocities of that
> > regime will have been stopped. Some times a people can't get out from
> > under the boot of a dictator. We just gave them a helping hand. It's
> > better for the region in the long run.
> >
> You raise some good points here, and believe me I hope it works out. I
> just think the U.S. accelerated too quickly into Iraq. If the U.S. had
> economic interests to protect I believe it would protect them.
> Out of all the alleged good that will come from this war I believe there
> will be dire consequences. We will see.
>
Accelerated too quickly? Not quick enough... after all it did take 12 years to
finally do something.
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
True... you don't count for much of anything. But ok, here it goes... phrases
like "hoser" and "eh", hockey ( my personal opinion), Hayden Christiansen, the
fact that they allowed pansy-ass draft-dodging American pukes safe haven into
their country to get out of going to Vietnam.... what else is there... hmmmm,
let me think on that for awhile.
Norm Loewen
big puss. :)
"Bill Kohlleppel" <kohll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3E953E3A...@attbi.com...
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, alex wrote:
> >
> > > ya know there might be some fact to what you wrote, and probally a
little
> > > bit of guessing, America made some mistakes in its choices of allies
for a
> > > few years, i think the decsions process centered around, " Oh well you
hate
> > > the russians too.............." there was alot of fear between russia
and
> > > the USA from post WW2 to the fall of Russia. I think that Russia fell
> > > because we were both in this arms race of flexing muscles and baring
> > > genitals to scare the other off and it burned out the Russian economy.
Fear
> > > of global nuclear war can make you do some crazy stuff, especially if
you
> > I think we will be worse off with a new breed of terrorist. The last
thing
> > theis world needs is an Iraqi terrorist. No act of terrorism has ever
come
> > from Iraq, but I doubt this will be the case in the near future. The
U.S.
> > might think this war is expensive, but they have no idea what the cost
> > will be in the long run.
>
> So we should just sit on our laurels and do nothing? You are an idiot.
>
> > But lets hope I am wrong and little ol Democracy
> > will thrive in Iraq. Or, will we have a worse situation compared to
Israel
> > and Palestine? I agree the world might be a better place without
Hussein.
>
> Then shut up already. We grow tired of your babblings anyway!
>
> >
> > But I know the world would be a better place without the war.
>
> Yeah like that will ever happen. A nice little fairy tale that it is.
>
> >
> > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > Canada.
> > JC
> >
> >
>
> To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of
Canada.....
> I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
>
>
>
Norm Loewen
Gone Wild in Iraq....honest mistake.
Norm
"Deborah Proctor" <marask...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:i5sla.18901$4P1.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Norm Loewen
> surrounded by American Soldiers with guns.
I would be hiding under my bed........
Norm
Bill Kohlleppel
>
> > >
> >
> > The best that I can understand he was undertaking some radical views and pursuing
> > drastic means that the Saudi government wouldn't tolerate. I really don't remember
> > what all was involved and, unlike you, I'd rather report on what is factual rather
> > than a "best guess".
>
> I never guessed anything. At least I provide back up for my statements. I
> have not seen one source of yours.
>
No, you just spout off more misinformation. I have yet to see any provided back up evidence
of anything that you have spouted in this entire thread. At least I get my information from
the news sources. I actually watch the news. Not much can be said for yourself, based on
your arguments.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Me arrogant? No. Just asking a simple question. I've never had much respect for
> > Canadiens as a whole. They seem to be extremely wishy-washy with a few noteable
> > exceptions.
> >
> > >
> Youre right but at least we never burned women accusing them to be witches
> or enslaved Africans, or killed 4,000,000 people in SOuth East asia.
We never killed 4 million people in SE Asia. Quit spouting off shit that isn't true.
> Or at
> least 11,000 people do not die each year as a result of handguns, showing
> how sophisticated we really are.
That is such a vague statement. For instance, people killed by handguns can and often does
include those who are killed in shootouts with police, or justifiable homocides, i.e.
self-defense.
> Its just in your nature to shoot and
> kill. In Canada , England and Australia, the number is under 100.
Yeah and look at your crime rates. It is a proven statistic that in those areas with the
least amount of gun control the lesser the crime rate is.
>
> Hell in some banks in the U.S. if you sign up for an account they hand you
> a new shotgun right in the bank. Really smart.
>
Just goes to show what you really know... which is basically nothing.
>
> > > You forgot to mention, Jim Carrey, Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Kiefer and
> > > Donald Sutherland, Kneanu Reeves, Rick Moranis, Monty Hall, Whayne
> > > Gretsky, and Kids in the Hall.
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm, The Sutherlands I can see. Reeves is ok. Fox I can appreciate. The rest.... well
> > I said good. The others don't rank so high.
> >
> > >
> > > Not to mention inventing Jet airplanes which the US stole from us along
> > > with Hockey.
> > > :)
> > >
> >
> > Invented Jet airplanes? Can't claim that one either, moron. The Germans had that
> > BEFORE the end of WWII. And hockey? You can have it.
> >
> Sorry what I meant was our Avro Arrow project. We invented the first
> plane capable of Mach 2+ ,fly by wire, computer control, and intergral
> missile control system. After this project was cancelled most of the top
> individuals involved went to NASA and Put the first man on the moon.
>
Well that isn't what you said, now was it? No, once again you spouted off and I corrected
you. Now you spout off some other shit. Whether it is right or worng I don't know... nor do
I really care.
Bill Kohlleppel
Were you griping at me? I was supporting your position and criticizing
Canada's. I totally agree with you on this point.
Bill Kohlleppel
Yeah, pretty much.
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
I understand that Ol' Proctor. But NK also has a more advanced nuke program
too. That's what I am talking about. They have the means to feed them, they
just don't. They spend more money on their military might rather than balancing
it out with taking care of their people. I just watched a documentary on Kim
Jong Il on OPB just an hour ago.
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Deborah Proctor
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Deborah Proctor wrote:
>
> >
> > "Bill Kohlleppel" <kohll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > news:3E961B08...@attbi.com...
> > > Arturo Fuente wrote:
> > >
> > > > "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> > > > news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Arturo Fuente wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
> > > > > >
> > news:Pine.GSO.4.40.030409...@mira.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> >
and
> > again, did we hear one word in disagreement with Clinton for doing it?
No,
> > we didn't. Which proves these dissenters are anti Bush...
>
>
> No. I was for CLinton with regards to Kosovo. It was humanitarian
> intervention.
You must have overlooked the part where I stated that Clinton bombed Iraq
for a week... Let's see... Clinton bombed them for a week and you're okay
with it.... Bush bombs them for 2 1/2 and you're against it...
I'm sorry I just don't see much difference between the two...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
"Norm Loewen" <loe...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:aRsla.87304$ug3.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> Ease up on us Canucks....this one here happens to believe that our PM is a
> big puss. :)
Maybe you can knock some sense into JC...
We've seen some polls in the US that a majority of Canadians are actually in
favor of the war in Iraq...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
I was griping at JC, not you... We actually agree... there's a switch...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
China, Japan and South Korea won't let NK do anything... Just today I read
where China is now telling NK to knock it off...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
rzrsedge
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, coordination kid wrote:
>
> >
> > "Bill Kohlleppel" <kohll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > > > Canada.
> > > > JC
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of
> > Canada.....
> > > I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
> > >
> >
a
> > few of them:
> >
> > The Phone, hovercrafts, the zipper, wireless comunications, atomic
energy,
> > hockey, basketball, limb reatachments, open heart surgery, velcro,
> > penicillin and insulin.
> >
> > There are alot more but those are just a few.
> >
> > C_K
> >
> Thats right. Only an American would make such an arrogant comment.
> I would like that same person to name something bad that has come out of
> Canada. I dont count as something bad. :)
>
Well Canada was the supplier of Plutonium and the vast majority of
scientists that created the nuclear bomb.
alex
i am not quoting exact history here, but i thought that it was the nazi
scientist that made the bomb tick
alex
Bill Kohlleppel
> > Only we are not involved in the fight.
> >
> > Thanks for proving my point.
>
> We take care of the wounded.
> >
> > > Canada's total involvement in this war would only be a symbolic effort
> > > at most anyway.
> >
> > Because they can't do much else. Pathetic.
>
> No we dont focus ourselves on killing people.
>
Neither do we... we only kill those who are deserving of it, evil dictators, etc.
>
> > > The US are fully capable without us.
> >
> > True.
> >
> > > We free up other troops by replacing other peacekeeping duties. Canada is not
> > > one to break
> > > international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
> > > guaranteed.
> >
> > Sure. That's a nice little copout there.
> >
> Not really its politics.
>
Call it what you will.... none the less, it is still a candy-ass copout.
>
> > > However, The US took action on its own. In a sense its good
> > > that Canada is not involved, perhaps preventing terrorist attacks on
> > > Canada.
> >
> > Do you think that you are immune to terrorism? Wake up and smell the coffee.
> > Terrorism affects everyone!
>
> Wake up and smell yourself, you created the problem. I doubt this war will
> solve it. I doubt my grandkids will live to see THe U.S> clean up their
> mess.
>
This is assuming that you will attempt to spawm... if you haven't already. But at any
rate, enough of the blame game.. we are taking care of the problem. Case closed.
>
> > > Our Country does not need that.
> >
> > And ours does? No country needs it. You arrogant little fuck!
> >
> did I say that? No. So, shut the fuck up.
>
No you just implied it. "Our Country does not need that." You shut the fuck up.
>
> Here is a question for you. Do you ever wonder why all this terrorism
> exists?
No, I know why. Most of the terrorist nations hate the US for what it stands for,
specifically its alliances with Israel.
> WHy Bin Laden did what he did?
Because he hates the US. He sees the US as the "scarlet whore" and he has taken it
upon himself to rid the world of her.
> WHy Arabs hate Jews?
Go back and read your Bible... if you even have one. It all stems from there.
> Why American Foreign Policy is highly criticized?
Because we dare to do the right thing when others would rather turn a blind eye or sit
on their laurels.
> Why these attacks occur against the U.S.
Because of what we represent. We represent freedom. Even freedom to "sin" in the eyes
of these religious fanatics. They don't respect that freedom, so they take it upon
themselves to kill that very institution that has been around for over 220 years. They
hate the Great America because of her alliances to the "evil Zionists", The Jewish
people.
>
> I am interested in your point of view.
See above.
>
> Is there any message they are trying to get across?
>
Of course. They hate the Jews and they want them all dead... and any who would support
them. They hate America because of what she represents, philosophical, moral and
religious freedoms.
>
> > > I hope England does not receive attacks either. I hope it all works out. I hope
> > > Iraq becomes a better
> > > place. One thing that bothers me is this Anti Canada bullshit that comes
> > > from Americans because we are not fully involved in this war, and how our
> > > precious relationship will be damaged as a result.
> >
> > There was a relationship?
>
> Yes, but unfortunately the U.S> always gets the better end of the deal.
>
So go cry to your local politician.
>
> >
> > > Well, Canada does not always have to do as the US does and can sometimes
> > > disagree. This is what
> > > being free is all about. Most countries were payed Billions for their
> > > support or forgiven Billions of debt.
> >
> > Probably because we can see that we will never see a dime of the money that is
> > owed to us anyway.
>
> True and paying off other nations seems to work too.
>
Not really. It always comes back to bite one is the ass. Look at the Clinton
appeasement policies with North Korea. Yeah, bribing them to not go nuclear went over
real well.
>
> >
> > > All of this at the expense of the
> > > American People. We were not in Vietnam. And many fail to realize
> > > that Canada fought THREE YEARS in World War 2 before the Americans became
> > > involved.
> >
> > And your point is what exactly....? Hold on, wait a minute, 3 years? Let's do the
> > math here. WWII started in September of 1939. France is occupied in 1940. Germany
> > attacks Russia in 1941. The US enters WWII in 1942. Even England didn't start
> > fighting until 1940. So you are telling me that Canada was fighting WWII in 1939?
> > Bullshit! Your facts are wrong, and you've proved yourself an idiot once again.
>
> Yes back to your history class. I think you need a bterr education.
>
So correct me where you seem to think I am wrong. None of these facts are inaccurate.
>
> > > It was only after they were attacked themselves that they made
> > > an effort and aknowledged the War.
> >
> > Not necessarily so. We sent pilots to fight on behalf of England. It was an
> > exchange program. So there was some involvement earlier that 1941-2.
> >
> > > Did Canada give Americans a hard time
> > > then?
> >
> > Why would they? We were still offering munitions and other means of support all
> > along.
> >
> > > So, lets hope this war wraps up quick, and the beginnings of a
> > > brighter Iraq surface.
> > >
> > > JC
> > >
> > > PS: Isnt North Korea perhaps an even bigger problem?
> > >
> >
> > They are... but they will be dealt with in due time, I suspect.
> >
> Leaving the bigger problem to las I guess it makes sense unless it gets
> out of hand.
>
You can't be that stupid, can you? You deal with the little guy before dealing with
the bigger guy, so that little guy can't become more powerful while dealing with
bigger guy. Does this make sense, or do I need to explain it as if you were a 2 year
old?
Bill Kohlleppel
Pathetically stupid is more like it.
Bill Kohlleppel
What is your husband into that kind of thing, Ol' Proctor?
>
> Deborah Proctor
> marask...@earthlink.net
Personally I am tired of taking this shit lying down as well.
Bill Kohlleppel
Sounds like a lot of double-talk to me. Ya know Bond you should be a politician.
You are great at bullshit artistry.
Bill Kohlleppel
So how is liberating Iraq any different? It's the same damned thing!
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
> Ease up on us Canucks....this one here happens to believe that our PM is a
> big puss. :)
Fair enough. I never had much respect for Canucks.... but you have made a
noteable exception in my book. Ok, that other Canuck is moron!
Bill Kohlleppel
> Actually no one forced them....they all thought it was a recording for Girls
> Gone Wild in Iraq....honest mistake.
>
> Norm
>
Oh now that was just funny! LOL
Bill Kohlleppel
Especially for one who claims he supports the man but not the war... sounds an
aweful lot like he is really anti-Bush to me. Freaking moron!
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
No shit.
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
About damned time. Of course NK keeps insisting that we need to have bilateral
talks with them. We say forget it. We want unilateral talks with NK, SK, China
and Japan as well as ourselves to diffuse the situation. Personally I think Kim
Jong Il needs to be next on the list. I am not liking the idea that NK has
developed a missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to my backdoor
(American West Coast).
--
Rebel Alliance Lt. Commander Aramys Strael
New Republic Admiral Aramys Strael, Jedi Master as of 16ABY
http://www.livejournal.com/~bkohlleppel
Bill Kohlleppel
Yep, Oppenheimer and Einstein were both on the project.
troy mieczkowski
if all you fuckin canuks hate us so much, why then does
90% of your opulation live within 100 miles of our border? canada the 51st
state. ya know we are a bunch
of imperialistic bastards, if there were anything worth a
shit in canada we would have invaded your pansy land
years ago!!!
troy
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Bill Kohlleppel wrote:
>
> > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> >
> > > Here are a few arguments about the War in Iraq. I know this is not
Star
> > > Wars, so if you know of a more appropriate newsgroup head me in that
> > > direction or just dont read it. Thanks.
> > >
> >
> > How about not posting if you know it is not going to be well recieved.
Damn
> > Bond, you are quite the idiot that everyone takes you for, aren't you?
> >
> Yes but the idiot you are you cannot help yourself to both read my
> postings and all my postings and of course respond to them. Who is the
> idiot for contradicting yourself? Get a grip of yourself Billy.
> Or at least stand up for what you believe in by not responding to my
> posts.
> > >
> > > I would like to firstly state that I in no way support or believe in
> > > Saddam Hussein or what he has done in the past or his way of politics.
My
> > > belief is that the U.S. had their chance to get rid of him in 91 and
> > > missed it. I am in no way stating that I am right or wrong. I just
invite
> > > comments. We can all learn from information. So, here is one point of
> > > view. I wish to read yours too.
> > >
> >
> > No they didn't. The UN Resolutions restricted the US from doing so. The
> > mandate was to liberate Iraq, no more.
> >
> > >
> > > Firstly, George Bushs response to 911 in Afghanistan and Al Quieda etc
I
> > > support.
> >
> > Wouldn't this be a "secondly" since the above was a "firstly"?
> >
> What are you grading my post? I expect grammar and spell checking too
> please. At least be thorough.
> > >
> > > When 911 occurred I watched his speeches in awe. I thought he
delivered a
> > > good message to the American people and of recently had made good on
his
> > > commitment against terrorism recently capturing Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed.
> > > However, this aggression against Iraq I do not believe in. In the end,
I
> > > believe it will do more harm than good, but lets just hope I am wrong.
> > >
> >
> > I think you are... but then again I think you are wrong about a great
many
> > things.
> >
> We will see. You assume too much.
>
> > >
> > > George Bush is going to war because Iraq allegedly has Weapons of Mass
> > > Destruction.
> >
> > Which we did find evidence of, or at least some chemical in nature.
Which is
> > just as bad, and just as illegal. Thanks for playing.
> >
> Pesticides do not count but thank you for trying.
>
> > >
> > > Iraq admits they had weapons of Mass destruction during the Iran war,
but
> > > does not anymore.
> >
> > I'll believe it when I can see the proof. Saddam had been lying to and
> > manipulating the world for 12 years now. I don't believe a word from
that
> > camp, whatsoever.
> >
> And you think the US does not lie to the world? Are you that naive.
> How do you prove you do not have something?
>
>
> > > Is there any evidence that Iraq does have weapons? No.
> >
> > Yes. We found those illegal missles just prior to the war. Also found
all
> > that chemical stuff in that hospital just a couple weeks ago.
>
> Missles. Big deal. Not enough to go to war over.
> What Chemical stuff? What are you making shit up now?
> >
> > >
> > > Have they used any since? No.
> >
> > You mean other than on his own people and the Kurds? If that is what you
mean
> > then your "no" is valid.
> >
> I meant since then. And it was Chemical Ali who did that.
> But nevertheless, that was horrible. Perhaps even more gruesome than when
> the US used agent Orange on their own people too.
>
> > >
> > > Did Iraq use weapons of Mass destruction during the War in Kuwait? No.
> >
> > Doesn't mean that he didn't have them. Hell he doesn't even recognize
the
> > fact that he lost that war. But he probably thought that had he used
said
> > weapons the focus of that war would have been drastically changed.
> >
>
> > >
> > > Are they using these weapons now? No.
> >
> > For good reason. They were put on public notice that if they did so the
> > nice-guy tactics we are using now will go out the window. The hell with
> > reducing collateral damage as much as possible.
>
> POINT IS IF HE IS GOING TO USE THEM NOW IS THE TIME
> what does he have to lose?
> he is finished anyways>
> > >
> > > Have they found any? No.
> >
> > Yes. See above statement as it pertains to missles found just prior to
the
> > war and all the chemical stuff found at the hospital.
> >
> maybe you could elaborate on this>|
>
> > >
> > > In 1982, did the U.S. give Iraq Billions of dollars to develop weapons
to
> > > Kill Iranians? Yes.
> >
> > That is the past. Quit whining over it and deal with the present. Yes we
> > messed up in dealing with this man. That is why we are taking care of
> > business now.
> >
> seems like you messed up a lot more than you admit>
> seems like the us is whining over their own economy and saddam"s alleged
> weapons of mass destruction>
>
> > >
> > > 1n 1983, the U.S. gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> >
> > Is someone forgetting that the Soviets were doing the same to both
sides? But
> > lets be clear on this point. Not only did we give weapons to the Iraqis
> > because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians, but it went vice-versa
too.
> > And let's not forget another reason the Iranians were given military
supplies
> > to fight the Iraqis.... we were buying back US hostages!!!
> >
> > >
> > > Did the U.S. break International Law by going to War with Iraq? Yes.
> >
> > No we didn't. We are enforcing a UN Resolution which is still in effect.
> >
> sorry us broke international law>
>
> > >
> > > Will they be liable for War crimes? No.
> >
> > No, because they are enforcing UN Resolution 1441.
> >
> tell me where in that article it mentions war?
>
>
> > > Why not? Who is going to impose them?
> > > The U.S. payed billions to other countries to go to war.
> > > Meanwhile their healthcare system suffers and plan cutbacks to veteran
> > > benefits.
> > > Bush has to use his back up plan of regime change aligned with
> > > disarmament. Now, if no weapons of Mass destruction are discovered is
> > > George Bush wrong?
> >
> > No, the man needed to be removed anyway. He'd been jerking the world
around
> > for 12 years with his non-compliance of the 12 UN Resolutions that are
still
> > on the table and in effect.
> >
> hmmm and who did the us jerk around? oh i can name a few>
>
>
> > >
> > > When he himself said he would not go to war if Saddam Hussein
disarmed.
> >
> > And he hasn't, now has he. al-Samoud and SCUD missiles are illegal as
per UN
> > Resolutions. He still has them, because he is still using them as we
speak.
> > So much for using the argument that the man has disarmed.
> >
> so the us is crying over some scud missles> its not enough to go to war
> over>
>
>
> > >
> > > Well then if he has nothing, what was he supposed to do? If he has
them
> > > why not use them against their greatest enemy the U.S.?
> >
> > Are you that much of a dumbass? Have you not paid attention to the news
> > coverage of the war at all? Those illegal missiles that I just
mentioned.....
> > he's used them. They have been firing them off from Basra to Kuwait
city.
> > Well, they were anyway.
> >
>
> yes< and what damage did they do? how many were killed?
> a hell of a lot less than the us precision bombs> again innocent civilians
> suffer more from us attacks than from some lil ol scud missles>
>
>
> > >
> > > What is he saving them for? Yes, I know he would lose all support
against
> > > the war. But again, by not using them proves he has no intentions to
use
> > > them. And what does he have to lose by not using them in the end if he
is
> > > to be destroyed. I personally do not believe he is dead.
> > >
> >
> > God I hope so!
> >
> > >
> > > George Bushs attempts to connect 911 to Iraq is very weak. There is no
> > > connection there. Bin Laden and Hussein are not connected and to say
so is
> > > a far stretch from the truth.
> >
> > You know this first hand? There has been an established connection
between
> > one of Saddam's hig ranking officials to the hierarchy of al-Quaeda.
> >
>
> bullshit! you are really trying here but lose all integrity with this
> statement>
>
> > > I have never heard of an Iraqi terrorist
> > > before? However, I am sure we will now as a result of George Bush. The
> > > truth is most of the individuals responsible for the 911 attacks are
from
> > > Saudi Arabia. Isnt this ironic? Considering Saudi Arabia is on good
terms
> > > with the U.S.? Or are they? Doesnt the U.S. contradict itself by
> > > supporting one dictatorship while wanting to install democracy upon
> > > another?
> >
> > No. First of all, those Saudis are, if they were like bin Laden, were
> > nationals who were kicked out of their country and had their citizenship
> > revoked. Meaning they are no longer Saudi citizens. Which means the
sovereign
> > State of Saudi Arabia is not associated or affiliated with these
individuals.
> > If you know something the rest of us don't, educate us and cite the
> > reference.
>
> first prove to me they were kicked out of saudi arabia> if you know
> something here which i know you dont lets hear it>
> >
>
> > > Imagine if the 911 attackers were from Iraq, War would have come
> > > a lot sooner. I have not seen Hussein do anything worthy of War since
91
> > > and no indication that he will.
> >
> > So using chemical weapons on his people for the purpose of weapons
testing
> > isn't worthy? I'd sure hate to think what you consider worthy of war.
Good
> > grief.
>
> now who is crying about the past> if it was worthy of war why not go to
> war then immediately after the chemical attacks on the kurds?
> why wait?
>
> >
> > > Yes, he is one mean son of a bitch and
> > > maybe the world is better off without him, but maybe the world will
end up
> > > even worse as a result of this war. Even if he had missles with
chemical
> > > weapons in them, how is this a threat to the US?
> >
> > If it threatens the world at large, it is a threat to the US. But more
> > importantly, it threatens our allies in the region. It threatens the
global
> > community. That makes it our business to ensure the safety of said
community.
> >
> i agree it threatens the allies in the region and americans in saudi
> arabia and israel>
>
>
> > > How will these weapons
> > > reach the US? Has he ever attacked the U.S? No.
> >
> > No, but he can attack our allies in that region. And that is threatening
> > enough.
> >
> agreed> but why has he not done so? why after !@ years has he not done so?
>
> > > Anyone with knowledge of Chemistry is capable of making Anthrax.
> > > Bottom line is that the U.S. does whatever it wants to whenever it
wants
> > > to because it can.
> >
> > Bullshit.
> >
> no its not>
>
> > >
> > > The U.S. are the only nation to have used weapons of Mass destruction
on
> > > another nation. Why shouldnt the U.S. be disarmed?
> >
> > Because we've also proved that we can settle conflicts "rationally",
meaning
> > without the use of WMD. If the otherwise were the case, then we'd have
> > dropped nukes on Korea back in the 1950's or on Vietnam back in the
1960's.
> >
> same could be said about iraq> it settled its conflict in kuwait without
> using wmd>
>
>
> > > They have also proven
> > > to be able to kill any government leader it chooses whenever it
chooses at
> > > the cost of thousands of innocent lives.
> >
> > Really? And which government leaders have we taken out in the past that
> > resulted in the taking of many innocent lives. Hell for that matter,
when has
> > the US ever killed a government leader?
> >
> > > How many people died in 911?
> > > 3,000? This is nothing compared to all the innocent lives the U.S. are
> > > directly and indirectly responsible for.
> >
> > And how do you figure?
> >
> > >
> > > In Iraq, the average literacy rate is a lot higher than in the U.S.
and
> > > their crime rate is a lot lower than in the United States.
> >
> > You know this first hand? Did you initiate an study on the subject, how
do
> > you come up with this information? I'd like to see it first hand. I am
> > suspecting you are pulling this shit out of your ass, which wouldn't
surprise
> > me coming from a pathetic little troll such as yourself.
> >
> you know you might want to consider that hussein while evil has done some
> good for his country> he has spent a lot of money on education> why dont
> you learn to read yourself and find the truth>
>
> > >
> > > More than 11,000 people are killed in the U.S. by guns each year.
> >
> > And your point is what?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > A few other interesting FACTS about the U.S are:
> > >
> > > 1953: U.S Overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs
Shah
> > > as Dictator.
> > >
> > > 1954: U.S. Overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of
> > > Guatemala. 200,000 Civilians killed.
> > >
> > > 1963: U.S. backs assasination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
> > >
> > > 1963-1975 U.S. Military kills 4,000,000 people in Southeast Asia.
> > >
> >
> > And where does this number come from?
> >
> do your own homework> this is all fact man> so ignorant and arrogant the
> american can be>
> > >
> > > September 11th 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
> > > President Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet
> > > installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.
> > >
> >
> > So the guy is assassinated.... was the US behind it? Prove it.
> >
> fuck you really dont know shit do you> you might want to learn about the
> cia and learn to realize the the us even attempted to assasinate the prime
> minister of australia at one time in recent years>
>
> > >
> > > 1977 U.S. backs Military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans
and 4
> > > U.S. nuns are killed.
> > >
> >
> > I happen to know for a fact that this situation the US had nothing to do
> > with. Nice try asshole. It was the Salvadorans who did all that
themselves.
> >
> you are a vulgar bitch>
>
> > >
> > > 1980s: U.S. trains Osama Bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill
Soviets.
> > > The CIA gives them 3 Billion.
> > >
> >
> > Exactly.... pay close attention to what you just said, "to kill
Soviets". In
> > case you had forgotten, the Afghanis were at war with the Soviets who
were
> > trying to control that country. We trained men like bin Laden to resist
the
> > efforts of the Soviets.
> >
> look what training a man like bin laden did for america>
> it all comes back to haunt you>
>
>
> > >
> > > 1981: Reagan Administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000
Nicaraguans
> > > die.
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm, Contras fighting a communist regime that they wanted to overthrow,
> > right? Correct me where I am wrong.
> >
> > >
> > > 1982: U.S. provides Billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to
kill
> > > Iranians.
> > >
> >
> > Right because the Soviets were supplying the Iranians.
> >
> > >
> > > 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
> > >
> >
> > Right, in exchange for the release of American hostages.
> >
> > >
> > > 1989: CIA agent Manual Noriega (Also serving as president of Panama)
> > > disobeys orders from Washington.
> > >
> >
> > He was never an agent. He was what they call a paid "informant". However
he
> > used his status with the CIA to boost himself into a kingpen in the drug
> > business. And he wasn't a president of Panama, he was just a military
> > dictator. We served a Federal Arrest Warrant on him, that is why we went
in
> > there to get him.
> >
>
> > >
> > > U.S. Invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian
> > > casualites.
> > >
> >
> > I doubt that. 3,000 Panamanian combatants? That I can believe.
> >
> no it is three thousand civilians>
>
> > >
> > > 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S.
> > >
> >
> > You mean all those Soviet tanks that the Iraqis were using? Hardly US,
don't
> > you think?
>
> Who gave them the money to buy the weapons?
>
> > >
> > > 1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates Dictator of Kuwait.
> >
> > Liberated the sovereign nation of Kuwait from the occupation of the
Iraqi
> > military.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1998: Clinton bombs weapons factory in Sudan. Factory turns out to be
> > > making aspirin.
> > >
> >
> > Clinton actually did something for a change?
> >
> > >
> > > 1991- present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N.
Estimates
> > > 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
> >
> > Bombing military sites due to non-compliance of the no-fly zone and
such? UN
> > estimates, or you estimate? Seems to me that is about the same number
that is
> > thrown around that have died under Saddam's regime.
> >
> UN Estimates.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban Ruled Afghanistan $245 Million in aid.
> > >
> >
> > Relief aid for the people is different than giving money to an evil
> > government. Mark your own words, "$245 million in aid". And that was
prior to
> > the attacks, now wasn't it? Yeah, you really need to think shit through
> > before you go spouting off.
> >
> > >I though you would understand this is what I meant. Boy you can really
> read.
>
> > > September 11th 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to
> > > murder 3,000 people.
> > >
> >
> > Any idiot could have devised such a plan. It didn't require CIA training
to
> > come up with such a deliberate attack on the sovereignty of a nation.
How
> > best can you demoralize a nation, you attack their military, leadership
and
> > financial institutions. I'm no military genius and I certainly have
never
> > been CIA trained and even I can see the logistics of the way he had
> > implemented his planned attacks.
>
>
> Yeah lets see you get away with it you arrogant smuck. Please.
> You are ridiculous to claim anyone could accomplish such a task.
> > >
> > > 2003: U.S. Invades Iraq breaking International Law in order to change
> > > regime and remove Saddam Hussein and install Democracy.
> >
> > Not breaking international law, enforcing it. It is called UN Resolution
> > 1441.
> >
> >
> >
> Well Billy boy you are a bitter little man who needs to learn more facts.
J.C. Bond
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, coordination kid wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Bill Kohlleppel" <kohll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3E953E3A...@attbi.com...
> > > > "J.C. Bond" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for the response. Good thoughts there. And yes, I am from
> > > > > Canada.
> > > > > JC
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > To the rest of the world: Did anything remotely good ever come out of
> > > Canada.....
> > > > I mean other than John Candy and possible Mike Meyers?
> > > >
> > >
> > > There is a long list of things that have come out of Canada, but to list a
> > > few of them:
> > >
> > > The Phone, hovercrafts, the zipper, wireless comunications, atomic energy,
> > > hockey, basketball, limb reatachments, open heart surgery, velcro,
> > > penicillin and insulin.
> > >
> > > There are alot more but those are just a few.
> > >
> > > C_K
> > >
> > Thats right. Only an American would make such an arrogant comment.
> > I would like that same person to name something bad that has come out of
> > Canada. I dont count as something bad. :)
>
> True... you don't count for much of anything. But ok, here it goes... phrases
> like "hoser" and "eh", hockey ( my personal opinion), Hayden Christiansen, the
> fact that they allowed pansy-ass draft-dodging American pukes safe haven into
> their country to get out of going to Vietnam.... what else is there... hmmmm,
> let me think on that for awhile.
Doesnt add up to much consider all the bad shit that has come out of the
U.S.
J.C. Bond
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > The best that I can understand he was undertaking some radical views and pursuing
> > > drastic means that the Saudi government wouldn't tolerate. I really don't remember
> > > what all was involved and, unlike you, I'd rather report on what is factual rather
> > > than a "best guess".
> >
> > I never guessed anything. At least I provide back up for my statements. I
> > have not seen one source of yours.
> >
>
> No, you just spout off more misinformation. I have yet to see any provided back up evidence
> of anything that you have spouted in this entire thread. At least I get my information from
> the news sources. I actually watch the news. Not much can be said for yourself, based on
> your arguments.
Yeah again that is so weak. I sourced a film praised by its acurracy and
doucmentation, not once criticized by any critics, or writers of journals,
magazines etc. Secondly I provided a website wihch provided the same
numbers the fiml indicated.
Since you claim CNN is gospel I would like to mention that it still claims
that no weapons of Mass destruction have been found.
The pressure is on the US to find them. Yes, to find the weapons of mass
destraction.
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Me arrogant? No. Just asking a simple question. I've never had much respect for
> > > Canadiens as a whole. They seem to be extremely wishy-washy with a few noteable
> > > exceptions.
> > >
> > > >
> > Youre right but at least we never burned women accusing them to be witches
> > or enslaved Africans, or killed 4,000,000 people in SOuth East asia.
>
> We never killed 4 million people in SE Asia. Quit spouting off shit that isn't true.
>
Prove me wrong. Yes, we all know you cant.
> > Or at
> > least 11,000 people do not die each year as a result of handguns, showing
> > how sophisticated we really are.
>
> That is such a vague statement. For instance, people killed by handguns can and often does
> include those who are killed in shootouts with police, or justifiable homocides, i.e.
> self-defense.
What the fuck does that matter. Killing is killing. Just proves you have a
violent society. Its not vaque either the numbers speak for themsleves. In
Britain only 63 people are killed each year. Hmmmmm
> > Its just in your nature to shoot and
> > kill. In Canada , England and Australia, the number is under 100.
>
> Yeah and look at your crime rates. It is a proven statistic that in those areas with the
> least amount of gun control the lesser the crime rate is.
>
Shows how sophicticated the US is. Yes I agree.
> >
> > Hell in some banks in the U.S. if you sign up for an account they hand you
> > a new shotgun right in the bank. Really smart.
> >
>
> Just goes to show what you really know... which is basically nothing.
>
Thats S-Mart you got that!
> >
> > > > You forgot to mention, Jim Carrey, Michael J Fox, Johnny Depp, Kiefer and
> > > > Donald Sutherland, Kneanu Reeves, Rick Moranis, Monty Hall, Whayne
> > > > Gretsky, and Kids in the Hall.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmmm, The Sutherlands I can see. Reeves is ok. Fox I can appreciate. The rest.... well
> > > I said good. The others don't rank so high.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Not to mention inventing Jet airplanes which the US stole from us along
> > > > with Hockey.
> > > > :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Invented Jet airplanes? Can't claim that one either, moron. The Germans had that
> > > BEFORE the end of WWII. And hockey? You can have it.
> > >
> > Sorry what I meant was our Avro Arrow project. We invented the first
> > plane capable of Mach 2+ ,fly by wire, computer control, and intergral
> > missile control system. After this project was cancelled most of the top
> > individuals involved went to NASA and Put the first man on the moon.
> >
>
> Well that isn't what you said, now was it? No, once again you spouted off and I corrected
> you. Now you spout off some other shit. Whether it is right or worng I don't know... nor do
> I really care.
>
Yes well the first Jet that really meant anything.
Oh you do care otherwise you wouldnt write back.
J.C. Bond
Are you talking to mE? Are you Talking to me?
I never wrote that.
JC
Chris Cox
news:i5sla.18901$4P1.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...> news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@deneb.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> > On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, TheMachine wrote:
> >
> > Simply Propoganda. I would be dancing in the streets also if I were
> > surrounded by American Soldiers with guns.
> > But I am sure some were happy about it, but dont think everyone thinks
the
> > same way. As of now, Iraq is in a state of Anarchy. Lets see how the
> > Americans control it.
>
> Didn't look forced to me... Have you personally talked to any Iraqi's and
> asked them if they were made to dance in the street?
Have you?
J.C. Bond
Of course you didnt read what I wrote. I said with regards to Kosovo.
Literacy is such a gift.
>
J.C. Bond
Oh and of course they will be good and listen. Its just so simple.
J.C. Bond
Kewl I didnt know that. You see thats what this is all about. WHy I love
this. Despite pitiful bickering. I cant get enough.
However, with your claim I think it was in the US all of this was created.
JC
J.C. Bond
Now I am totally tortured.
J.C. Bond
> "J.C. Bond" wrote:
>
> > > Only we are not involved in the fight.
> > >
> > > Thanks for proving my point.
> >
> > We take care of the wounded.
> > >
> > > > Canada's total involvement in this war would only be a symbolic effort
> > > > at most anyway.
> > >
> > > Because they can't do much else. Pathetic.
> >
> > No we dont focus ourselves on killing people.
> >
>
> Neither do we... we only kill those who are deserving of it, evil dictators, etc.
>
Oh lets not forget all the innocent lives.
> >
> > > > The US are fully capable without us.
> > >
> > > True.
> > >
> > > > We free up other troops by replacing other peacekeeping duties. Canada is not
> > > > one to break
> > > > international Law and if the UN succeeded we would be there with the US
> > > > guaranteed.
> > >
> > > Sure. That's a nice little copout there.
> > >
> > Not really its politics.
> >
>
> Call it what you will.... none the less, it is still a candy-ass copout.
>
> >
> > > > However, The US took action on its own. In a sense its good
> > > > that Canada is not involved, perhaps preventing terrorist attacks on
> > > > Canada.
> > >
> > > Do you think that you are immune to terrorism? Wake up and smell the coffee.
> > > Terrorism affects everyone!
> >
> > Wake up and smell yourself, you created the problem. I doubt this war will
> > solve it. I doubt my grandkids will live to see THe U.S> clean up their
> > mess.
> >
>
> This is assuming that you will attempt to spawm... if you haven't already. But at any
> rate, enough of the blame game.. we are taking care of the problem. Case closed.
>
> >
Good luck, In 20 years another president will be saying the same shit
about the mess left after this war.
> > > > Our Country does not need that.
> > >
> > > And ours does? No country needs it. You arrogant little fuck!
> > >
> > did I say that? No. So, shut the fuck up.
> >
>
> No you just implied it. "Our Country does not need that." You shut the fuck up.
>
Yes and we dont need to take on the problems of the US the problems they
created.
> >
> > Here is a question for you. Do you ever wonder why all this terrorism
> > exists?
>
> No, I know why. Most of the terrorist nations hate the US for what it stands for,
> specifically its alliances with Israel.
>
> > WHy Bin Laden did what he did?
>
> Because he hates the US. He sees the US as the "scarlet whore" and he has taken it
> upon himself to rid the world of her.
>
> > WHy Arabs hate Jews?
>
> Go back and read your Bible... if you even have one. It all stems from there.
>
> > Why American Foreign Policy is highly criticized?
>
> Because we dare to do the right thing when others would rather turn a blind eye or sit
> on their laurels.
>
> > Why these attacks occur against the U.S.
>
> Because of what we represent. We represent freedom. Even freedom to "sin" in the eyes
> of these religious fanatics. They don't respect that freedom, so they take it upon
> themselves to kill that very institution that has been around for over 220 years. They
> hate the Great America because of her alliances to the "evil Zionists", The Jewish
> people.
>
Geez did you take those words from George. SOunds like his lines.
> >
> > I am interested in your point of view.
>
> See above.
>
> >
THank you. Needs more insight however. But its a start.
> > Is there any message they are trying to get across?
> >
>
> Of course. They hate the Jews and they want them all dead... and any who would support
> them. They hate America because of what she represents, philosophical, moral and
> religious freedoms.
>
So you are saying all arabs hate jews?
> ARE you such a dick that you didnt realize that I agreed that it makes
sense. You love to argue with yourself.
Jimmy Dahlqvist
> Again, what law has he broken?
International law. There was no mandate for an invasion of Iraq, so Bush
went over the UN, and most sovereign nations of Earth, and did it anyway,
with the support of his little lapdog Blair. Furthermore, there is no
mandate, nor has there ever been in the history of the UN, that gives anyone
the right to a) threaten a leader of a sovereign nation and b) forcefully
remove that leader. There is NO SUCH resolution. And, this is painfully
obvious to me but apparently not to most, the right to defend oneself,
stipulated in article 51, and refined with resolutions 1368 and 1373 (in
respons to 9/11) does NOT imply that you can bomb the hell out of a
defensless country like Afganistan (who was NOT responsible for 9/11). Nor
does it give anyone the right to invade another country based on supposed
proof that the nation were harbouring Weapons of Mass Destructions (which
have yet to be found) and ridiculous claimes of links between Saddam Hussein
and Al-Qaida.
That said, I'm glad that Saddam is gone, but I will never forget in which
manner it was done. I'm worried about the future, fact is I'm worried
whenever a self-righteous bible-waving fanatic sits in the White House...
/Jimmy
Jimmy Dahlqvist
"Deborah Proctor" <marask...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Didn't look forced to me... Have you personally talked to any Iraqi's and
> asked them if they were made to dance in the street?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/09/opinion/09FRIE.html?ex=1050886682&ei=1&en=
9d7a028c8dc83295
Peachy, innit?
/Jimmy
Jimmy Dahlqvist
> This is why it just ticks me off...
>
> Either the US does nothing and gets criticized or the US leads and still
> gets criticized... Its no win situation... That's why I support Bush who
> does what he thinks is right regardless of what others think... Its
called
> acting out of conviction... and its quite refreshing... and is what
makes
> Bush a great leader...
Hitler and Stalin acted out of conviction too...
/Jimmy
Deborah Proctor
"Chris Cox" <cj...@ohyeahbaby.spam.optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e96bbcc$0$3467$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
I'm not the one making the charge that they were forced...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
Just like Iraq... You see, diplomacy didn't work because of Iraq and NK not
because of the US or the UN...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
"J.C. Bond" <umb...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.03041...@antares.cc.umanitoba.ca...
Thanks... just proved my point... you're anti Bush...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
"Jimmy Dahlqvist" <jimmy.d...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:9Bzla.5235$sJ3....@newsb.telia.net...
What international law? He had Resolution 1441 of the UN where it stated if
Iraq failed there would be serious consequences... Everyone knew what
"serious consequences" meant...
So that mobile chemical truck and the plutonium find doesn't count?
How on earth is Bush being self righteous? How is he waving the Bible
around?
In fact, the religious right isn't happy with Bush because he's not a put it
in your face kinda guy.
And at least he's not exiting a church with a bible under his arm on easter
sunday just to go to the WH and be serviced by an intern...
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net
Deborah Proctor
Post it... I don't subscribe to the NYT... In fact, their coverage on the
war with Iraq doesn't even make their paper worthy of wiping my ass.
Deborah Proctor
marask...@earthlink.net