Quote:

---

I knew right after September the 11th, though, that the attacks would begin to fade in people's memory. I mean, who wants to constantly go through life thinking that you're going to get hit again? Who wants to kind of re-live those days in your memory? As a matter of fact, I asked the American people to go on about your life. But given the fact that it's human nature to forget, or try to put in the past, put the pain in the past, I want to assure you and our fellow Americans I'm not going to put it in the past. The threat to the United States is forefront in my mind. I knew that at times people would say, you know, it may be an isolated incident, let's just don't worry about it. Well, for me it's not an isolated incident. I understand there is still an enemy which lurks out there.

And so part of my decision-making process, part of it as you see when I begin to protect you, to do my number one priority, rests upon this fact: that there is an enemy which is relentless and desirous to bring harm to the American people, because of what we believe in. See, we're in an ideological struggle. It's very important for the students here to understand that there is an enemy which has an ideology, and they're driven by an ideology. They make decisions based upon their view of the world, which is the exact opposite of our view of the world.

Perhaps the best way to describe their political vision is to remind you what life was like for people living in Afghanistan when the Taliban was running that country with al Qaeda as the parasite. If you were a young girl in that society, you had no chance to get educated. If you spoke out against the view of these folks, their religious view, you could be taken to the public square and whipped. In other words, there was not freedom. There wasn't freedom to worship the way you want to, just like we believe here in the United States of America. You can worship, you can not worship in our country, and you're equally American. You can be a Christian, Jew or Muslim, and you're equally American. It's the greatness of the United States of America which -- (applause) -- which stands in stark contrast to what these ideologues believe.

Their vision of the world is dark and dim. They have got desires to spread a totalitarian empire. How do we know? Because they told us. Mr. Zawahiri, the number two in the al Qaeda network, told the world such. He might not have wanted us to read that particular thing he was sending, but nevertheless we did. And he said that, here's our designs and our desires. In other words, these people have got an ideology, and strategy to implement the ideology. They've got a -- they have no heart, no conscience. They kill innocent men, women and children to achieve their objective. These folks cannot be appeased. We can't hope that nice words will change their point of view.

And so the decision I made right off the bat is we will find them, and we will hunt them down, and we will bring them to justice before they hurt America again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:


And so the decision I made right off the bat is we will find them, and we will hunt them down, and we will bring them to justice before they hurt America again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
EDIT: Is she still alive?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by cartoon:

I guess it depends on which advertising (or which literature, tv, or movies) you view.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
While fundamentally agreeing with her premise, I disagree with just about everything else she says.

First of all, there is no assurance that Western society will survive. Having read "Collapse" I no longer believe that knowledge will always be salavaged from collective experience. It is possible for an entire society to go off the rails and die- especially very highly developed, interdependent societies that can't possibly take a step backwards and still survive.

Furthermore, while I don't see Jews blowing themselves up in German cafes, I do see Israel bulldozing, strafing, and bombing entire communities. I do see the USA killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq. Just because it's government-sponsored, large-scale- and impersonal doesn't make it "not terrorism", which was decided in a previous thread to be creating a state of terror in civilian population for political ends.

---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.

---

Quote:

---

I do see the USA killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq

---

Quote:

---

The total figure for civilian deaths caused by military action of the US and its allies is a number just under ten thousand I believe

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:

---

The total figure for civilian deaths caused by military action of the US and its allies is a number just under ten thousand I believe

---

And you are free to do so. Of course that means that you are not on the same page as reality. Pirate News is much closer with his 1.6 million figure. I've done a lot of figureing, and I keep coming up about 1/2 of PN's number 800,000 or 900,000. In Bush's defense, most of those are not his, but he will be very lucky is his own total is only tens of thousands. I strongly suspect it will be hundreds of thousands. Of course, all of this is potentially dwarfed by the pending civil war, which could claim a toll in millions.

Part of why those of us who oppose the war do so is that we are in touch with reality, which, to put it in other words, means: We're pessimists.

---

The only problem with cynics is that they're right nine times our of ten.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
This is a must-see clip. This woman is brave.
http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1050#

Their time is past, and the tail is stil thashing about.


Chrisisall in the 21st

---

Quote:

---

You could also include the death toll caused by the sanctions against Iraq for the WMD that they didn't have.....

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

Jewish Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it."

-60 Minutes, 5/12/96, Extra! "We Think the Price Is Worth It," by Rahul Mahajan, November/December 2001
www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084

Jewish "President Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe III."
www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/bc42.html

---

USA nuked Iraq with dose-equivalent of 400,000 Hiroshima A-bombs. "Depleted" uranium is radioactive for 35-billion years and emits gamma rays, x-rays, beta particles and killer alpha particles:
www.traprockpeace.org/depleteduranium.html

Pentagon has already nuked USA with 1,050 A-bombs:
www.HistoryChannel.com

50,000 US troops killed in 15-year Iraq War
500,000 US troops are paid disablity from Gulf War
www.GulfWarVets.com

7,000 Americans genocided EVERY DAY in Death Camps in USA today:
www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_01.htm

Commander In Chief Radio #17
"POWs from 45 nations incarcerated in Gitmo"
by Skidmark Bob
Pirate Radio Santa Cruz
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/8939.php
www.freakradio.org

Free Peace MP3s
www.benfrank.net/nuke/Free_Peace_mp3s.html


www.police-state.net

"The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations."
-USAma Bin Laden (CIA code name Jew Tim OSSman when in California buying SAMS from CIA), business partner with Bush family since 1947, brother Salem Bin Laden was George Bush Jr's first business partner in Arbusto Oil in Texas, his other brother Shafig Bin Laden was dining with Sir George Bush Sr Knight of the British Empire and Carlyle Group (owner of Serenity) on 9/11/2001 in Washinton DC, CNN, "Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks," September 17, 2001
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/

"I have already said that I am not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other human beings as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people."
-Usama Bin Laden, Ummat magazine, September 28, 2001

"It's easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where the government might legitimately give out false information. It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."
—US Solicitor-General Theodore "Ted" Olson, in Jennifer K. Harbury vs. United States, at the US Supreme Court, on 17 March 2002 (his wife Barabara Olson, attoney at law and CNN talkinghead disappeared on September 11, 2001, allegedly on American Airlines Flight 77 that never hit the Pentagon)

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
-William Colby, Director CIA, assassinated 60,000 people via CIA Death Squads in Vietnam Wars with Phoenix Project ("drowned" in a suspicious "canoe crash" while cooking dinner in Washington DC)

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Bush Sued by RICO Act - 9/11 victims sue Bush Gang under RICO Act for perping domestic terrorism and mass murder on 9/11/2001. Stanley Hilton vs traitorous media whores Shaun Hannity and Alan Colmes for Jewish Australian porno king pimp daddy Rupert Murdock on Faux News.
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/7209.php

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Operation Northwoods - James Banford from ABC News reported on Pentagon's Operation Northwoods plot to perp domestic terrorism in USA to blame a foreign nation and "justify" invasion, declassified in 2000
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/7209.php
http://BodyOfSecrets.com

"Towers that fell 'like a controlled demolition'. Planes that vanished then mysteriously reappeared, and crucial evidence that has been lost for ever. In the Pentagon, a top secret team drew up a plan to simultaneously send up two airliners painted and numbered exactly the same, one from a civil airport in America, the other from a secret military airbase nearby. The one from the airport would have military personnel on board who had checked in as ordinary passengers under false names. The one from the airbase would be an empty drone, a remote-controlled unmanned aircraft. Somewhere along their joint flight paths, the passenger-carrying plane would drop below radar height, and disappear, landing back at the airbase and unloading its occupants in secret. Meanwhile, the drone would have taken up the other plane's designated course. High over the island of Cuba, it would be exploded in mid-air after broadcasting an international distress call that it was under attack from enemy fighters. The world would be told that a plane load of blameless American holidaymakers had been deliberately shot down by Fidel Castro's Communists - and that the US had no choice but to declare war and topple his regime. This Top Secret 'agent provocateur' plan - code named Operation Northwoods and revealed in official archives - dates from 1962 when the Cold War was at its height and was declassified in 2000."
-Tony Rennell, London Daily Mail, "9/11 ON TRIAL -Towers that fell 'like a controlled demolition'. Planes that vanished then mysteriously reappeared, And crucial evidence that has been lost for ever. A new book raises bizarre yet deeply unsettling questions about the world's worst terror atrocity…" August 6, 2005
http://www.financialoutrage.org.uk/911_mainstream_media.htm

"Operation NORTHWOODS may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government. Operation Northwoods had called for nothing less than the launch of a secret campaign of terrorism within the United States in order to blame Castro and provoke a war with Cuba."
—James Bamford, ABC News, "Friendly Fire - U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba," May 1, 2001
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba. Code named Operation NORTHWOODS, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years. The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military. Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job. Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy. "The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford."
—David Ruppe, ABC News, "Friendly Fire - U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba," May 1, 2001
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

"We could blow up a drone (unmannded) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. The presense of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The US could follow with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existant crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation. We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Flordia cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. Use of MIG-type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping, and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type palnes would be useful. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce that fact. Hijacking attampts against US civil air and surface craft should be encouraged. It is possible to create an incident which would demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner from the United States. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be subsituted for the actual civil aircraft and the passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rondevous. From the rondevous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly to an auxiliary airfield at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. Meanwhile the drone aircraft will continue to fly the filed flight plan. The drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency "MAY DAY" message stating it is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by the destruction of aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow IACO radio stations to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident. It is possible to create an incident that will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly Tail-end Charlie. While near the Cuban island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. This pilot would then fly at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who performed the mission under an alias would resume his proper identity. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared. A submarine or small craft would distribute F-101 parts, parachute, etc. The pilots retuning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found."
—Jewish Zionist General L.L. Lemnitzer, chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff at Pentagon, Memo to Secretary of War Robert McNamara - Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba - Operation NORTHWOODS, March 13, 1962 (declassifed 2000)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Jewish Fox TV's Lone Gunmen pilot episode - Broadcast in March 2001, re Jewish General LL Limnitzer's Operation Northwoods plot by Pentagon, CIA and Jewish Ike/LBJ White House to hijack a US airliner by remote control and crash it into the Jewish Rockefeller's World Trade Center, declassified in 2000
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6758.php

"I don't trust government. And neither should our citizens."
—US Senator Larry Craig, United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, "DOJ Oversight: Terrorism and Other Topics", testimony by US Attorney General John Ashcroft re President George Bush Jr.'s Executive Orders to "legalize torture" of US citizens and refusal to release that memo (felony Contempt of Congress), C-SPAN2, June 8, 2004

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be."
—President Thomas Jefferson

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator. I don't know where Usama is, and I don't care. The Constitution is just a gorram piece of paper. My daddy owns Serenity The Big Dang Movie - it's FABULOUS!!!"
-George Bush Jr, accused copkiller, convicted of DUI, cocaine, AWOL and desertion, arrested for theft and vandalism, sued for rape, currently sued for perping the domestic terrorist massacres on 9/11/2001, son of narco kingpin Sir George Bush Sr Knight of the British Empire sued for narcoterrorist bombings in Iran-Contra with his partner Pablo Escobar, grandson of Prescott Bush arrested 3 times under Trading With The Enemy Act during World War 2 and paid $750,000 forfeiture


www.whatreallyhappened.com/Aug02articles.html

---

Quote:

---

Of course that means that you are not on the same page as reality. Pirate News is much closer with his 1.6 million figure. I've done a lot of figureing, and I keep coming up about 1/2 of PN's number 800,000 or 900,000.

---

Quote:

---

Part of why those of us who oppose the war do so is that we are in touch with reality

---

Quote:

---

I got my figures from Iraq body count - an anti war movement not some official US governmental source.

---

Quote:

---

Are you sure you are not quoting overall death figures, including those from natural causes? Some reports cite these to show that the overall death rate has gone up - ie. iraq is less stable now and people are suffering for lack of basic ammenities.

---

Quote:

---

True enough, unfortunate circumstance will lead to high death rates. But my point remains; who do you blame for the civilian deaths from the current instability, the radical elements of arab/iraqi society who are causing it or the americans who are failing to prevent it? I'm not trying to plead the innocence of the US I just think people should give blame where it's due.

---

Quote:

---

You're assuming that I support the war in Iraq. Huh.

---

Quote:

---

Well, regardless of what people in here may say and think about America

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:

---

You could also include the death toll caused by the sanctions against Iraq for the WMD that they didn't have.....

---

Oh, I did. I don't think it's that high, it's between 500 and 600K. Clinton is an evil bastard. I'm not sure yet that Bush is an evil bastard, he might just be an incompetent moron. Also, the first Gulf war. But it's not just us, I think Saddam gets some credit, but still, you can't blame the wolf for being a wolf, at some point you have to take responsiblity for the fact that you locked it in the hen house.

For this war, I think honestly, the 30K figure is low, and while I think the 150K figure is high, it's likely to be somewhere in between the two.

I guess, objectively, not as bad as Clinton or Kerry is really damning with faith praise. To the extent Bush is Clinton, he's as bad, to the extent he's a republican, he's nto as bad, and on the budget, for whatever reason, he's clearly worse, as in - look at the budget - but even and average of 'better than Clinton' is not enough - I'm not grading on a curve.

Clearly there are many things worse than having Bush as president. For instance, we could have Osama Bin Laden as president, or even school building contractor. Or Al Zarqawi roaming about telling the democrats and republicans to bomb each others houses and places of work. Or we could have any of a number of presidents of other countries such as Kim Jong Il, Thabo Mbeki, Vladimir Putin or Robert Mugabe. Or anyone from Hamas. We could be the new Bolivarian Socialist Republican of America.

But again, this isn't the contest at hand. My objections to Bush come from "he's not better than any random republican senator" I think even someone from Bush's corner of the political spectrum, there are a number of people who do be far better. I'd be completely up for putting all 55 names in a hat and drawing a new Prez and VP.

What I'm really dreading is the new Hillary admin. This is a woman who has essentially already promised us a war to conquer Iran and install a new govt. This will be potentially harder than Vietnam, because Iran will have not just China backing it up, but also Russia. It'll be pretty easy for the Hillster to spend a trillion dollars killing a million people and failing to take Iran.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartoon:
Well, regardless of what people in here may say and think about America, it's still the one place in the world that everyone else is trying to get into so they can live the best life imaginable on earth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartoon:
Well, regardless of what people in here may say and think about America, it's still the one place in the world that everyone else is trying to get into so they can live the best life imaginable on earth.

---

As ussual Cartoon talking bollocks again. It would be nice if you could say something that's true for a change.

Here's a hint, there's plenty of developed countries in the world outside of the US (yes really, the USA isn't the only country in the world) which have immigration. If you look on a map (well get someone to do it for you, I realise you're incapable of doing it yourself) you'll see what I mean.

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not off in paranoia city, but I'm not sure this is true. I think that the Iraq Body Count, though it started as an anti-war group, is not an official US govt. source. The govt uses it, Bush himself has used their figures. I think their estimates are seriously low by any serious attempt at a realistic projection.

---

Quote:

---

I don't get the difference

---

Quote:

---

Most of the deaths probably come form our bombing of overcrowded neighborhoods in arial attacks on cities

---

Quote:

---

The Iraqis are doing the only sane thing they can: resisting a foreign occupation

---

Quote:

---

Now it could be you were quoting excess deaths, which means (i think) that 150,000 more people since the invasion have died than would have been the case if Sadaam was still in charge of them.

---

Quote:

---

Do you watch the news?

---

Quote:

---

I meant the majority of the 30K were probably arial bombardment numbers

---

Quote:

---

Of course not. I don't own a TV. I read the news.

---

Quote:

---

I was refering to the Iraqis we fight who fight us, the insurgents, they are doing the natural thing. 700 Al Qaeda and a few looneys bent on civil war are another thing.

---

Quote:

---

No offense, but your argument comes across like democrats, ie. not taking a strong enough stance.

---

Quote:

---

Ah, that's much less outrageous - apologies for misinterpreting you. Not too far off, IBC has a running total of some 35,000, about 10,000 killed by us. And I was always agreeing that they are mainly civilians, not combatants.

---

Quote:

---

Haha, cool. But it depends what you read I guess.

---

Quote:

---

But I still don't think you have a realistic view of what's going on, glorifying and upscaling the 'iraqi resistance' and downplaying al qaeda and rival sunni/shia factions.

---

Quote:

---

The only thing we are forcing on the iraqi people is democracy,

---

Quote:

---

which is pretty much letting the people choose themselves how things are run, instead of the previous psychotic dictator.

---

Quote:

---

Your idea that the iraqi people are united in resisting the occupying americans is a strange one,

---

Quote:

---

since the two rival factions are carrying out attacks on each other pushing the country to the brink of civil war.

---

Quote:

---

I don't see how you can downplay this in light of the figures:
Coalition forces killed by Iraqi militants - about 2k
Iraqi civilians killed by Iraqi militants - at least 25k and rising all the time

---

Quote:

---

Look - you see exactly who the Iraqi militants are fighting aginst? The Iraqi militants are killing their countrymen and you call them freedom fighters

---

Quote:

---

and blame the deaths on George Bush!!!

---

Quote:

---

Crazy stuff.

---

Quote:

---

And you also blame all the civilian deaths from the resulting instability on Bush as well.

---

Quote:

---

As for the current operation, this is the largest scale military action for some time, and it's not a regular thing. I say, best thing for long term peace and stability is to try to take out the insurgents if you can, even at the risk of civilian casualties.

---

Quote:

---

If you disagree, fine, but at least keep some perspective. Get a media reported civilian casualty figure, double it, and compare it to the estimated deaths this month from sectarian violence.

---

Quote:

---

Hmm, ok. Well I'm not a democrat.

---

Quote:

---

If my stance isn't strong on something it's usually because I'm not sure where I ought to stand.

---

Quote:

---

Iraq is controversial for good reason - it's a complicated mess with lots of blame to be dished out.

---

Quote:

---

I think in hindsight we will all have a better understanding of who was to blame where and whether it was all worth it.

---

Quote:

---

In short, no offence taken - i'm quite secure holding the opinions I do as lightly as I do - I think for someone like me who only dabbles in politics now and then it's for the best. It doesn't stop me pulling up people as ignorant as me with much stronger views that I don't think are justified though

---

Quote:

---

Oh, I completely disagree. I'm not only not glofying it, I'm giving far too much compromise here. The reality is there are 700 oppositon soldiers who are technically literally "Al Qaeda" and 200,000 which are "Saddam Loyalist" My compromise is based on the idea that a lot of the former millitary are now fighting for Al Qaeda, but even so, I'm certainly not conceding that this is a majoirty by any means. It may even be a remote fringe.

---

Quote:

---

This is exactly what the french did in WWII

---

Quote:

---

Quite frankly, I think the same thing would happen here.

---

Quote:

---

I didn't get this until you reacting violently to a criticism of Bush

---

Quote:

---

Crazy to speak my free opinion against beloved leader.

---

Quote:

---

Have you ever read the constitution?

---

Quote:

---

Do you want a Saddam Hussein of your own?

---

Quote:

---

the concept of pre-emptive war was discredited half a century ago

---

Quote:

---

I think you've glorified the insurgents just by saying their cause is a 'moral' one. From then on it seems, you are free to blame the deaths of all the people they murder on Bush.

---

Quote:

---

It seems likely to me that the insurgency is to a large extent made up by Al Qaeda and Sadaam Loyalists. I think we can both agree that these are bad guys.

---

Quote:

---

So my conclusion is Sadaam loyalists and Al Qaeda are to blame for the insurgency (remove Al Qaeda from the equation if you want).

---

Quote:

---

I'm sure they are constantly recruiting members from the disaffected civilian population all the time (Seems it's possible to recruit suicide bombers anywhere in the muslim world), but the core leadership, the weapons and the expertise must be in their hands. This just seems like a sensible deduction to me, but if you have any other insight i'm happy to hear it.

---

Quote:

---

Nowhere near as brutal and indiscriminate.

---

Quote:

---

What? Now you've got me pegged as a Bush lover? Honestly, it's like all you do is skim over my post to try and gauge my political mindset and then you rail against it - taunting me with sarcastic quips thus:

---

Quote:

---

Ok, I'll help you out. He's not beloved, and he's not my leader.

---

Quote:

---

Reckon i've gathered the gist of it from american tv so I can guess the kind of thing you're alluding to.

---

Quote:

---

Seriously, I'm not a fan of Bush - I feel like I'm repeating myself when I say this but I'm suspicious of the motives and competence of the administration.

---

Quote:

---

I'm right leaning politically, but I'm not American and therefore not republican and therefore not swayed by any kind of party allegiance.

---

Quote:

---

I'm more ready than most to attack pre-emptively those showing intent and capability to hurt us (the west) but I think both of these have to be proven - so far not the case with iraq.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
The proper thing for the US to do was probably to agreesively move in to block germany in one of those early conflicts, in the manner in which we did in Kuwait. It wouldn't have been that easy, but it's what we should have done.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
The proper thing for the US to do was probably to agreesively move in to block germany in one of those early conflicts, in the manner in which we did in Kuwait. It wouldn't have been that easy, but it's what we should have done.

---

The US wasn't capable of that at the time. Link that with the population desire to stay well out and if you'd tried, it would have been a disaster.

I have to agree on preemptive strikes. I'm currently reading a book about the battle of Stalingrad, that also goes into some detail on the lead up. I didn't know this but Hitler's declaration of war was given as a pre-emptive strike with a list of 'offences' commited by Russia.

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
]

Not to mention there was a movement in the US to back Germany that had some influence.....



" Over and in, last call for sin
While everyone's lost, the battle is won
With all these things that I've done "

The Killers

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/killers/allthesethingsthativedone.html

Quote:

---

KPO: “I think you've glorified the insurgents just by saying their cause is a 'moral' one. From then on it seems, you are free to blame the deaths of all the people they murder on Bush.”

DT: "This is just spin"

---

Quote:

---

Of course it's a moral one, they're defending their country, ie, they are driven by their conscience

---

Quote:

---

But moreover, I can't blame the loyalists for being loyalists. It's not evil or immoral of them. It's a position I disagree with, but in a free society, they should have the right to hold that position. Resistance is what happens when you invade and subject people to your will. Our will, at the very least as perceived by them, is to steal the oil. To what extent that is true is irrelevant, because they believe it to be so. They also believe that our will is to create greater Israel. Since we do seek to establish a multi-natioinal mid-east union, there is a chance that such an institution might represnt more Israeli and penninsular power, and the Iraqis, like Pirate News, view the pneninsular kingdoms more or less as in collusion with Israel. To what extent any of this is true, again, is irrelevent, because they believe it to be so.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
And what is our motive for killing? You can hardly call it "self defense" since Saddam never posed a threat. And if you say that we're interested in spreading freedom (or democracy, however you want to call it) with the business end of a gun then are we any better than the jihadist who wants to spread Islam at the point of a sword?

---

Quote:

---

No comment?

---

Quote:

---

And what is our motive for killing?

---

Quote:

---

if you say that we're interested in spreading freedom

---

Quote:

---

or democracy

---

Quote:

---

with the business end of a gun then are we any better than the jihadist who wants to spread Islam at the point of a sword?

---

Quote:

---

Still, I think we are agreed that the war in Iraq wasn't legal; military action can only be sanctioned in my book if a country is a real threat to us, or if the head of state is carrying out genocide on his own people. Sadaam was only halfway on both counts. Having said that, are you utterly convinced that trying to oust Sadaam was worse in the long term for the Iraqi people than leaving him in power?

---

Quote:

---

If Iraq breaks down through civil war into a 'failed state', and the country is left in chaos will you completely blame George Bush

---

Quote:

---

Because installing democracy in Iraq is taking power from the hands of one tyrant and putting it in the hands of the people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kpo:
Because installing democracy in Iraq is taking power from the hands of one tyrant and putting it in the hands of the people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
It depends on when and how that would be accomplished. What makes a terrorist a terrorist is not his (or her) goals but methods. We effected "regime change" by spending Russsia into the ground (altho Afghanistan helped), we chose trade as our "weapon of choice" for China, South African apartheid was broken by sanctions and internal dissent, and we certainly destabilized our share of South American governments. But Bush's chose war and death...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
And what is our motive for killing? You can hardly call it "self defense" since Saddam never posed a threat. And if you say that we're interested in spreading freedom (or democracy, however you want to call it) with the business end of a gun then are we any better than the jihadist who wants to spread Islam at the point of a sword?

---

Your implication is that there is a moral equivalency between a totalitarian theocracy and a democratic republic.

---

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:
... installing democracy in Iraq is taking power from the hands of one tyrant and putting it in the hands of the people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverman:
But we are no longer a Democratic Republic. We are now a Corporate Aristocracy parading around pretending to be a Dem. Republic, which, in my book, is just as bad as the Theocracy. The war was fought for profit and the personal gain of a few corporations. The Islamic Fundamentalists fight for their ancient "holy" literature. Both reasons are equally wrong.

---