For every question, there's an answer -- and you'll find it here!


Printer-friendly copy
Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #51208
View in linear mode

Subject: "Iraq, Part II" Previous topic | Next topic
MadDadThu Jan-01-04 01:44 AM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"Iraq, Part II"


          

Due to the length of the original post, (http://www.pcqanda.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=50479&mesg_id=50479&page=),I'm starting a second post so that those who are on dial-up can contribute their thoughts, if they desire.

I'll start off by replying to Doctor Midnight's replies (reply #81)
----------------------------------------------------------------
ME: Yeah, it's great they got him.
I feel SO much safer now that we have removed him from power.
Was it worth having over 400 of our kids killed?

DOC: Anyone that believes this operation was centered only on removing Saddam from power is living in a fantasy world. As far as the number of deaths are concerned, the "worth" is already becoming apparant. After all, when was the last time you heard of a hundred or so Iraqi civilians being dipped in acid or summarily shot?

ME: Besides the 400 plus US servicemen and women, plus the admittedly unverified accounts of 1,500 to 3,500 (some even put the number at 10,000 plus) Iraqi civilians, plus the nearly 100 soldiers from other coalition numbers, plus those killed in terrorist activities over the last several days, the death toll continues to rise. It is my sincere belief that the reason given for the war by the Bush administration centered around the "fact" that Iraq possessed WMD's. Yes, there were other reasons given; for instance, one being a claimed direct tie to the WTC attacks and Bin Laden, that has yet to be proven. The Bush administration at one point claimed they had a document showing Saddam had tried to buy radioactive ingredients from Africa. This was discovered to be a forged, false document. There is the ongoing investigation regarding the identity of the source of the leak that identified the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson as a CIA operative. Mr. Wilson believes this was done because his wife had information that showed Iraq did not have WMD's. Look, even if Bush unknowingly was using faulty intelligence upon which to base his decision, still doesn't make his decision the correct one.
Correct me if I am wrong, but me thinks this is the first time in history that the US invaded another country that was not DIRECTLY a threat to the United States. I am sure there are and have been other countries with diabolical leaders, and I don't see us invading them.
On the other hand, maybe we did scare the shit out of Libya.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: Why do some of you feel this is the end of the war?

DOC: I've never met anyone that thought this was the end of the war. Please give me an example.

ME: I can't give you an example. I plead guilty to reading things into other's posts that weren't actually said, but were implied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: I support the troops, but they shouldn't be there in the first place. The violence isn't going to stop, and neither is terrorism. There is so much hate in the Arab world against the US that capturing Saddam is barely going to make a difference.

DOC: (edited to save space)
Taking the capture of Saddam in and of itself, and not relating it to popular support for the U.S. in the Arab world, seems to have given us (and in turn the Iraqi civilian population) a distinct advantage, the fruits of which are already being harvested. Just like any dictator, Hussein likened himself to a deity, a prophet of some unnamed religion which believed itself to be pure and above all others, even other Arabs (such as those from Kuwait, UAE, or even Egypt). Like Stalin's personality cult, Hitler's Volksgemeinschaft and "Hitler Myth", and Mussolini's National Identity, all power is derived directly from the leader, and all blame is placed on his subordinates. The invasion of Kuwait failed? It was the Generals, or the Shi'ites, or the Kurds. 4,000 were gunned down in Kerbala? Shia uprising, what else could be done? It is this absolute power that allows a single person to have total control over their subjects. It is also a weakness, in that once the leader has been exposed, people will slowly start to lose faith. To put it in Ronald Reagan terms "Support for Saddam will not go away overnight. But it will go away. It will go away because the Iraqi people WANT it to go away."

ME: Good points. I hope this turns out to be correct, but I don't know if it will be that simple. I think the fight against terrorism is going to be, like it has been pointed out, a never-ending battle, and it isn't going to fade away or diminish just because of Saddam's capture. I would think that somewhere out there in this big world is someone ready and willing to fill in his shoes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: Did you personally feel threatened by Saddam before the war started?

DOC: I feel threatened by anyone that can sleep at night knowing they have unjustly murdered thousands upon thousands of people. It would be insanity to NOT feel threatened.

ME: What about Guinea, where "The population is suffering heavily from the social and economic crisis, and the leadership continues to suppress critical voices through intimidation and state violence."?

What about Sudan, where "Most disturbing are increasing reports of major human rights violations in the west, where some 600,000 persons have been displaced in what resembles the government’s strategy in the oilfields over the last four years"?

What about Serbia, where "The incomplete peace in southern Serbia is further weakened by the continuing uncertainty over Kosovo’s final status. The international community will need to remain engaged, pressing both Belgrade and Albanian politicians to fulfil all aspects of the Konculj Agreement, while focusing more attention on economic development. The UN mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), the NATO troops there (KFOR) – particularly the U.S. contingent – and the Serbian government all need to reassess their performance."?

What about Georgia, Burundi, Rwandi, Uganda, Ethiopia, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Angola, Nepal, Pakistan, Kashmir etc, etc. ? What is so special about Iraq that their citizens rate higher on the "Let's Invade and Help" charts than those from other countries where people are dying needlessly? It wouldn't be that natural resource so abundant in Iraq, would it?

Sleep tight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: Where are the WMD's that were the "reason" the war began in the first place? WHERE ARE THEY?

DOC: Anyone that needs to be shown a stockpile of WMD's to justify the invasion of Iraq is not, IMHO, going to be convinced by any reason. If anyone requires more proof than the brutality that the regime brought to Iraq, well that is just sad. There are some people that simply cannot defend themselves, and it sickens me that we live in a world where nothing is done until it's too late, when all we can do is claim "we didn't know it was happening." Well, we did know, we've known for a long time, and what better time than the present to do what we can to help out the proverbial little guy?

Speaking of helping out the little guys, see above answer.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
ME: Sure the world is a better place now that Saddam is kaput, but ask yourself, was it worth the billions of dollars and hundreds of lives that it cost to capture him?

DOC: Again, I believe this relates back to your assertion that someone out there believes that the capture of Saddam somehow signaled 2 minute warning. I don't know anyone who believes that, it is a foolish notion.

ME: I've come to the conclusion that these discussions in this forum don't change anyone's mind. We all come here with our beliefs held tight and no room for any other view point. Me included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

To Newbee: you made the comment "THE LAST THING WE SHOULD DO NOW IS TO PULL OUT".

I've never said we should. Pulling out now doesn't resolve anything, other than saving some soldier's lives.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
One other tidbit: Number of US Senators with children serving in the military: One (Tim Johnson, Democrat of South Dakota)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
1
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
2
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
3
      RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
4
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
5
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
6
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
7
      RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
9
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
8
RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
10
      RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
11
           RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
12
           RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
14
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
16
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
17
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 02nd 2004
21
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 02nd 2004
22
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
29
                     RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
30
                     RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
31
                          RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
32
                     RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
39
                          RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
40
                               RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
41
                               RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
53
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
54
                                         RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
55
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
56
                                                   RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
57
                                                        RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
58
                                                             RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
59
                                                             RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
60
                                                                  RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
61
                                                                  RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
62
                                                                       RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
64
                                                                  RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
63
                                                                       RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
65
                                                                            RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
66
                                                                            RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 10th 2004
67
           RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
13
                RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 01st 2004
15
                     RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 02nd 2004
18
                          RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 02nd 2004
19
                          RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 02nd 2004
20
                               RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 03rd 2004
23
                               RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 03rd 2004
24
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 03rd 2004
25
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 06th 2004
27
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 06th 2004
28
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
33
                                         RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
34
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
35
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
42
                                                   RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
43
                                                        RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
44
                                                             RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
46
                                                                  RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
47
                                                                       RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
52
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 07th 2004
36
                                                   RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
37
                                    RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 03rd 2004
26
                                         RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
38
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 08th 2004
45
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
50
                                              RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
48
                                                   RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
49
                                                        RE: Iraq, Part II
Jan 09th 2004
51

doctormidnightThu Jan-01-04 02:27 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#1. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 0)


  

          

Wow, we're on a roll now! First let me say that I'm glad you replied, and I wish you a Happy New Era of Time Description Based on the Popular Calendar of the Day!

ME: Yeah, it's great they got him.
I feel SO much safer now that we have removed him from power.
Was it worth having over 400 of our kids killed?

DOC: Anyone that believes this operation was centered only on removing Saddam from power is living in a fantasy world. As far as the number of deaths are concerned, the "worth" is already becoming apparant. After all, when was the last time you heard of a hundred or so Iraqi civilians being dipped in acid or summarily shot?

ME: Besides the 400 plus US servicemen and women, plus the admittedly unverified accounts of 1,500 to 3,500 (some even put the number at 10,000 plus) Iraqi civilians, plus the nearly 100 soldiers from other coalition numbers, plus those killed in terrorist activities over the last several days, the death toll continues to rise. It is my sincere belief that the reason given for the war by the Bush administration centered around the "fact" that Iraq possessed WMD's. Yes, there were other reasons given; for instance, one being a claimed direct tie to the WTC attacks and Bin Laden, that has yet to be proven. The Bush administration at one point claimed they had a document showing Saddam had tried to buy radioactive ingredients from Africa. This was discovered to be a forged, false document. There is the ongoing investigation regarding the identity of the source of the leak that identified the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson as a CIA operative. Mr. Wilson believes this was done because his wife had information that showed Iraq did not have WMD's. Look, even if Bush unknowingly was using faulty intelligence upon which to base his decision, still doesn't make his decision the correct one.
Correct me if I am wrong, but me thinks this is the first time in history that the US invaded another country that was not DIRECTLY a threat to the United States. I am sure there are and have been other countries with diabolical leaders, and I don't see us invading them.
On the other hand, maybe we did scare the shit out of Libya.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I know, the deal with Libya started about 10 months ago, which is not coincidence.

OK, so back to the main point you are trying to make. Yes, there have been casualties, as there will be in any conflict. After all, if it were any other way it wouldn't be war, it would be just a nasty argument with a lot of pushing and shoving going on. Now, I'm not trying to defend Bush (because I think he did to some extent mislead people, but I don't entirely believe that it was his intention to mislead people.) Poor intelligence can lead to all kinds of disasters, (hey guys, this Enigma code is unbreakable!) but I don't think I have the ability to get into detail about a lot of these types of historical events. Believe it or not, American history is my weakest point.

All the other claims for an attack, for me personally, were footnotes in the broader scheme of things. If a person chooses to believe something is of more importance or urgency, that is their right, but it doesn't mean that everyone else thinks the same way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------



ME: Why do some of you feel this is the end of the war?

DOC: I've never met anyone that thought this was the end of the war. Please give me an example.

ME: I can't give you an example. I plead guilty to reading things into other's posts that weren't actually said, but were implied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. The biggest problem with text-based communication is that you can't see another persons facial expressions, hear their tone, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------


ME: I support the troops, but they shouldn't be there in the first place. The violence isn't going to stop, and neither is terrorism. There is so much hate in the Arab world against the US that capturing Saddam is barely going to make a difference.

DOC: (edited to save space)
Taking the capture of Saddam in and of itself, and not relating it to popular support for the U.S. in the Arab world, seems to have given us (and in turn the Iraqi civilian population) a distinct advantage, the fruits of which are already being harvested. Just like any dictator, Hussein likened himself to a deity, a prophet of some unnamed religion which believed itself to be pure and above all others, even other Arabs (such as those from Kuwait, UAE, or even Egypt). Like Stalin's personality cult, Hitler's Volksgemeinschaft and "Hitler Myth", and Mussolini's National Identity, all power is derived directly from the leader, and all blame is placed on his subordinates. The invasion of Kuwait failed? It was the Generals, or the Shi'ites, or the Kurds. 4,000 were gunned down in Kerbala? Shia uprising, what else could be done? It is this absolute power that allows a single person to have total control over their subjects. It is also a weakness, in that once the leader has been exposed, people will slowly start to lose faith. To put it in Ronald Reagan terms "Support for Saddam will not go away overnight. But it will go away. It will go away because the Iraqi people WANT it to go away."

ME: Good points. I hope this turns out to be correct, but I don't know if it will be that simple. I think the fight against terrorism is going to be, like it has been pointed out, a never-ending battle, and it isn't going to fade away or diminish just because of Saddam's capture. I would think that somewhere out there in this big world is someone ready and willing to fill in his shoes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I never said it would be easy! Nor did I say that terrorism as a concept and implementation of political force would go away completely. But I disagree strongly in that I firmly believe terrorism will eventually diminish. To what extent, I have no idea, but it will start to taper off. Unless WWIII comes along, in which case neither of us will have time to argue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------


ME: Did you personally feel threatened by Saddam before the war started?

DOC: I feel threatened by anyone that can sleep at night knowing they have unjustly murdered thousands upon thousands of people. It would be insanity to NOT feel threatened.

ME: What about Guinea, where "The population is suffering heavily from the social and economic crisis, and the leadership continues to suppress critical voices through intimidation and state violence."?

What about Sudan, where "Most disturbing are increasing reports of major human rights violations in the west, where some 600,000 persons have been displaced in what resembles the government’s strategy in the oilfields over the last four years"?

What about Serbia, where "The incomplete peace in southern Serbia is further weakened by the continuing uncertainty over Kosovo’s final status. The international community will need to remain engaged, pressing both Belgrade and Albanian politicians to fulfil all aspects of the Konculj Agreement, while focusing more attention on economic development. The UN mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), the NATO troops there (KFOR) – particularly the U.S. contingent – and the Serbian government all need to reassess their performance."?

What about Georgia, Burundi, Rwandi, Uganda, Ethiopia, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Angola, Nepal, Pakistan, Kashmir etc, etc. ? What is so special about Iraq that their citizens rate higher on the "Let's Invade and Help" charts than those from other countries where people are dying needlessly? It wouldn't be that natural resource so abundant in Iraq, would it?

Sleep tight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Almost all of those countries have natural resources that could be "acquired." The gold and diamond mines of Angola, oil fields in Kashmir, etc. Sure those countries have their problems, but you have to take a logical approach to things. The starvation in Ethiopia is an environmentally induced purge, the desert has been moving south for decades and people just refuse to leave because of whatever reasons. Most of Congo is still unihabited (partly because of war, partly because of it's wildlife and terrain) but it could support about a million more people. When a grocery store goes out of business, you don't hang around outside their doors saying "Well, shit, I'll just wait here til they reopen so I can get me some cheezy poofs and a grape soda!", you go somewhere else where food and supplies are more abundant!

What makes Iraq different is that their leader had possession of a large and fairly modern military, had previously shown he was capable of invading other countries, and most importantly (IMHO) the US could win. North Korea, which shares many of the same attributes, would be an example of a war which may or may not be won (excluding the use of Nukes, in which case "sleep tight" takes on a whole new meaning.)



---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: Where are the WMD's that were the "reason" the war began in the first place? WHERE ARE THEY?

DOC: Anyone that needs to be shown a stockpile of WMD's to justify the invasion of Iraq is not, IMHO, going to be convinced by any reason. If anyone requires more proof than the brutality that the regime brought to Iraq, well that is just sad. There are some people that simply cannot defend themselves, and it sickens me that we live in a world where nothing is done until it's too late, when all we can do is claim "we didn't know it was happening." Well, we did know, we've known for a long time, and what better time than the present to do what we can to help out the proverbial little guy?

Speaking of helping out the little guys, see above answer.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

See my first response. It's in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

ME: Sure the world is a better place now that Saddam is kaput, but ask yourself, was it worth the billions of dollars and hundreds of lives that it cost to capture him?

DOC: Again, I believe this relates back to your assertion that someone out there believes that the capture of Saddam somehow signaled 2 minute warning. I don't know anyone who believes that, it is a foolish notion.

ME: I've come to the conclusion that these discussions in this forum don't change anyone's mind. We all come here with our beliefs held tight and no room for any other view point. Me included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I've changed my mind on issues before, which would seem to indicate I will change it again.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

jennThu Jan-01-04 02:31 AM
Member since Mar 11th 2003
331 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#2. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 0)


          

I would like to add this. When I first started to hear Bush talking about invading Iraq, the main reason he gave was that Saddam was a threat to us. It wasn't until no WMD were found during the initial inspection that he started talking about the brutality of Saddam towards his people(although maybe I just wasn't hearing things correctly..lol)as a reason for invasion. That reason really ticked me off. I know I have said this before, but it bears repeating. China is a classic example of massive human rights violations that occur every day. Not only have I NEVER heard talk of invasion to "save the people of China from their Dictator", we continue to import products made in China every day. Not only that - we buy those products every day. I truly feel that this is the ultimate hypocrasy(sp?), which is why I have never ever believed these were the only reasons for this war. What I do feel now is fear. Fear that every time we stick our noses into another country we are asking for retaliation. Just my thoughts

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
doctormidnightThu Jan-01-04 02:41 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#3. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to jenn (Reply # 2)


  

          

A war with China is unwinnable, so diplomatic pressure is about the only thing we have to use. I can't really forsee any kind of conflict with China NOT resulting in all out destruction of the entire world, but at least we would be rid of Barbara Streisand.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
jennThu Jan-01-04 03:02 AM
Member since Mar 11th 2003
331 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#4. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 3)


          

>but at least we would be rid
>of Barbara Streisand.


  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

RETSFCLThu Jan-01-04 05:27 AM
Member since Jul 24th 2003
2864 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#5. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 0)


          

Well I've held my tonuge on this topic till now because you both were right and had points with which even you both agreed on. I'll add more later but let me start with this:

< I've come to the conclusion that these discussions in this forum <don't change anyone's mind. We all come here with our beliefs held <tight and no room for any other view point. Me included.

Well I can tell you for a "FACT" that it does help to change others minds. There are groups out there that do nothing but look at these various Forums and report back to politicians as to the flow of information regarding different topics.
What I can't tell you for a fact is that this Forum is being monitored. But it never hurts to voice your opinion unless of course you are stepping on somebody else's rights.

There are a lot of things that are going on and have gone on that are wrong in IRAQ. But I am a firm beleiver that we needed to be there and still do.

The loss of life is a sad thing but it happenes. Just about all soldiers over there expect it as well as those outside of the war. I have lost friends of friends there and do not take it lightly. Throughout History different wars are debated by alot as to whether we needed to be there or not. When Japan attacked us it was apparent that we would now be envolved. It is no different than this except not all people believe that SADDAM is envolved. But I believe that it will come and so will the WMD and where they went or are.

The real sad part of our soldiers being there right now is the fact that a good percentage are doing nothing. Thats right nothing. And some of those being killed are doing nothing. There are officers and enlisted that check each of the units in IRAQ and report back to major commands. These reports have stated things like: Seen same group of soldiers in PX 5 days in a row ( they state have nothing else to do) , soldiers sleeping throughout the day (state when upon being awoken "I was bored nothing to do" , there are soldiers being used as cheap labor to help contracted civilian contractors , soldiers have built a golf course just outside of the airport in Bagdad, soldiers are being misused by young inexperienced 1st & 2nd Lt.'s sweeping streets and other medial tasks ( these unit leaders do not understand the prime training environment they are in. They could train their soldiers so that when needed they have the knowledge needed to survive.)

I could go on and on but you get my drift. I know that after 22.5 years of service myself that there will always be medial tasks that need to be taken care of. But it really seems outta hand in IRAQ. That has a lot to do with Leadership and I hope they really get a handle on it. Just like a lot of the vehicle accidents you heard about right after the fall of Bagdad. Because the (not most - but those that were pretty lose to begin with) soldiers went off half cocked. They slowed down when the Leadership got envolved. You seen a couple of what I'm talking about if you seen BAND OF BROTHERS.


I quess I have rattled on long enough. But I must say that right or wrong the thing to do now is support our troops. Because we disagree/agree with our present leadership they had no choice they went and are for the most part(98%) doing a fantastic job.
(I didnt even get into the issue of our RESERVE troops )

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlThu Jan-01-04 07:37 AM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#6. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 0)


  

          


>Correct me if I am wrong, but me thinks this is the first
>time in history that the US invaded another country that was
>not DIRECTLY a threat to the United States.


You mean besides the Philippines? Dominican Republic? Grenada? Haiti? France? Italy? Germany? Holland? The Solomans? Vietnam? Korea? Algeria? Panama? Kuwait?

I think you might want to open a history book, MadDad.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
MadDadThu Jan-01-04 01:57 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#7. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 6)


          

In the context of it being the first time we invaded a country without direct provocation, is what I intended to say,
I will say though, that that does not appear to necessarily be the case.

http://truthnews.com/world/2003030077.htm

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
AcadiaThu Jan-01-04 03:59 PM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1331 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#9. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 7)


  

          

President Bush said the evening of 911 when he gave his speech to Congress and the nation, that we would show no difference between the terrorists and those governments that harbor them: Binladin had at least 2-3 camps set up in Iraq. That’s provocation enough for me. That speech was a warning to Saddam that Saddam chose to ignore, as did the Afghanistan government. Why was it Ok to go into Afghanistan after Binladin’s people but not Iraq. ALL AND ANY governments harboring Binladin’s people have been warned, now they’ll have to pay the consequences.

Acadia

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlThu Jan-01-04 03:01 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#8. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 0)


  

          

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/14815.htm

Worth reading.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

    
MadDadThu Jan-01-04 04:07 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#10. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 8)
Thu Jan-01-04 04:14 PM by MadDad

          

Acadia.....provide proof of the Bin Laden camps in Iraq, please.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

        
AcadiaThu Jan-01-04 06:05 PM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1331 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#11. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 10)
Thu Jan-01-04 06:08 PM by Acadia

  

          

Um, where have you been the past eight months? I can't prove it now, they're gone, wiped out by our brave men and women. Asking me to prove that they were there would be as absurd as me asking you to prove that they weren't there. There are some people who claim the Nazi Concentration Camps never existed, are you also one of those weirdos?

Acadia

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
jennThu Jan-01-04 06:29 PM
Member since Mar 11th 2003
331 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#12. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Acadia (Reply # 11)


          

>Um, where have you been the past eight months? I can't prove
>it now, they're gone, wiped out by our brave men and women.
>Asking me to prove that they were there would be as absurd as
>me asking you to prove that they weren't there. There are
>some people who claim the Nazi Concentration Camps never
>existed, are you also one of those weirdos?
>
>Acadia
>

Um, you have neatly sidestepped the question. But, just for the sake of argument, where WHERE they before our brave men and women wiped them out?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
AcadiaThu Jan-01-04 06:53 PM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1331 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#14. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to jenn (Reply # 12)
Thu Jan-01-04 07:01 PM by Acadia

  

          

Well, the only proof I would ever be able to give you would be news clippings and even I would not consider that proper proof. What do you want, for me to take you by the hand and go for a walk in the deserts of Iraq? I did a Google search and got over 23,000 hits and the below links were just from the first page:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

http://www.dodgeglobe.com/stories/120203/opi_1202030018.shtml

http://www.ocnus.net/cgi-bin/exec/view.cgi?archive=36&num=9103

http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DB23Ag02.html

http://www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/stein092601.html

http://makeashorterlink.com/?U44E257D3

Please note that this last link has photos (gosh, maybe Rush Limbaugh is actually good for something after all). But I know that even this will not prove anything to you. You are dead set on believing what you want and no amount of proof in the world will change your view, you've got too much of your ego invested in this by now. (And maybe you can also say the same thing about others in this thread). People only believe what they want to believe, just witness how people absolutely KNOW without any doubt that their Lord is the only true Lord and their Word of God is the only true Word. Same with politics and war: God is always on our side. (Sigh).

Acadia

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
doctormidnightThu Jan-01-04 09:28 PM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#16. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Acadia (Reply # 14)


  

          

Not necessarily true. I don't believe in any god, but if one does exist I'm sure they wouldn't want me on their team.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
AcadiaThu Jan-01-04 09:58 PM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1331 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#17. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 16)


  

          

Don’t sell yourself short. I believe atheists are among the most likely to make it to He-Even (if there is a Heaven) because they haven’t polluted or closed their minds with any kind of controlling, brainwashing belief system.

Acadia

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
MadDadFri Jan-02-04 12:12 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#21. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Acadia (Reply # 14)


          

"You aredead set on believing what you want and no amount of proof in
the world will change your view, you've got too much of your
ego invested in this by now. (And maybe you can also say the
same thing about others in this thread)."
Works both ways, doesn't it?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
AcadiaFri Jan-02-04 12:19 PM
Member since Oct 13th 2002
1331 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#22. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 21)
Fri Jan-02-04 12:25 PM by Acadia

  

          

Yup, everyone KNOWS they are right about everything, the ego demands it. (If there is a Satan, I personally believe that the ego is his favorite and most effective weapon).

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
hal9000Wed Jan-07-04 05:41 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#29. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Acadia (Reply # 14)
Wed Jan-07-04 05:46 AM by hal9000

          

>Well, the only proof I would ever be able to give you would
>be news clippings and even I would not consider that proper
>proof. What do you want, for me to take you by the hand and
>go for a walk in the deserts of Iraq? I did a Google search
>and got over 23,000 hits and the below links were just from
>the first page:
>
>http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp
>
>http://www.dodgeglobe.com/stories/120203/opi_1202030018.shtml
>
>http://www.ocnus.net/cgi-bin/exec/view.cgi?archive=36&num=9103
>
>http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DB23Ag02.html
>
>http://www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/stein092601.html
>
>http://makeashorterlink.com/?U44E257D3
>
>Please note that this last link has photos (gosh, maybe Rush
>Limbaugh is actually good for something after all). But I
>know that even this will not prove anything to you. You are
>dead set on believing what you want and no amount of proof in
>the world will change your view, you've got too much of your
>ego invested in this by now. (And maybe you can also say the
>same thing about others in this thread). People only believe
>what they want to believe, just witness how people absolutely
>KNOW without any doubt that their Lord is the only true Lord
>and their Word of God is the only true Word. Same with
>politics and war: God is always on our side. (Sigh).
>
>Acadia
>

Acadia,

Every clear minded, independent thinker knows there's no connection between Saddam and Bin Laden. You're simply miming things you've read and heard on corporate owned media; you're not thinking for yourself and you've conducted no credible objective research on your own. All you've done is gather news articles from right wing sources.

The Weekly Standard is co-edited by William Kristol, hardly an objective source for journalistic information. William Kristol is the son of Irving Kristol and Gertrude Himmelfarb, and is nearly as important to the right wing movement as his father. In the words of Washington Post "critic" Howard Kurtz, "He's become part of Washington's circulatory system, this half-pol, half-pundit, full-throated advocate with the nice-guy image," who is "...wired to nearly all the Republican presidential candidates." Kristol was raised in Manhattan, educated at Harvard and roomed with Alan Keys, another subsidized right wing figure.

Dodge City Globe is a corporate media source owned by Morris Communications, one of the largest media companies in the nation. And the article you provided quotes CIA Director Tenet, the same man who lied about the Niger evidence that Bush used in his State of the Union Address based on data from known forgeries to support the Iraq war. He took the rap and said he never told Bush's people that the data was corrupted, and it was his fault those "sixteen words" regarding Iraqi attempts to procure uranium from Niger for a nuclear program made it into the text of the speech.

Global Beat Syndicate, is funded by New York University's Center for War, Peace, and the News Media. Humm...Why not Center for Peace first, War second...must be a Freudian slip, eh? Funding comes primarily from private U.S. and European foundations (another word for corporations), with additional support from several governmental and international agencies. This source has an obvious agenda.

The article you provded from Global Beat is authored by Jeff Stein who co authored "Saddam's Bombmaker" with Khidhir Hamza. Well, Khidhir Hamza is a former Iraqi nuclear scientist who defected to the U.S. in 1994, and testified before a U.S. Senate panel investigating Iraq's nuclear armaments. Hamza told U.S. Senators that Iraq was three years away from creating up to three atomic bombs. Really? Where's the evidence? Hamza was one of hundreds of Iraqi scientists and engineers. He did not hold exclusive knowledge to Iraq's weapons programs and Hamza is also a Shiite; most Shiites in Iraq would love to see Saddam go and outside Iraq make no secret their hatred for Sunnis. A popular catch phrase repeated by Iraqi Shiites is "We will murder all you Sunnis while you sleep".

The fact is two former Bush administration intelligence officials say the evidence linking Saddam to Bin Laden was never more than conjecture. And Greg Thielmann, a former State Department intelligence official said, "There was no significant pattern of cooperation between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist operation."

All Intelligence agencies agreed on the "lack of a meaningful connection to al-Qaeda" and said so to the White House and Congress. Additionally, a United Nations terrorism committee says it has no evidence — other than Secretary of State Colin Powell's assertions in his U.N. speech — of any ties between al-Qaeda and Iraq. And U.S. officials say American forces searching in Iraq have found no significant evidence tying Saddam's regime with Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

Sigh...

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MykWed Jan-07-04 07:14 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#30. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 29)


  

          

"Every clear minded, independent thinker knows...insert whatever crap you happen to be believing at the time..."
"You're simply miming things you've read and heard...insert something you don't trust at this time..."
"All you've done is gather news articles from...insert right wing if you are left wing, left wing if you are right wing...sources"

Come on Hal, are you really trying to tell us that NYU.EDU is right wing? Were you expecting funding to come from poor people?

Why didn't you make an attempt to discredit the two former Bush administration intelligence officials? I'm sure you would be making something up about them if they were saying something you didn't want to hear, so why not now?

Did you bother reading any of the above links? Perhaps try linking around to other related stories linked from those above? Or did you do that and are ignoring what you found because you know that nobody would come close to believing you if you claimed PBS was right wing?

Face it, you're not a clear minded, independent thinking, you are simply a parrot miming things you've read and heard from news articles that say what you want to believe.
Unless your recent sabbatical was because you took a trip to Iraq, parroting is all you could be doing.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Wed Jan-07-04 08:30 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#31. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Myk (Reply # 30)


          

Who funds PBS? Private colleges are funded by the wealthy; they churn out spineless intellectuals who submit to power. The British conquered India to control a monopoly of opium and it was praised by the most distinguished intellectuals of the day who described England as a unique power in the world and misunderstood. When the Japanese fascists invaded China and Manchuria, the intellectual rhetoric was the same.

And so it continues...

You have an eighth grade understanding of the world; no one takes you seriously.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
MykWed Jan-07-04 09:11 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#32. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 31)


  

          

Wow, I realize your first post was rather shallow and easy to shoot down but for you to resort to personal attacks so early ("You have an eighth grade understanding of the world; no one takes you seriously."), you must really be out of touch.
How long do you suspect it will take before you can hold up a good argument for at least a few posts?

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
AlThu Jan-08-04 11:34 AM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#39. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 29)


  

          


>All Intelligence agencies agreed on the "lack of a meaningful
>connection to al-Qaeda" and said so to the White House and
>Congress.



And all of them have changed that position in the last few weeks. It seems there was a link.

But it is immaterial if there was a link to Al-Queda or not. Al-Queda is not the only terrorist organization in the world, and Hussein clearly did support terrorism. There is more than enough evidence to convince any clear thinking person of that. The war is on terrorism, not Al-Queda. Keep it in mind.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
hal9000Thu Jan-08-04 01:46 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#40. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 39)


          

>And all of them have changed that position in the last few
>weeks. It seems there was a link.

Provide a link, so I can read about it.

>But it is immaterial if there was a link to Al-Queda or not.
>Al-Queda is not the only terrorist organization in the world,
>and Hussein clearly did support terrorism. There is more than
>enough evidence to convince any clear thinking person of that.
>The war is on terrorism, not Al-Queda. Keep it in mind.

Yeah, just like it's no longer material if he had WMD's. I wonder why Saddam's atrocities didn't matter when Donald Rumsfeld, who was Reagan's emissary to the Middle East, was sent to restore relations with Saddam knowing perfectly well he was using chemical weapons. Iraq was taken off the list of terrorist states in 1982 so the US could provide him with arms, aid, establish relations and so on, and since there was an empty spot on the list of terrorist states, they introduced Cuba as a terrorist state at the time.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
hal9000Thu Jan-08-04 02:00 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#41. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 40)


          

And Saddam's atrocities would also include his massacre of the Shiite rebels who might have overthrown him in 1991. "At the time, Washington held the 'strikingly unanimous view (that) whatever the sins of the Iraqi leader, he offered the West and the region a better hope for his country's stability than did those who have suffered his repression,' reported Alan Cowell in the New York Times.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
AlFri Jan-09-04 05:45 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#53. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 40)


  

          


>Provide a link, so I can read about it.

Go ask your local FBI or CIA agent, HAL. They must know you very well by now.

I see that you are unable to get through your head that the link quoted was to terrorism, not to Al Queda. And the war is not on Al Queda, it is on terrorism. Come visit, Hal. I'll take you somewhere to see terrorism up close and personal. You might not return, but you will learn something.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
hal9000Fri Jan-09-04 06:52 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#54. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 53)


          

>
>>Provide a link, so I can read about it.
>
>Go ask your local FBI or CIA agent, HAL. They must know you
>very well by now.
>
>I see that you are unable to get through your head that the
>link quoted was to terrorism, not to Al Queda. And the war is
>not on Al Queda, it is on terrorism. Come visit, Hal. I'll
>take you somewhere to see terrorism up close and personal. You
>might not return, but you will learn something.

As usual, you ramble on with only unsupported conjecture -- you're nothing but hot air.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
Ed W.Fri Jan-09-04 10:02 PM
Charter member
2754 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#55. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 54)


          


>As usual, you ramble on with only unsupported conjecture --
>you're nothing but hot air.
>

Only if that includes you and me Hal, you just cut and paste from only the sites that YOU think are right.....we all do the same thing...nothing new, and none of us will change our thinking....it would help the servers if you just posted a link...rather than copy and paste whole websites, if we had to use paper to save your posts we wouldn't have any trees left.




Ed W.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
hal9000Fri Jan-09-04 10:53 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#56. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Ed W. (Reply # 55)


          

you just cut and paste
>from only the sites that YOU think are right.....we all do the
>same thing...nothing new, and none of us will change our
>thinking....it would help the servers if you just posted a
>link...rather than copy and paste whole websites, if we had to
>use paper to save your posts we wouldn't have any trees
>left.

Your ludicrous “cut and paste” jag, is tired and worn from repeated, mindless use. Most of my posts are narrative in nature and reflect my particular knowledge of a subject. Instead of posting contrary views, you contribute nothing but trivial personal innuendo. You’re either uninformed, or too indolent to post anything else. I’ve had you pegged from the beginning——you have contempt for anyone who doesn’t share your views.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                
Ed W.Fri Jan-09-04 11:21 PM
Charter member
2754 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#57. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 56)


          

Because you have posted nothing new, or different, than everything you posted a year ago. It is not worth the effort to reply to what was addressed then. You have a short memory, but spend all your time searching the web for these same articles on your website.

Start a new leaf, or move on.

Ed W.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                    
hal9000Fri Jan-09-04 11:49 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#58. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Ed W. (Reply # 57)
Fri Jan-09-04 11:54 PM by hal9000

          

>Because you have posted nothing new, or different, than
>everything you posted a year ago. It is not worth the effort
>to reply to what was addressed then. You have a short memory,
>but spend all your time searching the web for these same
>articles on your website.
>
>Start a new leaf, or move on.

Not worth the effort of replying you say, and yet you do reply, but not by conveying information, rather with the same, stale personal innuendo, clearly reflecting your contempt for anyone who views things differently than you. And while you criticize me for possessing the same views, you respond as before with the same personal assaults instead of addressing my views. And to top it off, you don’t seem to have a clue of the glaring hypocrisy.

Why don't you start a new leaf and move on; I won't miss your non-posts.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                        
MykSat Jan-10-04 12:42 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#59. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 58)


  

          

Although they don't classify as subtle, your reply posts have been nothing but innuendo since you've came back. I'd rather refer to them as flaming. Generally when someone resorts to that as quickly as you have been doing, it means they know they don't have anything else to back them up so they hope that if they yell louder they'll scare off the opposition.

The early return post you made to Paul has been so fitting of most everything YOU'VE had to say. Seems what's good for your goose isn't good for your gander.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                        
RETSFCLSat Jan-10-04 03:44 AM
Member since Jul 24th 2003
2864 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#60. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 58)


          

Well there was some interesting discussions here but lately all I see or read is mud slinging. Have any of you gone back to read the bull you have written. I see a lot of the quotes you have taken are from people just like yourselves (people saying things of which they have very little or no knowledge). I think you are like some of the news casters that just like to hear yourself talk or in this case read yourself trying to get the last word in. Thank-you for turning this important topic into meaningless tribble.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                            
doctormidnightSat Jan-10-04 05:43 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#61. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to RETSFCL (Reply # 60)


  

          

Posting to get the last word in.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                
MadDadSat Jan-10-04 06:02 AM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#62. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 61)


          

Well, there ya go.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                    
MykSat Jan-10-04 10:08 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#64. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 62)


  

          

Yep

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                            
hal9000Sat Jan-10-04 06:36 AM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#63. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to RETSFCL (Reply # 60)
Sat Jan-10-04 06:46 AM by hal9000

          

>Well there was some interesting discussions here but lately
>all I see or read is mud slinging. Have any of you gone back
>to read the bull you have written. I see a lot of the quotes
>you have taken are from people just like yourselves (people
>saying things of which they have very little or no knowledge).
> I think you are like some of the news casters that just like
>to hear yourself talk or in this case read yourself trying to
>get the last word in. Thank-you for turning this important
>topic into meaningless tribble.

So you thought you'd stop by and teach every one a lesson by slinging a little more mud to add to the already existing meaningless "tribble."

Well, unfortunately "tribble" is not a word, it's meaningless, unless you're a senior citizen trying to cheat in Scrabble. In fact I'd almost be grammatically correct to say it's meaningless tribble.

LOL! Oh the irony of it.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                
RETSFCLSat Jan-10-04 01:45 PM
Member since Jul 24th 2003
2864 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#65. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 63)


          

The word was meant to be dribble but then you knew that and we all know you never make a mistake.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                    
MadDadSat Jan-10-04 04:05 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#66. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to RETSFCL (Reply # 65)


          

s w r sppsd t knw whn wrd tht snt wrd s wrd?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                    
hal9000Sat Jan-10-04 05:09 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#67. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to RETSFCL (Reply # 65)


          

>we all know you never make a mistake.

What tribble! Sure I do, just ask Shelly, he and others keep a close watch. Besides, why would you draw that conclusion? I haven't even posted since you've become a member.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

            
MadDadThu Jan-01-04 06:46 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#13. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Acadia (Reply # 11)


          

What's a "Nazi"?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                
MykThu Jan-01-04 07:17 PM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#15. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 13)


  

          

Something that has to do with "those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it".

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                    
81 NewbeeFri Jan-02-04 04:31 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#18. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Myk (Reply # 15)


  

          

So you don't want us to get out.What do you suggest(other than impeach Bush)?Will you tell me what party you are part of?If you say Independent I probably won't believe you!Do you vote?Did you vote for Ross Perot?,Ralph Nader?,Al Gore,Bob Dole?Bill Clinton?Would you consider yourself an enviormental activist? I won't ask what kind of car you drive Do you believe that the UN also lied to us about WMDs?I'm ready to answer any questions you ask of me in return.I am really convinced that Bush is the Spark that lights your fire and the fact (?) that he "lied" has your shorts in a knot.At least that is the central theme in your view of the conflict

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
81 NewbeeFri Jan-02-04 04:41 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#19. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to 81 Newbee (Reply # 18)


  

          

So there is no confusion my previous post is a reply to message 0

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                        
MadDadFri Jan-02-04 12:07 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#20. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to 81 Newbee (Reply # 18)


          

I AM an independent. Democrats and Republicans are all pretty much the same thing anymore. Who I voted for is none of your business. I'm not enough of an environmental activist to go around hugging trees. I drive a boring American vehicle, next time its going to be something fun and most likely foreign.
You're really stuck on the me being upset that Bush lied. Well, he did. And he also stole the election, but that's a story for a different day. Anything else I can answer for you?
What are your answers to the same questions?

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
81 NewbeeSat Jan-03-04 03:09 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#23. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 20)


  

          

I told you that I would not believe you if you said you were an Independent !I do agree that for the most part the parties are similar.I really did not care what kind of car you drove(I was only interested in that with HAL)I really did expect you to answer who you voted for but find it surprising that you felt you wouldn't or couldn't.(Paranoia?)Even your profile is a bare minimum!
You did not say what we should do other than withdraw from Iraq!You did not say if the UN lied when they said he had WMDs that were unaccounted for!If you read many of your posts it is obvious that your "hatred" of Bush has a BIG influence in your thought process.All of my Democratic friends have gotten over the election and have moved on .Your statement"and he also stole the election"is a further indication that your RANCUR about Bush has influenced your opinions.I am not obsessed with it but I notice you have almost made a mantra of it.I will answer my questions for you since I don't care who knows who I voted for( I do have the courage of my convictions)I planned on voting for Perot but did not when he went off the deep end before the election.I had hoped he would drive the Senators and Congessnen of both parties bezerk and slow goverment spending for a while as well as making polotics fun for awhile.I voted for Clinton the first time he ran .He disappointed me .With all his talent he accomplished little.The man could talk the ears off a brass billygoat,but did not use it to get things done Too bad!I voted for Dole,as much for the fact that he was also a WW2 vet and at least had a political record that was reasonable.Ilooked upon Gore as a stuffed shirt and a follower rather than a leader.I figured Nader had absolutely no chance of being elected.If you have no objection will you tell your age and where you reside.I promise not to stalk you!!

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                            
AlSat Jan-03-04 03:27 AM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#24. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 20)


  

          

> And he also stole the election, but that's a
>story for a different day.

I take it that you have a problem with the Electoral College and the US Constitution?



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
MadDadSat Jan-03-04 04:40 AM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#25. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 24)
Sat Jan-03-04 04:51 AM by MadDad

          

Only problem I have is with legit votes that were not counted, and the actions of the Florida Board of Elections. But screw it, Gore couldn't even win his home state.

Newbee, reside in the midwest, and just turned 45 today.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
81 NewbeeTue Jan-06-04 05:33 PM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#27. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 25)


  

          

Hi MadDad,I meant to send this the day I got your reply butI have to claim a "senior moment".In either case I guess it is better late than never!Sincerely,.....

http://www.pcqanda.com/dc/user_files/8546.txt

81 Newbee

Attachment #1, (txt file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
MadDadTue Jan-06-04 09:31 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#28. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to 81 Newbee (Reply # 27)


          

Thanks, Newbee (for reminding me that I've gotten olde )

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
hal9000Wed Jan-07-04 10:17 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#33. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 25)
Wed Jan-07-04 10:18 PM by hal9000

          

>Only problem I have is with legit votes that were not
>counted, and the actions of the Florida Board of Elections.
>But screw it, Gore couldn't even win his home state.
>
>Newbee, reside in the midwest, and just turned 45 today.

Check this out:

America's Electronic Voting Machines Are Susceptible to Manipulation
January 5, 2004
New York Times

Walden O'Dell is entitled to call himself a "Pioneer." The business leader from North Canton, Ohio, has qualified for the honorific because he collected 600,000 dollars for George W. Bush's election campaign. He accompanied this with a pledge to do everything possible to help Ohio "deliver its electoral votes to the president" in 2004.

But with this statement O'Dell has caused more of a stir than he could have wished. For the "Pioneer" is also chief executive of Diebold Inc., a company that among other things manufactures voting machines. About 40,000 of these are installed in 37 states and are supposed to record and count votes on November 2. Diebold is in second place, right behind the market leader, Election Systems and Software which achieved its top ranking under Chuck Hagel before he, a Republican, was elected senator from Nebraska.

Recently the states have left decisions about the technological side of voting procedures to private companies. It is shocking enough that the giants of the trade are vying to get close to the government. But in addition, O'Dell has inadvertently called attention to how susceptible the machines are to manipulation.

In principle, voting machines work like ATMs: The voter touches the name of his candidate on the screen. But instead of receiving some sort of receipt at the end of the transaction as he does from a money machine, he gets no receipt at all for the vote he has cast. Thus there is no way to check whether the machine has really recorded what it was supposed to have recorded.

And discrepancies are not rare, as was revealed a year and a half ago during spot checks performed in Dallas and Georgia: in thousands of cases the computerized voting machines had either allocated votes to the wrong candidate or not counted them at all. The lame excuse was that the screen had wrongly calibrated itself because of frequent use.

In the meantime, legions of computer freaks have tackled both the computers' software and hardware, discovering plenty of sources for errors. Since the exact time of the transaction is not recorded as it is with ATMs, some sinister forces could arrange ex post facto for a desired result without attracting attention during the customarily low voter turnout. Diebold even admitted that the database had not been encoded before the counting of the votes - a windfall for hackers.

Ironically, the electronic voting machines are supposed to prevent a repetition of the embarrassments that occurred in Florida in 2000, and which tinged the election of Bush with suspicion. Antiquated equipment was unable to read voting cards that had not been properly punched - and consequently they were not counted.

The U.S. Congress is spending just under four billion dollars on modernization of the voting process. A changeover to the digital era will be complete by 2006. By November 2nd this year, new computer screens should be operational at about 20 percent of all polling places.

Now Diebold is thrashing about with all sorts of inadequate explanations for the defective software. Yet the company could learn a lesson from its small, keen competitor. The Avante company combines digital high tech with old-fashioned paper statements. In this way each voter can make sure that the computer has really done what the voter wanted it to do - and manipulation is, at least for the most part, made more difficult.




  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
ukmitchWed Jan-07-04 10:41 PM
Member since Jul 15th 2002
4314 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#34. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 33)


  

          


Is that there one of them darned conspiracy theories, Hal?



Mitch

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
hal9000Wed Jan-07-04 10:50 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#35. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to ukmitch (Reply # 34)


          

>
>Is that there one of them darned conspiracy theories, Hal?
>

Conspiracy theory in the New York Times? Surely you jest. Did you read the article? I mean here’s a guy who raises $600,000 for Bush, and just happens to be chief executive of Diebold Inc., a company that among other things manufactures voting machines--not to mention that the voting machines are flawed.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                
ukmitchThu Jan-08-04 02:48 PM
Member since Jul 15th 2002
4314 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#42. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 35)


  

          


Yeah, Hal, I jest!

But don't you just love conspiracy theories?



Mitch

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                    
hal9000Thu Jan-08-04 03:10 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#43. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to ukmitch (Reply # 42)


          

How about this for conspiracy--the Reptilian Agenda. LOL!

http://www.reptilianagenda.com/

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                        
ukmitchThu Jan-08-04 03:52 PM
Member since Jul 15th 2002
4314 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#44. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 43)


  

          

>How about this for conspiracy--the Reptilian Agenda. LOL!
>
>http://www.reptilianagenda.com/

Fascinating:

Los Angeles singer Pamela Stonebrooke has upped the ante on true-life, alien-abduction books.

Stonebrooke claims she had a sexual affair with a reptilian something-or-other from outer space - and that she was the one putting the moves on her alien captors.

More unusual than the singer's improbable tale of intergalactic romance is that editors from at least three publishers bid for book last week during a one-day auction.

Ballantine Books, a division of Random House, won and will publish "Experiencer: A Jazz Singer's True Account of Extraterrestrial Contact" next spring. The advance was said to be about $100,000.

Far from being a "victim" in a hideous sexual encounter, "she conquered her fear and carried the sexual action to the reptilians," says the book proposal.

"She recounts this act of interspecies intercourse in a graphic, no-holds-barred, tour de force description, unique in UFO literature, replete with precise physical and emotional detail, sensational without being sensationalistic," it says.

As far as proof of her amorous adventures, Stonebrooke shows skeptics a series of marks on her leg, little scooped out patches of skin - presumably because the aliens needed it to conduct tests.



Funny, Hal, but she doesn't tell us whether it was a 'big' lizard, or a 'little one'?



Mitch

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                            
hal9000Thu Jan-08-04 05:04 PM
Member since Jan 21st 2002
3876 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#46. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to ukmitch (Reply # 44)
Thu Jan-08-04 05:15 PM by hal9000

          

Ukmitch,

That's amazing...well, I'm sure Pamela would affirm size is of no consequence to Reptilians. Parties and social censure may be another matter entirely, unless of course they went to Jackson's Neverland Ranch where I'm confident they'd be received warmly, especially if they brought their children.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                
ukmitchThu Jan-08-04 09:47 PM
Member since Jul 15th 2002
4314 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#47. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to hal9000 (Reply # 46)


  

          

>Ukmitch,
>
>That's amazing...well, I'm sure Pamela would affirm size is
>of no consequence to Reptilians. Parties and social censure
>may be another matter entirely, unless of course they went to
>Jackson's Neverland Ranch where I'm confident they'd be
>received warmly, especially if they brought their children.


Reminds me of a classified ad (think you call them small ads) which I saw in newewpaper.

It said: " Giant Iguana for sale. Very friendly. Eats anything. Loves children........."

Served with a tossed salad from the Michael Jackson German cookery range, I assume.



Mitch

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                                    
81 NewbeeFri Jan-09-04 03:48 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#52. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to ukmitch (Reply # 47)


  

          

I guess I should have cut my toenails before I ventured into space."It was good for me

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
MadDadWed Jan-07-04 10:50 PM
Charter member
1854 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#36. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to ukmitch (Reply # 34)


          

Not really. It is a fact that there have been problems with the machines, and it is a fact that Diebold's officers are big contributors to the Republican Party.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                
MykThu Jan-08-04 12:25 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#37. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to MadDad (Reply # 36)


  

          

And it is a fact that the Democrats are historically more likely to have voter fraud.
Republicans are more likely to back an assassination after the election.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                
doctormidnightSat Jan-03-04 06:12 AM
Charter member
11300 posts
Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
#26. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Al (Reply # 24)


  

          

A lot of people have had problems with the Constitution, that's why we have ammended it.

The problem with the electoral college isn't Congress, it's the way in which states implement it. 1824, John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson; 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes over Samuel Tilden; and 1888, Benjamin Harrison over Grover Cleveland are all examples of mathematical problems with the electoral college. And you just have to love the way Indiana has their system set up, the wording alone is good enough for an episode of South Park!

One problem with changing the way the an American President is elected is that it would be a very significant change in the federalist nature of the U.S.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                    
81 NewbeeThu Jan-08-04 03:39 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#38. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to doctormidnight (Reply # 26)


  

          

If the machines(Punched Card) had been serviced properly (Empty the chads) and the old farts (like me) had been able to follow the lines on the special ballot there would have been no problems and law suits in Florida.But we are now going to spend millions of bucks on machines that won't work any better and that have no way to verify them.We have been using punched card ballots successfully for years.It must be that living in Florida has turned the brains of Democrats there into mush!What a waste!!

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
Bob HThu Jan-08-04 04:27 PM
Charter member
10682 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#45. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to 81 Newbee (Reply # 38)


  

          

Amazing that the punchies didn't seem to be a problem in Missouri.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
MykFri Jan-09-04 01:42 AM
Charter member
7491 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#50. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Bob H (Reply # 45)


  

          

Not totally unproblematic. Remember it did take the democratic precincts longer to figure them out last time so they had to hold the polling places open longer.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                        
Paul DFri Jan-09-04 12:51 AM
Charter member
10207 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#48. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to 81 Newbee (Reply # 38)


  

          

What's wrong with pencil and paper? Works fine here.



Paul D

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                            
ShellyFri Jan-09-04 01:32 AM
Charter member
58338 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#49. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Paul D (Reply # 48)
Fri Jan-09-04 01:33 AM by Shelly

  

          

All this is probably immaterial, it seems elections are now ultimately decided in the courts, not the voting booth. May the best lawyer win.

Shelly

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

                                                
81 NewbeeFri Jan-09-04 03:42 AM
Member since Dec 10th 2001
3409 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#51. "RE: Iraq, Part II"
In response to Shelly (Reply # 49)


  

          

Yes Shelly,It seems like damn near everything in our lives are being decided by lawyers these days.A sad development

81 Newbee

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #51208 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.27
Copyright 1997-2003 DCScripts.com
Home
Links
About PCQandA
Link To Us
Support PCQandA
Privacy Policy
In Memoriam
Acceptable Use Policy

Have a question or problem regarding this forum? Check here for the answer.