This is why we don't want the UN in charge of US security....

[valvano]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129011,00.html

If the UN can't protect some simple refugee camp, why in the world should we get their "permission" prior to protecting ourselves?????

:D

[mcaismyhero]

Yeah I saw that on CNN as well. Some disturbing stuff.

[valvano]

Yeah...US security is doing a fine job in Iraq. :rolleyes:

how many mass graves have been filled since we took sadam out??????

how many iraqi atheletes will be tortured this year if they fail to win at the olympics?????

how many kurds have been gassed since we took sadam out????

how much skimming of iraqi oil exports by the un have taken place lately????

:rolleyes:

[ASsman]

How many of those things have ocurred in the past 10 years.....Also who said Saddam did any of these things?

Oh, you were sarcastic.. my bad.

[bilbo]

Why the smiley faces?
Absolutely astonishing.

[Schmeltz]

Valiantly bombing small countries that, it turns out, were no threat to anybody, does not constitute "protecting yourself."

[Ace42]

how many mass graves have been filled since we took sadam out???

The "massaged" US figures estimate 300,000 dead in mass graves over the 30 years of Saddam's rules. This figure does not take into account that most of these are from the Iran-Iraq war, nor does it acknowledge that a lot of them are from US bombing and military action prior to the actual invasion during the first gulf war. Most other estimates put the figure a lot lower. The US killed more than 100,000 innocent Iraqis in one WEEK at the end of the last Gulf War.

So, under Saddam, 27 Iraqis die a day on average, under the Americans, 14,285 a day. Note that this is on AVERAGE. On the "Highway of death" US soldiers killed over 20,000 innocent civilians in ONE AFTERNOON.


how many kurds have been gassed since we took sadam out???


According the US war college, various CIA and other intelligence reports, and a lot of independant analysis - the shell that gassed the Kurds came from Iran, not Iraq. So, the answer to that is "quite possibly about the same number as was gassed by Saddam, 0"


how much skimming of iraqi oil exports by the un have taken place lately????


The UN did not "skim Iraqi oil exports" - there have been sanctions in place that have prevented that for the best part of a decade. This is at the behest of the US government, which has resulted in mass starvation.

I think you should do some more research before engaging in an inept attempt at rhetoric.

[ASsman]

Yah, and what the fucks up with all the goddamn smilees.
Also fuck FAUX News, they can shove it.

[Ace42]

Incinerated body of an Iraqi soldier on the "Highway of Death," a name the press has given to the road from Mutlaa, Kuwait, to Basra, Iraq. U.S. planes immobilized the convoy by disabling vehicles at its front and rear, then bombing and straffing the resulting traffic jam for hours. More than 2,000 vehicles and tens of thousands of charred and dismembered bodies littered the sixty miles of highway.

From 125,000 to 300,000 people were killed... We recognize our role in history is to bring the transgressors to justice.

http://www.deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

[travesty]

According the US war college, various CIA and other intelligence reports, and a lot of independant analysis - the shell that gassed the Kurds came from Iran, not Iraq. So, the answer to that is "quite possibly about the same number as was gassed by Saddam.0

I think you should do some more research before engaging in an inept attempt at rhetoric.

So the Kurds, who fought alongside Iran during the Iran-Iraq war and were attacked throughout by Saddam, were gassed by Iran? Riggggght! I think I'm going to need to read these "reports".

I think your going to need to do some more presentation of evidence before engaging in speculation and conspiracy theory.

[Ace42]

So the Kurds, who fought alongside Iran during the Iran-Iraq war and were attacked throughout by Saddam, were gassed by Iran? Riggggght! I think I'm going to need to read these "reports".


http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/GaseousLies.htm
that is an extract of "the Times of India"

http://debs.pinko.net/pipermail/socialistsunmoderated/2004-July/002113.html

http://hnn.us/articles/1242.html


The Kurds are universally hated by the Arabs. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi all hate them.

Kurds occupy a mountainous area between Turkey, Iran and Iraq. I find it more plausible than the debunked "incubator baby" story the US government threw around.

As they are in "no-man's land" - what makes you think that the gas loaded into artillery shells that is commonly known to have been used throughout the Iran / iraq conflict could not have gone astray, been targeted at the wrong co-ords, or that a band of arabs in the mountain couldn't've been mistaken for Iraqi scouts?

Google for it, there are plenty of sites that support this. Even some Noam Chomsky articles mention it in passing.

While you may be skeptical, there is enough evidence to at least make it worth considering.

[travesty]

I did and I saw them, plausible yes, probable...I don't know. Just don't seem to make sense Pa. Gonna throw that one in with the George Bush/CIA attacked the World Trade Centers argument.

[Ace42]

I'd say that it is not implausible that the US lied about who perpetrated the attack, as it is not the first time they decided to apportion blame to a political target rather than the most likely suspect:

In passing, one might note that the destruction of Iran Air 655 in Iranian airspace by the Vincennes may come back to haunt Washington. The circumstances are suspicious, to say the least. In the Navy’s official journal, Commander David Carlson wrote that he "wondered aloud in disbelief" as he observed from his nearby vessel as the Vincennes—then within Iranian territorial waters—shot down what was obviously a civilian airliner in a commercial corridor, perhaps out of "a need to prove the viability of Aegis," its high tech missile system. The commander and key officers "were rewarded with medals for their conduct," Marine Corps colonel (retired) David Evans observes in the same journal in an acid review of the Navy Department cover-up of the affair. President Bush informed the UN that "One thing is clear, and that is that the Vincennes acted in self-defense...in the midst of a naval attack initiated by Iranian vessels...," all lies Evans points out, though of no significance, given Bush’s position that "I will never apologize for the United States of America—I don’t care what the facts are." A retired Army colonel who attended the official hearings concluded that "our Navy is too dangerous to deploy."

It is difficult to avoid the thought that the destruction of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie a few months later was Iranian retaliation, as stated explicitly by Iranian intelligence defector Abolhassem Mesbahi, also an aide to President Rafsanjani, "regarded as a credible and senior Iranian source in Germany and elsewhere," the Guardian reports. A 1991 U.S. intelligence document (National Security Agency), declassified in 1997, draws the same conclusion, alleging that Akbar Mohtashemi, a former Iranian interior minister, transferred $10 million "to bomb Pan Am 103 in retaliation for the U.S. shoot-down of the Iranian Airbus," referring to his connections with "the Al Abas and Abu Nidal terrorist groups." It is striking that despite the evidence and the clear motive, this is virtually the only act of terrorism not blamed on Iran. Rather, the U.S. and UK have charged two Libyan nationals with the crime.

The charges against the Libyans have been widely disputed, including a detailed inquiry by Denis Phipps, former head of security at British Airways who served on the government’s National Aviation Committee. The British organization of families of Lockerbie victims believe that there has been "a major cover-up" (spokesperson Dr. Jim Swire), and regard as more credible the account given in Alan Frankovich’s documentary The Maltese Cross, which provides evidence of the Iranian connection and a drug operation involving a courier working for the U.S. DEA. The film was shown at the British House of Commons and on British TV, but rejected here. The U.S. families keep strictly to Washington’s version.

http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/z9804-rogue.html

The US government lied about the Lockerbie bombing (at least in Noam Chomsky's opinion, and I am in agreement) - I would not put it past them to do the same against a country they intend to go to war with. Infact, we know they have done as much RE: the incubator babies.

Accusing a target of opportunity, rather than a target with the best opportunity, is in a different league to them attacking their own country.

[Ace42]

I don't see "20,000 INNOCENT CIVILIANS" in that webpage. I'm not going to pretend whatever happened there didn't happen, but even your source speculates that there may have been civilians on the highway. It's not known if we killed 20,000 INNOCENT CIVILIANS. We may have killed innocent civilians, but how many is unsure. Good use of the condescending capslock, though. Whoever yells and belittles most in an argument wins, right?

Saddam Hussein announced a complete troop withdrawl from Kuwait in compliance with UN Resolution 660. Such a massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Convention of 1949, common article 3, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who "are out of combat."

A soldier "out of combat" is accorded the status and rights of a civillian. As there was no trial or descrimination in the targetting, and all people are "innocent until proven guilty" - those people were to all intents and purposes "innocent"

I agree the use of the terms might have been misleading, I will concede that, but it does not alter the fact that "tens of thousands" (that's a plural there. Indicating "more than one unit of 10,000) of people were unlawfully killed by the US. The fact that they were indescriminately roasted makes it impossible to verify, but that does not lessen the importance.

I could argue that if terrorists detonated a suitcase nuke in a major US city, because all the people were vaporised "how many is unsure, there were probably a lot of soldiers" - and you'd be unable to prove otherwise.

[Itchy Donny]

Is it just me or does Iraq seem to look like mogadishu in "Black Hawk Down"?Although "Black Hawk Down" was a film the events were pretty real.

[xxeralkuxx]

CNN=CASH NOW NETWORK---pay em enough and you can air any thing, like the "poison gassed dog" from iraq.....liberal greed mongers.

[DroppinScience]

Why the smiley faces?
Absolutely astonishing.

Valvano's big smiley faces right next to his words make me wanna smack this 12-year-old upside the head.

:D

Hey look, I can do it too!

[EN[i]GMA]

Because he enjoys the deaths of human beings when it helps further his Conservative anti-UN opinons. Right valv?

[poist]

I hate it when half-wits come here and air their half-arsed opinions. Research something before you trouble others with it.

[valvano]

because the UN that John Kerry and all you liberals love is such a joke. it can't even protect some po-dunk refugee camp it set up in Africa, yet we are supposed to clear everything through them........what happened to those innocent people is what happens when you but your safety in the UN...a big clusterfuck

BTW, according to John Kerry, Michael Moore, and Hollywood, the whole world hates us.........................I didnt hear any boos for the USA during the opening ceremonies of the Olympics the other night...............what gives????


and, here you go...

:D

[Ace42]

because the UN that John Kerry and all you liberals love is such a joke. it can't even protect some po-dunk refugee camp it set up in Africa, yet we are supposed to clear everything through them........what happened to those innocent people is what happens when you but your safety in the UN...a big clusterfuck

Do you even know how the UN operates?

[valvano]

Do you even know how the UN operates?

based on what happened at the refugee camp, it doesn't operate too well.....

ta daaaaaaa
:D

[Ace42]

based on what happened at the refugee camp, it doesn't operate too well.....


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3567788.stm

So fox was only 30 people out, impressive. That's just under a quarter exaggeration factor.

I guess maybe if the US didn't keep withholding financial and military support from the UN, they'd be able to post more guards, huh?

[valvano]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3567788.stm

So fox was only 30 people out, impressive. That's just under a quarter exaggeration factor.

I guess maybe if the US didn't keep withholding financial and military support from the UN, they'd be able to post more guards, huh?

the UN knows who to call when they want the job done.......France and Germany

[Funkaloyd]

Hussein had used chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds long before the Halabja incident. According to this (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq25.pdf) State Department report (PDF, page 6 is relevant), Hussein used chemical weapons against "Kurdish insurgents" in late August or November of '83. The document is dated 21/11/83, a month before Rumsfeld met with Hussein and strengthened the US-Iraq relationship, so regardless of who gassed the Kurds in '88, I think it's safe to say that neoconservatives only care now because it serves their interests.

[Ace42]

the UN knows who to call when they want the job done.......France and Germany

You'd not want to call the US, afterall - they couldn't even protect their own people in their own country on Sept 11th.

[bilbo]

the UN knows who to call when they want the job done.......France and Germany


As we say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions
printed on the heel. :rolleyes:

[ASsman]

Fuck this shit, Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law is on.

[TheWedge]

CNN=CASH NOW NETWORK---pay em enough and you can air any thing, like the "poison gassed dog" from iraq.....liberal greed mongers.

What does that make Fox news? Conservative greed mongers?

[Bob]

If the UN can't protect some simple refugee camp, why in the world should we get their "permission" prior to protecting ourselves????

i love that one. that's why we bombed the fuck out of a country way across the ocean that couldn't attack us even if it wanted to; self defense. too many people swallowed that pill....

of course we don't need a permission slip to defend our country. but that's not what we were doing, we were attacking someone else's country, one that couldn't attack us. that's not defense. that's like, if you're walking down a street, and someone looks at your girlfriend, and you cut their throat, that isn't self defense, you're a thug

[valvano]

bill clinton
john kerry
john edwards
al gore
england

what does all these have in common? they all said the same things, iraq had WMDs and Sadam is a danger to the US. How many articles did the UN pass? Something like 15 demanding Iraq fully open up to inspections?

Well, guess what. Instead of sitting buy talking with his thumb up his ass, George W did something. Following 9/11 we went to Afghanistan, then we went after whomever we felt would be next. Based on previous intelligence reports that all of the above also supported, we went after Iraq. Those WMDs are somewhere, they didnt just vanish.

And all you punk ass kids should hope that we continue to hunt those WMDs down. I don't agree with much that W has done other than his tax cuts, but at least doing something about terrorism instead of sitting back in cricticizing everything a la Kerry. Did you know he has missed 75% of the votes over the past several years involving intelligence issues????

Who do you want as president, somebody who you know will act, or somebody who will flip flop depending on the current audience?

[bilbo]

I want a prez that'll ignore a PDB that states Bin Laden determined to attack US. That Aug 2001 vacation down to Crawford sure paid dividends. :rolleyes:

[EN[i]GMA]

Somebody who I know will act. In other words neither Bush nor Kerry qualify. Sorry to burst your bubble but Bush isn't a "strong leader" any more than Kerry is a "Flip Flopper". Try to use your own brain to anyalize things instead of using the asinine terms thrown around by the media. It helps to give you a shred of credibility. Oh and good luck finding those WMDs. I've heard Saddam ordered them buried randomly in the desert and those that knew where they were buried exterminated. Thats if they exist.

[Bob]

the "clinton (or other influential democrat) did it too" card, there it is, i love that one too

we seem to be heading towards a future where more and more hostile countries are developing these powerful weapons, can we really hope to stop them all with military action? everytime a small country might be a threat, we've got to go in and destroy them every time? that seems like an awful hellish future to me, a war everytime we think someone's up to no good. if we keep this up, the "punkass kids" will be the only ones left to go out there being told to look for these WMD's that may or may not actually exist, and you don't want to send them (or me) out there, they tried that in vietnam and it fucked up horribly. punkass kids make terrible soldiers, you can't even make them sit still in a classroom.

what i'd like is a president who stops pissing off countries that are building missiles, honestly. or at the very least one who doesn't sell missiles to dangerous countries. regrettably, my only two options seem to be the war president or the god-knows-what president, it doesn't really matter what i actually want. this isn't an election, it's a game show. i've won, and now i choose between the shitty winnebago or the mystery box. i sure as fuck don't want that winnebago, but who knows what piece of shit's in that mystery box.

[EN[i]GMA]

Which brings up the question. Isn't going to war with a country to prevent going to war with a country the stupidest fucking idea ever?

[100% ILL]

GMA']Which brings up the question. Isn't going to war with a country to prevent going to war with a country the stupidest fucking idea ever?


Perhaps, but considering the deed has already been done and cannot be undone what is the most logical course of action? Should we pull all of our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan? I don't think even John Kerry has that in mind.

[Ace42]

england

what does all these have in common? they all said the same things, iraq had WMDs and Sadam is a danger to the US.

Actually, England only went to war based on faulty information. As the Butler report stated, the dossier given to MPs who voted on the war was misleading.
If you actually read it, you will see he does state that important caveats about the unreliability of the information were intentionally removed.

So, basically, the information said "he might have WMDs" - and the country went to war on the basis that he *DID* have WMDs. That is a very very big difference. Furthermore, the 45 minute claim that was at the core of the debate has proven to have been not merely retrospectively false, but misleading even before the war. I can send you a copy of the Butler report if you want. It *is* a whitewash, but still has some important factlets involved.

How many articles did the UN pass? Something like 15 demanding Iraq fully open up to inspections?

http://www.csis.org/stratassessment/reports/iraq_unres.html

A fair few less than 15, and most have nothing to do with obstructing weapons inspectors. There's some about humanitarian food efforts, some about Iraqi politicians travelling to places they were told not to... I'll hunt for a more recent list. Furthermore, if there were suitable resolutions to go to war, the UN would've supported the US's actions. It didn't, therefore the resolutions are irrelevant.

Based on previous intelligence reports that all of the above also supported, we went after Iraq. Those WMDs are somewhere, they didnt just vanish.

Those WMDs are in the same place they always were - the imaginations of the war-mongers. No-one believes there were WMDs anymore - even Blair has conceded that there aren't any, and probably weren't any. That's why he totally changed his argument post Butler (whitewash) to "But we thought he was going to make some..."

What does that tell you? It was a crock of shit.


And all you punk ass kids should hope that we continue to hunt those WMDs down. Why waste time and money hunting for shit that doesn't exist? Remember the US is ignoring other countries with *real* bonafide physical, they admit to it, and have threatened to use it WMDs. Or would a couple of Sarin gas mortars and short-range missiles that can't even reach Israel anymore hurt the US more than Korea and Iran's nukes? Pshaw.

but at least doing something about terrorism instead of sitting back in cricticizing everything a la Kerry.

All he has done about it is make it worse. He has pissed off a lot more people, alienated the country further from the rest of the world, and created greater animosity. Didn't Sept 11th teach you anything? THE THREAT IS NOT FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY, OR MISSILES, OR TANKS, OR PLANES. IT'S NOT FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY. On Sept 11th they used your planes that they hijacked in your country on your buildings. WMDs are totally irrelevant. While your army are off bombing Iraqis, there are shitloads of homeless arabs thinking "Hmmm, shall I smuggle myself into America, and go crazy with an American gun I bought from an American gangsta in America? Yeah I just might" - Bush hasn't done squat to fix this sort of thing. Next time a terrorist strikes in America, ask yourself if Bush's policy in Iraq and Afghanistan could've done anything to prevent it. The answer will be "no." If anything, it will have PROVOKED it.


Did you know he has missed 75% of the votes over the past several years involving intelligence issues???

And did you know that 93% of statistics are made up on the spot? Can we have some *real* evidence? And no, a link to a right-wing propoganda engine doesn't qualify. Not that I care, I think Kerry's a shaft anyway.


Who do you want as president, somebody who you know will act, or somebody who will flip flop depending on the current audience?

"Current Audience" - If he IS flip-flopping, it is to get more votes than Bush. The only way to do this is to appeal to more people than Bush (assuming your country is a democracy, always a very dangerous assumption in regards to the US) - if he does what the majority of people want, he is doing his job as ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE of the people.

It's his job to do what the majority want, irrespective of his views on the matter. Don't forget that.

[EN[i]GMA]

Check your facts Ace, it's 42.7% of statistics made up on the spot.

http://www.thehumorsource.com/funny-quotes/2.html

[Ace42]

GMA']Check your facts Ace, it's 42.7% of statistics made up on the spot.

http://www.thehumorsource.com/funny-quotes/2.html

They made that up on the spot. Vic Reeves said it (probably not first) and it was in the 90s IIRC. 90s %age that is.

[valvano]

what i'd like is a president who stops pissing off countries that are building missiles, honestly. or at the very least one who doesn't sell missiles to dangerous countries. regrettably, my only two options seem to be the war president or the god-knows-what president, it doesn't really matter what i actually want. this isn't an election, it's a game show. i've won, and now i choose between the shitty winnebago or the mystery box. i sure as fuck don't want that winnebago, but who knows what piece of shit's in that mystery box.

lets see,
clinton tried to negotiate with a country that was building missiles called North Korea. We got them to sign an agreement, etc. the whole package deal.

8 years later, we found out they had lied the whole time...

[EN[i]GMA]

I was trying to be facetitious ;).

The source should have given it away.

[Echewta]

And what is Bush doing about North Korea? Samething but shhhhhhh.

[bilbo]

lets see,
clinton tried to negotiate with a country that was building missiles called North Korea. We got them to sign an agreement, etc. the whole package deal.

8 years later, we found out they had lied the whole time...

Do you have any idea what you're talking about, or are you just repeating what you heard on right-wingnut talk radio?

[valvano]

do you have any idea as to how deep of a whole you have your head stuck in?

:p

[bilbo]

Please tell me about this agreement between North Korea and the US? When did it start, what precipitated it? What happened throughout the years. What did the North Koreans promise to do? What did we in turn pledge?

If you're going to talk about stuff here, at least try to make sure you're informed, otherwise you waste everyones time.

[ASsman]

Hmmm, soon we will start moving backwards.

[valvano]

Please tell me about this agreement between North Korea and the US? When did it start, what precipitated it? What happened throughout the years. What did the North Koreans promise to do? What did we in turn pledge?

If you're going to talk about stuff here, at least try to make sure you're informed, otherwise you waste everyones time.

straight from a non partisan site:

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron.asp

a liberal paper:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-01-10-nkorea-arms-development_x.htm

another liberal news source:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/20/us.n.korea/

[ASsman]

OMGF! @#$# USA TODAY IS LIBERAL! #@$# CNN TOO !! STOP THE PRESSES!

[bilbo]

I wasn't looking for googled links, I wanted your words on the subject. That being said, did you even read that USA Today timeline?

Tell ya what, why don't you go back to your shine box and leave the discussions to the grown-ups. :rolleyes:

[bilbo]

Goodnight Mrs. Calabash--wherever you are!

[ASsman]

This is a good thread.....

FOR ME TO POOP ON !

[valvano]

I wasn't looking for googled links, I wanted your words on the subject. That being said, did you even read that USA Today timeline?

Tell ya what, why don't you go back to your shine box and leave the discussions to the grown-ups. :rolleyes:

ahem...

•1994: North Korea and U.S. sign nuclear agreement in Geneva. North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for international aid to build two power-producing nuclear reactors.


so Clinton rewards N Korea

•Sept. 17, 1999: President Clinton agrees to the first significant easing of economic sanctions against North Korea since the Korean War ended in 1953.


alas, as with most Communist, you can't trust them

•July 2001: State Department reports North Korea is going ahead with development of its long-range missile. A senior Bush administration official says North Korea has conducted an engine test of the Taepodong-1 missile.



:rolleyes:

[bilbo]

You just cUt-N-pAsTe shit from a timeline. That doesn't make you informed.

When did North Korea reactivate it's nuclear facilities at Yongbyon?
When was the UN nuclear watchdog asked to leave?
Do you think Bush's infamous "Axis of Evil" remarks in the 2002 SOTU had any bearing on the situation?

You really don't know anything about this subject, do you? Any idiot can see that the Bush Administration went in and fucked up whatever minimal positive steps their predecessors had made.

[ASsman]

Any? I would beg to differ, there are many who are indeed that stupid, thanks to paint chips...

[bilbo]

Any? I would beg to differ, there are many who are indeed that stupid, thanks to paint chips...


It appears as though you are right.

Goodnight.