UN Inspectors Told To Leave Iraq Immediately by Haken

Nic, let me ask again...where did you get the info? Did you aquire the Nigerian documents, learn Nigerian, study the fakery?

No

You have taken the word of someone else, just like the rest of us. That don't make you any brighter or righter. You are likely as far from the original source of the intelligence as all of us.

We, all of us, are built to believe. The most important quiet voice is the one within, the one that whispers Occam's Razor to me when I get carried away, the one that quotes "...however unlikely, what remains MUST be the truth."

I question you because you speak, but remember we ALL have our little voices.

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:08 AM

It seems that no one on this board wants war. The divisive issue is whether it is justified or not.

Nic, thanks for the quote but unfortunately, that wasn't me. Wish it were because I agree 100%.

And Wulf, although your sarcasm is thinly veiled, I agree with you too as far as taking the word of someone else. Gosh, something we agree on...other than Firefly, of course. We are all forming our opinions based on knowledge we've received and yet have no way of verifying its veracity. Whether it is propaganda from the government or propaganda from the peace activists, none of us are privy to the truth. And therefore, we need to listen to each person and RESPECT their opinion.

"...morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with" - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:08 AM

It seems that no one on this board wants war. The divisive issue is whether it is justified or not.

Nic, thanks for the quote but unfortunately, that wasn't me. Wish it were because I agree 100%.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:10 AM

HKCAVALIER

While I await the wonderful news that Joss has found a home for Firefly, I'd like to add a couple thoughts here that I've yet to see posted.

One major factor in this war for which I don't need any documentation (just a little common sense and a willingness to "go there"), is racism. Oil or no, we would not be going to war right now if Saddam Hussein were white. You know it would be funny if it weren't plain evil, but there's a very obvious link between the 9/11 terrorists and Iraq: skin color.

There's a lot of noise being made about the stupidity and denial of those of us who are against the war, but opposing this war seems pretty sensible to me if for no other reason than it is too expensive. Expensive in lives, expensive in money we don't have, expensive in loss of a global community, expensive in astronomical risk. In the face of these obvious reasons to find other solutions to our "Mideast Problem" this war starts to look pretty stupid and full of denial to me. Some day, as Americans and human beings, we are going to have to respect our limitations. Which is not to say that we are not the richest most powerful nation on the planet, only that we are not God and we are not (or should not let ourselves become) the benevolent dictator of the world.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:36 AM

Randy, I don't veil my sarcasm; what fun would that be? No, the fact is, facts are hard to come by, and however loudly or longwindedly some folk decry there own point of view, it's unlikely to be fact.

I don't argue with fact, but anyone says I have to believe the facts they a'tellin me better be prepared to have them disputed.

As my final post on this thread, to the folks that felt I was tryin to run 'em off, or tryin to shut 'em up, or just ridin' roughshod over 'em:

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch

All evil needs to prosper is for good to do nothing.

What? You were expecting an apology? Haw

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:52 AM

Merl, don't EVER let anyone silence you. Speak out. Your beliefs and opinions are just as important. And by being civil and respectful, you rise above. It takes strength to stand strong especially when you're the minority. That is the only way to facilitate change. And though you may not be able to change someone's mind, it is important that you let the world know that you don't agree. Silence comes across as tacit approval. I participate in the peace rallys not because I think we can change the government's collective mind at this point but to show them and the world that there are Americans who do NOT approve of their actions.

Besides, don't leave me here alone with the wolves...

And your English is excellent, by the way.

"...morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with" - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:52 AM

And your English is excellent, by the way.

"...morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with" - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 8:48 AM

I guess the thing that really bothers me is the way Saddams past actions are being used to justify this war.
Yeah the guy is a tyrannt, yes he has killed thousand. No I would not shed a tear if he took two to the back of the head.
But if his crime is murder, and I would say it is, aren't the people who handed him the weapons and supported him accomplices?
Hell, the laws in some states find you guilty if you stand back and watch a crime going down if you don't do anything...
Ugly situation, Saddam wasn't alone in making it

Wheres the responsibilty?

Perhaps international credibility would be restored if some Americans went on trial at the Hague as well...

Does that seem right to you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:03 AM

MERLINDREA

First of all: Thanks to everybody here for asking me not to be silent. Makes me all warm and fuzzy inside

. Seriously, big thanks to all on the board for being civil over this matter which calls out for strong opinions.

Second, I'm not sure if this made the news in the US, but I found it interesting:

Several Iraqian families now living in Belgium have started a law suit against George Bush senior, based on crimes against humanity. In the first golf war, the US Army had bombed living quarters, resulting in the dead of 403 civilists.
They also want to sue Cheney, Powell and Schwarzkopf.

I can give you the source of that article, but its in German: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,240813,00.html.

No wonder the US government does not want an international court

Merl

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:17 AM

Grrrr... Randy, we're not all wolves. Well a few of us are, but there are a lot of sweet little kitties here too.

And to everyone else out there- I still want to hear what you think we should do instead of going to war. I haven't heard anything reasonable yet. Come on, I want to know what you think.

-------------------------------------
Jayne: Hey, I didn't fight in no war. Best of luck, though.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:11 AM

HJERMSTED

Crazy, crazy alternative to war: How about letting the combination of sanctions and inspections work? Give them time. I know GW wants to coordinate wartime high approval ratings with the approaching election year (hence the rush he seems to be in), but why not slow down and let the UN sanctioned process work?

But Bush has ruled out that idea, so here's a new one:

Instead of going to war and spending $200 billion of US tax dollars to kill/maim Iraqi people and destroy the Iraqi social infrastructure (which is the conservative estimate of what the US is about to spend/do)...

Bush and Co. should offer Sadaam Hussein half of that amount to go into exile (and once he's in exile, promptly freeze his accounts, arrest him with the aid of whatever country allowed him in and ship Hussein off to The Hague to stand trial for attempted genocide of the Kurds).

Bush could then spend the other $100 billion on fixing the broken US economy.

Less blood and destruction... plus it's crazy enough to work.

Or we could just call Superman.

mattro

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:14 AM

Oh hell, I lied. That wasn't the last post.

I just wanted to point out sumthin that was so obvious, so unignorable, I thought it didn't need sayin here.

Well. I can see I was wrong.

If Saddam's only crimes were ethnic genocide, racketeering, and the seeking of nuclear capability, we, the US, wouldn't be there.

Anybody not with me so far? Good.

Saddam Hussein decided to jump into the deep end of the superpower pool, and build him an empire ... a nuclear capable, poison gas weilding, oil sheik kinda empire. He wanted Iran and Kuwait, and tried to take them. He didn't ask the UN. He didn't make reparations. And when his own people rose up against him and his thugs and his rape and his torture and his murder and his wars, he GASSED them. Whole cities of them. I guess the rest of his subjects, his slaves, got the message.

Who here thinks that's ok? Hold up your hands.

So he fails to get Iran, he fails to get Kuwait, and the world, the WHOLE DAMN WORLD, tells him to quit, lose your insane dreams of empire, get rid of the weapons you intend to use to make your empire. For over a decade now, he has ignored that mandate. He has steadily, and at great cost to his subject/slaves, rebuilt his army. Anthrax, Nerve Gas, Ricine, Sarin, Radiological materials, and Smallpox are stockpiled around his nation, and he built missiles capable of delivering them to neighboring nations.

Who here thinks ole Saddam intends to use them only for self defense?

Next time little Saddam's in a murdering mood, it may be you. You ok with that?

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 10:38 AM

HJERMSTED

The only thing I would point out is that Sadaam Hussein HAS been contained since Gulf War I. UN imposed sanctions with the help of a constant US military presence have been working at keeping Sadaam in check. No reported aggressions toward his neighbors in over 12 years (only a great deal of colorful bravado and bluster... all talk).

The current strategy, though not as satisfying as ousting this fevered ego from power, has been successful at neutering Hussein.

Also keep in mind that during Gulf War I, we KNOW that Iraq had WOMD, but he did not use them on the UN forces that were attacking him! Today we only SUSPECT he has WOMD. However, just like the "communist hoardes" infiltrating America in the 50s... we cannot find them anywhere. Whatever "proof" the Bush Admin has shown the world was only enough to convince TWO nations (out of 160-ish) that Iraq's threat to the world is real.

American paranoia is NO REASON to spill blood anywhere.

mattro

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 11:24 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I'm distressed and discouraged even more than when FF was cancelled, if that's possible.

I don't have much time so I'm not going to go into deep explanations. I'll try to make this as strightforward and factual as possible.

The USA government has nothing against dictators. Hell, they're our favorite buddies! We set them up in Iran (Shah), Iraq (Hussein), Congo (Mugabe), Phillipines (Marcos), Indonesia (Suharto), Chile (Pinochet), Panama (Noriega), Guatemala (forgot the name), etc etc etc. If you think we didn't know what these guys were up to, I'll give you an example of our complicity:

When Kissinger was in Indonesia, Suharto asked for the go-ahead to invade East Timor. Kissinger basically said "wait till I leave". The invasion began the next day (after Kissinger got his *ss on a plane) and over 200,00 people were killed... with USA military supplies and intelligence. I'm not going to supply you with references to declassified documents and all that... just do a google search on any of the above countries + CIA and take a look around. Info is only a click away.

We don't have anything against WMD either. Where do you think Saddam got all of his fancy toys? So, while Saddam was busy gassing Iranian troops and his own villagers, George Schultz, Baldrige and Bush Sr. were busy shipping Saran and VX precursors and "crop spraying" helicopters (indeed!) to their big buddy and providing "ground truth" "calibrating" information to the Iraqi army on their kill rate of Iranian troops using mustard gas. Again, I don't have time to explain or argue. If you want to know for sure, look it up.

As far as the sanctity of UN resolutions goes, Israel's ignored over 500 UN resolutions. But we don't seem to have a problem with that. We're pretty good at ignoring UN resolutions too.

I really don't expect the average USA citizen to know about our tainted history. It's not something that our government or our official history books like to brag about. But GEORGE W BUSH KNOWS 'cause it was his own daddy who did a lot of this. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Perle know, too.

They follow the same scenario:

Decide that something (say, the Panama Canal) is an objective.
Claim over and over again that the leader of that particular country has an especially nasty trait (Noriega is a major drug runner)
Invade, to applause
Forget to metnion that we have failed to attain our stated objective (drug runnng didn't even slow down)

If you think I'm just being a horrible cynic... do any of you remember that "major buildup of Cuban troops" in Granada that sparked our invasion? In retrospect, it sounds like a sitcom, doesn't it? And a not-very-convincing one at that.

So there's only a couple of things I can conclude about our fearless leaders:

1) They're either liars, as in the Hilterian version of the "big lie"
2) They're delusional.
3) both of the above.

Quite frankly, I think the USA public better get a grip on reality real fast because the world is not going to be a nice place for us.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 11:48 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, and by the way, the biggest contributor to Islamic fundamentalism in general and bin Laden in particular was Saudi Arabia. The biggest contributor to the Taliban was Pakistan.

Although Saddam is a dictator, he is not a RELIGIOUS dictator. That is why we buddied up to him in the first place. Most of you are too younf to recall, bvut he was presented as a moderate to the USA people, in contrast to the Ayatollah in Iran (who had just overturned the Shah, who was our puppet.)

Gotta keep the players straight here, boys and girls!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 5:47 PM

like it or not fellas, Saddam is going down.

say hello to mr. cruise missile...

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:38 PM

NICOLA

Hey guys. Well, it looks like the war has started. There really isn't much information out there, BBC World Service and CNN are both running the same video feed, (nothing terribly unusual to be seen) although the commentary is quite different.

I do agree with Wulf and Randy that it is not appropriate to believe everything you read and/or see on the news. However, I think that if you are a reasonably discriminating reader/viewer, you can winnow out the hype and hysteria that is so prevalent in papers and TV news today.

And if you really work at it (i.e., try to read news from outside the US), you might even get different facts that the US media has decided is not worth reporting.

Merlindrea has provided us a link to a German article highlighting exactly this point.

Americans do not get unbiased, uncensored news. And before you all jump on me with 'Freedom of the Press', please remember, the first level of news reporting is the reporter - and self censorship is not imaginary. And then there is the editor and then the publisher and then the owner....

Noam Chomsky has often pointed out how American media tends to be uncritical of various actions of the decision-making elite. (I would like to add - not just American Media - we are all products of our culture and this inevitably will affect media reporting). Not because the media is controlled by the government, but because American culture enforces a kind of implicit comformity. A comformity that most people never recognise. Those that leave the US and live abroad for a period of time find a sudden exposure to thoughtful, critical discourse from a different perspective to be disorienting.

I spent three months in Morocco working a few years ago, and I was consistently taken aback by the completely different viewpoint that the Moroccans, British, Canadians, Germans and Dutch held to the Americans on the very same news items. It opened my eyes rather brutally to the knowledge that if you want decent news about foreign affairs you have to get news from more that one source, and some of it has to come from outside the US.

I really wish I spoke Arabic - because I think that Al Jazzera would be a fascinating perspective to balance what I hear from CNN and BBC.

I didn't mean to get involved in a post-modern polemic about the self-corruption of the US media - but I did want to say I am very sensitive to the issue and have done a bit of serious thinking on the issue.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:13 PM

NICOLA,
You are so right. I always try to read my news from different sources around the world, and it can be very scary when they disagree “facts”. Personally, I hope the news does lie to us about some of the things they report. When they say where our troops are, and when, what types of guns they have, and what they plan to do, I hope they lie. Its not that what they say sounds bad, but I could easily be the enemy listing to the news. Some of the things they report, we don’t even have to know. I don’t need to know every specific location, and what are plans are. I’d leave that information to the military specialists, it’s not like the general public makes any decisions about those types of things anyway.
THEGN,

Quote:
Originally posted by THEGN:
Three weekends ago, millions of demonstrators across the globe protested on behalf of "human rights." Their marches, slogans, placards and speeches did not declaim against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, did not cite the human rights reports detailing his tyranny and torture, did not take account the plaints of Iraqis fortunate enough to live in exile.

Rather, they protested the U.S. and the U.K. and their efforts to topple Saddam and liberate Iraq. Now, we are seeing more television advertisements along these lines, and even a "virtual march on Washington."

People do have a strange way of ignoring things, just picking and choosing what they want, whatever fits with their side don’t they? I think a lot of people--not all--who are protesting the war just don’t want any change in their lives. They don’t want things to be disrupted by a war, they want things to just be left how they are. They are willing to give money to Iraq, something clean and simple. Something they can do from the comfort and safety of their homes. The problem won’t be solved by simply giving money, but it would be doing something, and thus Iraq and other respective countries could be ignored guilt free. I can’t accept that. Nothing worth doing was ever easy. That goes for us going to war, and those protesting it.

-------------------------------------
Jayne: Hey, I didn't fight in no war. Best of luck, though.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:13 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Thegn, your impassioned call to liberty would be stirring and uplifting if it were only based in reality. So as not to confuse you with a long list of facts, which you apparently skipped over, let me put this in terms you might understand:

The USA is the Alliance, not the Rebellion. Sadaam is a Reaver, not the Alliance.

Who is the Rebellion?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:18 PM

Call me stupid, but I didn't understand that. Maybe because I think that the Revers might be a part of the Alliance but that would mean that Sadaam and the US...wha?...okay, no, I'm still confused. Can you put that in other, other terms?

-------------------------------------
Jayne: Hey, I didn't fight in no war. Best of luck, though.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:48 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

You REALLY don't understand????

Or are you just kidding?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:57 PM

It is my firm belief that American reporting is the best in the world in most ways. Why?

Competition. No other country has media quite so competitive. Sure, evil vampire tycoons could be controlling every channel, every reporter, every paper...NOT!

Please try to understand - because of this competition, each media group must try to be the best at what it does. Some address niche markets-Conspiracy Paranoid Daily, for instance. But mainstream American media has to compete in a vast and discerning market. Calling us, the citizens of the US, ignorant and uninformed begs the issue.

They can't afford to be wrong, or lie, or steal, because every other group will be watching. Local papers in distant countries may have different takes on events than USA Today, or CNN, but what makes it a more truthful take? Nothing.

Reading about events described in a government controlled, government run, government censored paper in Iraq could hardly be expected to have an unbiased account.

Reading about events described in a local German paper, the same Germany that decided not to back us, the US, might not really be unbiased.

Just having many sources doesn't make you brighter or righter, don't you understand?

For good social and economic reasons, I've always felt American media is just about the most trustworthy in the world. Not perfect. Not only. Just among the best.

While you are welcome to feel differently, be aware of how that effects your credibility. I've seen some wild-ass statements here, stated as fact, that completely lack credibility. You may have an opinion, you may state your opinion...

Don't expect your opinion to be transmuted to fact simply because you wish it.

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 4:16 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Hmmm... you apparently didn't read my previous posts, which were basically just lists of facts...backed up by declassified documents.

I'd be willing to go rounds point by point, except that I don't think you'd be willing to listen. Even if I showed that you were wrong... point by point and incontrovertible fact by fact, I bet you wouldn't change your mind.

But if you ARE willing to listen honestly, as I am, then I'd be happy to engage in discussion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 4:29 AM

MERLINDREA

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfhawk:
It is my firm belief that American reporting is the best in the world in most ways. Why?

Competition.

Actually, I don't believe this is true. First of all, almost all stations are private. Meaning they depend on the money of the advertisers to survive. So they are NOT independent. They make the mood but they also have to follow the mood.

In Germany, we have private stations, too, but we also have several stations financed by the public. Everybody who owns a TV or radio has to pay a certain amount, which gets distributed to those public channels. That means they are not dependend on advertisements (it also means that they have show very few ads, what a luxury :-)) and are free to report what they want. And there is also a certain competition between them. I don't see a real competition, when all stations yesterday just showed CNN the whole night.

Talking about CNN, thats another thing I noticed: what CNN calls news are very few facts with hours and hours of air. Bla bla bla, we got this expert here speculating and another one speculating and bla bla bla. But there are no background stories, no deep information. During the war in Afghanistan, after 9/11, did they ever bring a background story on why Afghanistan became such a poor and destroyed country? Did they ever discuss that US and Russia used Afghanistan to fight their war and that both those countries supplied the warlords with weapons to utterly destroy the country after the two big players left - and totally forgot! - Afghanistan for 15 years?

Accept it: US is not always the best in the world

. There is a whole big world out there...

Merl
Sorry, couldn't keep quiet :-)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 4:58 AM

MERLINDREA

To lighten the mood a bit, I just got this joke (had to translate it, so wording might be a bit awkward):

Last month, the UN asked worldwide following question:

"Please let us know your honest opinion how to solve the lack of food in the rest of the world"

Unfortunately the answers were not satisfying.

In Africa, the people didn't know what "food" is.
Eastern Europe didn't know what "honest" means.
Western Europe didn't know "lack".
The Chinese never heard the word "opinion".
The Middle East asked, what they meant with "solve".
South America didn't know the word "Please".
And in the US, nobody knew what they meant with "the rest of the world".

That joke actually describes another thing I noticed when watching the news here. The news are all about US. Okay, now they are about Iraq, but only because of the US involvement. No wonder Mr. Bush didn't get the name of the canadian president right - do you ever hear about this guy in the news? Or Mexico - do you ever hear news about them? Those are your closest neighbours, but just from watching the news, I wouldn't even know how their countries are shaped.

The only radio channel I found to send both American and International news and background stories is the PRI channel. But everything in tv you can just forget about it - its entertaining, but thats it.

Merl

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 5:28 AM

That is hi-larious!!!

And the news today- you are right, they are just trying to be entertaining, not actually informative.

-------------------------------------
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:49 AM

Merl, you are so right. I read the news online from several sites and I subscribe to the Economist (which is surprisingly pro-war but, being a non-US publication, still provides excellent well-rounded coverage). So I try to get a global perspective. But as Molly Ivens pointed out, most U.S. media is not asking the difficult questions, delving deep into the mire to find the "truth". But instead, they simply regurgitate what the government tells them to say. They never seem to ask, "well, but is that the truth?" Oder ist es nur mich?

I continue to read the posts on this board and am in awe of the narrowness of vision. There are tons and tons of "facts", both current and historical. But the pro-war posts seem centered on the basic argument: Saddam bad. Must be killed.

Well, yes, everyone agrees on that. But it seems the pro-peace people are more concerned about the much wider ramifications and implications of this war. The war is a stone dropped in a pond. The pro-war people are focused on the big splash. The pro-peace people are focused on how the ripples will cover every inch of the pond. Even more things to think about: There have been recent reports of how the war will destroy extremely valuable archaeological sites (after all, it is the birth-place of modern civilization) and it will cause irreparable ecological damage whose affects will be felt beyond the immediate region (including radioactive shrapnel used by armour-piercing weapons that will scattered everywhere).

Nic, you are right on target. We all hear the news coming down the pipeline. It is our duty to listen and to THINK, not simply accept.

Kaythryn keeps asking about alternatives to handling Saddam. Hmmmm...I can't answer that one. But what I do have to say is are you asking the right question? Why now? Why alone? I have yet to hear a good answer to these aside from the "saddam bad man" answer. There is a plethora of domestic problems that are crippling our country. What about those? What about a president who makes unilateral decisions in a "democracy"? What about our own government torturing its prisoners?

Wulf keeps attacking other people for not questioning their "facts" while spouting more of his "facts" and never questioning them. No entiendo o tal vez no entiende. Let's be fair. We ALL have to question our facts. Just because we don't agree with something, doesn't make it untrue. Wakarimasu ka?

To other pro-peace-ers, the protest in SF last night was awesome! Wet but awesome. I could just feel the power of the people surging...or maybe it was just my wet shoes. No Armageddon! Sigue la paz!

"...morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with" - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:49 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:49 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:49 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:33 AM

Randy,
I'm not just asking for alternate courses of action in handling Sadaam, I’m asking for any other alternates. I mean ANY. For you who are protesting the war, what do you want us to do? You must have some idea. If we don’t continue on as planned with the war what do you think we should do? What are you saying in these protests??? Negotiate a little longer? Give him money like some people have mentioned? Just ignore these problems are and go on as if nothing has happened? If you want to protest the war fine, I have little problem with that, but you must have and an idea of what you want the world, or just your country to do afterwards- even if you say you don’t want us to do anything, that is still saying something. I ask because I don’t understand. I don’t want us to fight, I don’t think anyone really wants to fight, but I don’t see any other options at this juncture for handling these problems.

-------------------------------------
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:42 AM

SARAHETC

Quote:
Originally posted by merlindrea:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfhawk:
It is my firm belief that American reporting is the best in the world in most ways. Why?

Competition.

Actually, I don't believe this is true. First of all, almost all stations are private. Meaning they depend on the money of the advertisers to survive. So they are NOT independent. They make the mood but they also have to follow the mood.

Not that I posted the original, but I agree with it and as such: Competition and Independence are not the same thing. Competition should encourage Independence, properly applied, but it is not and does not guarantee Independence.

As a former jounalist and now as a journalism educator, there is no such thing as total journalistic independence. News should ideally be the first rough draft of history--and as such, contain as many viewpoints as possible. It is possible to watch ABC to get one viewpoint, switch to Bloomberg News to get another viewpoint, and then switch to FOX to get yet another viewpoint.

Furthermore, news is a commodity. I believe Merl expressed disappointment that CNN ran the same 4 clips over and over interspersed with "expert" testimony or whatever. CNN was not the only network to do so. Because all news sources, public or private, accept funding from somewhere, they are required to provide a product or a service. Public news considers itself a service and often performs as independently as humanly possible (and humans are fallible to greater or lesser degrees), but as such, provides the service for a limited amount of time. Private news organizations, such as the major 24-hour news networks, provide a good. The more a good is a available, the more it can be consumed, leading to demand, which offers money leading to supply, which hopefully leads to more consumption, more demand, and on and on ad nauseum.

Fox, CNN, Bloomberg, etc. are all competing for advertiser dollars and advertisers are monitoring our consumption in great detail to determine to what extent their advertising has an affect on our consumption. Like so: You buy a coke. Coke says, "How did you hear about our product?" You say, "I was watching news coverage on CNN" Coke says, "Do you often choose CNN as your news provider?" Do you often make soft drink choices based on television advertising? Will you continue to view CNN as your primary news provider?" Then Terrible Research Monkeys take that information and tell the advertising department that a majority of the 18-35 year olds who drive white cars and watch CNN purchase coke products. The ad dept. makes the decision to give X amt. of dollars to CNN based in order to secure further demand. CNN receives the money and, based on info provided by the Ad dept., alters their coverage to greater or lesser degrees to reflect what they perceive to be the desire of their audience.

Consequently, 24-hour networks never want to cease offering a product. So if all they have is 4 clips on a decaptitation strike (ain't that a helluva term?) then they will offer that product until a more attractive product comes along.

Ideally, more networks and more advertising dollars would create a situation wherein those networks strived to gain viewership and viewers demanded the most impartial product possible, leading inevitably to the "best" (most impartial) possible product. But information is not washing machines and as such, people will and should demand more with better. This increases the level of competition and starts the cylce again.

Ain't free enterprise shiny?

Those of us who agree with one another know who we are. Furthermore, I don't think anyone is really in the mood to let their mind be changed (even you, Signy). The war has started. It is happening. Hopefully the loss of life will be minimal and only bad guys. Then, the money can flow in and the aid can start and the embargo can fade away. Until then, maybe we should ignore each other until we go away. And I think that I'll try to make that my policy from here on out cos whoever said that the USA is the Alliance (I'm going to deliberately forget, too) makes me want to kick somebody in the face and use the f-word. A lot.

Sarah,
unhelpful and distracting, probably.

I'm a dying breed who still believes, haunted by American dreams. ---Neko Case

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:47 AM

HJERMSTED

Quote:
Accept it: US is not always the best in the world . There is a whole big world out there...

Other than militarily, the US isn't even among the Top 10 best.

Iraq needed weapons inspectors, but what the US needs are IQ Inspectors. The rest of the world can form IQ inspection teams to enter the United States and improve its education system. No major overhaul is necessary just remove the paranoia here and install some logic there... Boot the creationist minded teachers and corporate sponsors out of the public school system... Make more scholarships available...

With a smarter US, the rest of the world could breathe a sigh of relief.

mattro

Regime Change Begins at Home: No Bush '04

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:49 AM

Randy, you'll know if I attack. Trust me.

Facts? You are one of those half-readers, ain't ya? You read about half, then assume the rest.

I have not claimed to be the purveyer of 'fact' in this thread. I support reason, empathy, and truth. Facts, when ya can get 'em, are good, too.

Hmmm, I heard someone say up there that because american tv media are privately owned, they bow to government influence? Merl, I HAVE NOT ONCE told you to shup up, have I? But you should go back and rethink that. Maybe hit the dictionary. Somehow, you seem to not understand 'competition'. Let me help.
I want news. McDonalds doesn't have news, but would like me to come to McDonalds. McDonalds pays someone to produce news for me and to show me where McDonalds is. McDonalds has NO INTEREST in controlling the news, it just wants me to know where to get my lunch.
Burger King also wants me to know where IT is. Burger King pays another someone to produce news for me, competing with the other news program. Now I have 2 programs to chose from. Which one will I watch? The best news program, of course. Which is best? I watch them both to see. The one that gives me the quickest, most honest news will be the one I watch most. In the competition for my attention, they strive to be the best news program. If they slack, if they lie, if they are slow, their competitors will report it and take advantage, their veiwers will change the channel, the commercials won't sell, and POOF!, there's another news crew lookin for jobs.

Regurgitated crap from fringe sources, unproven radical theories, world-wide conspiracies, evil space monkies - I'll not argue with a crackpot. Believe what you want, hope you don't get too lonely way out there.

And what a lovely sentiment I read above: America isn't the best.

I guess that says it all for some of you folks. I'm glad to know where you stand. Let me tell you where I stand now.

America is the best. Maybe not the best possible, maybe not the best constantly, and maybe not the best forever, but
America
Is
The
Best

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 9:18 AM

I just heard about some anti-war protests on the news where people we calling for a whole day of disobedience. I’m not saying all of you who protest the war are like this- but that was stupid. Plainly stupid. I’ve only heard a little bit so far, but thankfully all they’ve managed to do was cause more traffic. If you’re going to protest go about it a better way. That just made me laugh.

And I agree with you Wulf, America is the best. Maybe my opinion is biased because I live here, or maybe it is more informed, but America is the BEST. Those of you here who think the government is horrible and you disagree with what they are doing, feel blessed that you can stand up and say so without being executed. If you really can’t stand this country you also have the freedom to leave. Oh, and there are a few people I would like to take advantage of that freedom.

-------------------------------------
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 9:51 AM

I'm not sure why this concept is so difficult to grasp. The point of the protests is to show that we are at war and you cannot just go about your lives as if everything is normal. NOTHING IS NORMAL WHEN WE ARE AT WAR. It is symbolic, metaphoric. Verstehest Du? Your immediate lives may be just the same. Go to work, come home. Whip up some dinner. Sure, people are dying half a world away, but you can still watch your episode of Entertainment Tonight with your dinner. The world is no longer the same place for anyone in the world and it won't be even after the war ends. And THAT is the point of the protests.

And Wulf, you crack me up! I have to say that your posts are really the most entertaining ones.

"...morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with" - Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 9:51 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:19 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Hey Sarahetc, I didn't mean to push your hot button. And I AM willing to change my mind. The interesting thing is that we all seem to want the same thing: good for the people of the world... Even Thegn spends an awful lot of time thinking about the liberty for the Iraqis!

The only question is "How do we get there from here?"

Then we are discussing means and not ends. (At least I hope we are!) And that is a topic about which reasonable people might disagree.

So, if you are willing to start with that goal in mind, let us reason together.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:35 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Kathryn, one alternative to Saddam is not to have put him in power in the first place, which is exactly what the USA did. In fact, there are a LOT of dictators the world would have been better off without that we managed to install/ prop up.

Ok, you might argue then was then, and what we did were mistakes brought about by the Cold War. And now is now and we don't do that anymore. But we're supporting Islam Karimov, the President of Uzbekistan whose resume looks an awful lot like Saddam's, or maybe even worse.

And what about Saudi Arabia? I work with an Ethiopian who knows people who worked there (Saudi Arabia has lots of "guest workers") and the stories that I heard would make your blood boil. Here's one: A woman working in one of the palaces had a 15-year-ol son who was raped by a prince in the royal family. When she protested, they killed her son and gave her $5,000 along with his body.

If we really want to do something about all of these horrible dictators, maybe we shouldn't support them in the first place?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:42 AM

I'm glad to be entertaining. My high school English teacher, Ms Mantooth, once said we were gonna have fun, and maybe, accidentally, learn something. I accept your thinly veiled sarcasm at face value. Thanks for the compliment. Have fun, folks.

Ms Mantooth was a horsewoman and rancher, when she wasn't pounding sentence structure into teen-age minds. She told us once about a horse she called Satan, when she called him something printable.

Satan was a hard-headed horse, but strong and intelligent. Ms Mantooth was not a small woman, so Satan got ridden occaisonally despite his stubborness. One day, while checking some brushy areas of her ranch for foals, they disagreed on which way they would go. In the ensueing exchange, Satan bucked and reared, coming down in the crotch of a small tree, lodging himself.
Trapped by the neck, forelegs off the ground, angry and panicked, Satan began to struggle madly, ignoring Ms Mantooth's attempts to free him. Recognizing that the horse would injure or kill himself, and more that a little frustrated at Satan, Ms Mantooth took the only immediate action that might save him. She picked up a nearby deadfall branch, and knocked the horse unconscious with a single, mighty blow. Did I mention Ms Mantooth was a large woman?
She was then able to free him, and he survived without lasting injury. It was, she said with a smile, the most satisfying help she had ever given.

I'm not for war, but I sure wanna help Saddam...

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 11:28 AM

Okay, this is the last time I’m going to say this because I’m tired of beating a dead horse. Everyone seems to have an opinion of who is right, and who is wrong, what caused this, and why we should attach or not, but here is what I want to know, and what I’ve been trying to ask---

All of you who are opposed to our current course of action (going to war) what do you think we should do instead? What other options do we have? The only condition I have (this is the problem I have with what you said SIGNYM) is that you can’t go back and change past events. I’m forward thinking and it doesn’t do anyone any good now to criticize past events.

- so far all of the options I’ve heard are give Sadaam money, and call superman. Superman might do some good.

-------------------------------------
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 11:48 AM

Alright Kaythryn,

The US is into the war, where do we go from here...

Win it as fast as possible, then leave as fast as possible.

As soon as there is somekind of government on the ground, not nessesarily pro american either, pull the troops out, and out of Kuwait, Saudi, the entire middle east. As long as they are there it will be an unstabilizing influence.
Cut support for Sharons government in Israel, yes the Israelis have security issues, but so do the palestinians. The current course of action is going nowhere as Anthony Zinni said US policy is quite insane.

Oh, and signing and backing the international criminal court agreement would also be a positive step.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 12:53 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

This assumes we have to "do something". We could safely ignore Saddam. He might have SOME biological or chemical WMD but he just doesn't have the delivery systems. He doesn't have nuclear materials- the "evidence" presented so far has been shown to be forgery. His participation in acts of terrorism against the USA has been nil. What's the urgent urgency?

Sure, he's a dictator, but so are some of our best buddies (just like he used to be). IF we really want to make the world a better place, maybe we should just stop thwarting local attempts and economic and political self-determination, and let the dictaros fall by the wayside. (Yeah, I know wulf will say this is fringe thinking, but I can point him to USA declassified documents. I think he's just afraid to look.)

Maybe it's 'cause my dad escaped Poland and spent some time chez Gulag, or maybe it's 'cause my daughter almost died after she was born, but for whatever reaons, the following book review is a touchstone:

“It is not so sad that people die. After all, it is the natural human condition. Everything that lives dies. It's that children often die without hope.

"As "Holocaust: A History" draws to its close, Debórah Dwork and Robert Jan van Pelt include a 1941 photograph of Mirka Grossman and a fragment of conversation between the little girl and her father. "Daddy," she asked in Polish, "isn't it better that today it's a bad day, but tomorrow it will be better?"

"Today doesn't matter," her reassuring father replied, "tomorrow will be much better."

It was a comment overheard by Mirka's aunt, Sara Grossman-Weil, one August day in 1944 as cattle cars packed with Jewish deportees from the Lodz ghetto rolled to Auschwitz-Birkenau..."

It's hard to remember that there are real people at the other end of our bombs and guns. But there are children just like ours, and families who want to protect them, people who cry like we do when their loved ones die. I cry about them. Don't you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 2:00 PM

Ok, here is my problem.

Saddam has long range capability, and has shown it today. He has the science and industry to produce longer range missiles yet. He has attacked innocents with SCUDS in the past. He possesses many kinds of illegal weapons of mass murder. Why, Sig, do you simply deny and ignore this?

Are you anti-american? anti-israel? anti-humanity?

You accept SOME documents, add wacko journalism, shake with denial, throw out the rest you don't want to see, and, viola', you have a different world than most of the rest of us.

France speaks French instead of German because of our meddling. Literally hundreds of examples exist in modern history (you do read history, and not just Conspiracy Daily?) accounting helpful meddlings by us, the US. Sure, we have failed. Sure, we have screwed up. The accounting ain't done yet, but we may actually turn out doing more good than bad.

...But we tried, and that's the key...you only fail if you try

all evil needs to prosper is for good to do nothing

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 3:28 PM

Well Wulf,
For one, good and evil is a matter of where you are sitting.

The problem is any number of countrys are developing the capibilitys you are talking about.
What is the solution there, go after them all?

After this, many will redouble their efforts to gain such weapons out of fear of the US, after all no one can match your military spending. Other means become neccersary for defence.

And the United States didn't take Germany down, it was an international effort, Canada, Britain, the French / Polish / and whoever got clear and ( they likely could have done it on their own ) the Russians. Have you considered the reason why this war doesn't have that sort of backing.

The US has done some good, but they have also done alot of bad, and many are justified in their anger towards them. What of justice for them?

The way I see it, this solution is only going to pour gas on the fire, maybe things will calm a bit when Bush leaves office ( I hope 2004, but we'll see ) But your foriegn policy has brought the world to this point.

I was a soldier once, and as one I can picture some of the consequences here, diplomacy can only work if the other side trusts you, and is afraid of you. With most of the world, the US has lost the trust part, and fear can drive you into doing things you wouldn't normally consider.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 4:53 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

OK, wulf, since you don't seem to want to do the work yourself, I'll find the links to declassified USA documents that were released under FOIA and post them here. What will you do then? Plug your ears and go "la-la-la" as loud as you can???

I don't ignore the fact that Saddam has SOME WMD. But remember where he got them from. Oh yeah, that's right, you think that's whacko, too. OK (sigh) I'll go dig up the info on that too, although you'll probably clain it's all forged.

As far as "our" involvement in Europe- do YOU read history? Or do you just read spy thrillers? It was the USSR that won the war. My relatives were there, in Poland and Hungary. It was the EASTERN front that the Germans were afraid to go to. So while we were sort of dicking around on a 300-mile front, the Russians were fighting on a 3000-mile front. They lost 20 million people, quite a few of those starved in Stalingrad. Or did that little fact escape you? In the end, as my MIL said, the Germans were retreating from the Russians as fast as they could hobble, by foot, train, and any way they could.

The USA would do MUCH MORE good if it simply didn't promote evil so vigorously. A good place to stop would have been when we were busy supplying Saddam with every WMD imagineable.

I DO give us credit for WWII, Yugoslavia and Somalia. At least we were trying to do the right thing.But how do we explain Iran, Chile, the Congo, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Iraq, Brazil, El Salvador, Iraq, Guatemala, and Colombia? Did you all know that we (ie Unocal) was in negotiation with the Taliban for an oil pipline? That the only thing that wrecked the deal and got the government pissed off was that the Taliban get playing us agiants Bridas (Argentia)? I'll pull up the corporate report if you want.

BTW- you wonder what I'm for and against? I am against evil, whether it's done by Saddam or the United States or Unocal. We're the most powerful country in the world, and have been for the past five decades. We should acknowledge our own rather large responsibility for the state of the world as it is today.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:07 PM

Oh yea, I remember now, it was the RUSSIANs on D-Day, not my father. stupid me. And the Battle of the Bulge, that wasn't my father, either, was it?

And, whatever documents you dig out of whackyland, a) it doesn't make 'em fact, and b) who the hell cares.

You keep insisting Saddam is our fault. You are, of course, wrong. We tried to help, him, his country, the region, and OURSELVES. He decided to be what he is. Iraqi people decided to allow him to enslave them.

We didn't clone him, program him, and install him...nor did we we clone, program, and install all the insane dictators of the world, past and present. Like you, he took the path of unreason on his own, without any need for our pushing or guidance.

I know you don't get it, I know you don't care to, but here it is again.

You can't have it the way you want it. We, the US, haven't caused all the troubles of the world.

wasted words, I know, but what the heck

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:17 PM

Gin, you don't seem to be getting it either.

How can a country, youngest of it's size, only a small fraction of the world's total population, have the influence you claim?

Could it be we've done something right? In fact, a long series of somethings right? You can't have it both ways (sanely, that is). Your anti-American bias is clear. Our success as a nation, and a superpower, is simple, incontrovertable proof, that we've done the right things. Ignore it if you like, I'll waste a few more words.

Hmmm, evil is simply a point of view? You lose. Mystical evil, service of lower powers, would be evil that isn't point of view, right? You're not saying that, though. You're saying that mass murder, indescriminate torture, ethnic genocide, are not acts of evil? Right? Are there any pets left in your neighborhood?

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:23 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

OK, you said it yourself: YOU DON'T CARE.

Well, I CARE. I care about the truth, you obviously don't.

I care about evil done in this world, whether it's by Saddam or Unocal or the USA. You don't.

You want to live in your little comfortable world where you pretend to be the good guy and listen to George dubya and believe.

Fine. I'm going to post the sources anyway. These will be cerdible, solid sources like declassified CIA documents, testimony before Congress, Commerce department papers, admissions by the Dutch government, historical documents. Don't bother to look, you've already said that you don't care.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:53 PM

I think Wulf and Signym each need a pair of boxing gloves.

Either that or you two need to sit down for a few hours at a big desk amongst piles of declassified documents and maps with a beer.

Scratch that, maybe it’s best not to introduce alcohol to the fiery tempers.

Here we go, I say instead of our Firefly raid, (since we are hopefully getting all the episodes anyway) we use all of our stealth, intelligence, connections and resources to sneak Wulf and Signym into the UN. There they can trap all of those political people in one room and have it out. Oh, I foresee a three day shouting match. I’m sure after three days, and scratchy voices you too can decide on some cleaver course of action to save the world. If not we leave the decisions to the UN and the all mighty Queen Kaythryn has been voted into the UN. How did I get in the UN you may ask? Well it‘s my story so poof, I‘m there. Anyway next we box Wulf and Signym up and send them first class to Saddam in a crate marked fragile and perishable. Once there they will each get a chance to slap Saddam. One of you give him a hit from me please? Then Wulf and Signym, your mission, if you choose to accept, and you must, it is to stuff Saddam in your crate and put him in storage. By then I’m sure you too will be able to find a common political ground. You know what that is? It will be by being Queen Kaythryn’s --who has now completely taken control of the US-- ambassadors. I don’t know where you are from Signym, but I don’t care, you still get the job. And you both get free James Bond like cars. Yeah, I like this. I get a car too. And you too Merl. Because of Merl’s cross country research all of the world has united together in the unified effort for peace. Iraq is rebuilt, gas prices go down, Queen Kaythryn gets re-elected and Merl gets a book deal. Wulf and Signym get a TV time slot where they go on from 6-7:00 every night and discuss world issues. Somewhere down the line someone’s ear gets bitten and it makes front page news. This is has just gotten nutty so I stop.

-------------------------------------
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:08 PM