CHEMICAL weapons FOUND.

[HueyPilot]

Just wanted to add...

I got carried away and forgot to add a couple other tidbits of information.

I won't go so far to say that Iraq never received any US help. During the 1980s, the US did provide Iraq some monetary aid in the form of loan guarantees and other foreign aid programs, but none that directly supported military activities. This was primarily in response to the Iran/Iraq war, where at the time, Iran was perceived to be the greater enemy. But to call Baghdad and Washington "best buddies" is a stretch. The Reagan administration assisted Iraq to some degree, but from the reading I've done on the situation, there was a fair degree of mistrust concerning Saddam Hussein.

It could only be comparable, albeit in a smaller degree, to the US helping and supporting Stalin during the second World War. We didn't particularly like Stalin, nor did we trust him....but we felt we needed his help to further a common goal. Right or wrong, it still doesn't abdicate our responsibility to properly conclude the Gulf War saga. Saddam is evil. The presence of his regime threatens the regional security. And we can't "contain" Saddam forever. Containment might avert a war, but at what cost? Do we continue to allow Iraqis suffer at the hands of Hussein? Do we continue a never-ending pattern of US/UK containment forces stationed in the middle east? In fact, the presence of US and UK troops throughout the middle east in support of UN enforcement was one of the driving forces behind al-Qaeda.

Back to the charge of assisting Saddam. Again, many critics of this war have made this claim, and it is in part true, just not to the extent that many make it out to be. However, lets use a little historical precedence, if I may. The war critics charge that because we helped Saddam in some way, we're hypocritical to go to war against him. Fine, but then the British were hypocritical to go to war against Hitler in 1939. After all, they sold Germany the engines that made the Me-109 the most successful German fighter of the day. They sat by and watched as German warplanes powered by British engines destroyed Spain in the Spanish civil war. And according to the anti-war activist's logic, that means that Britain had no right to declare war against Germany in late 1939. After all...at that point, Germany was not directly threatening British soil, just Poland's. It wasn't until after the declaration of war that Germany put Britain in it's sights.

I think most of us would agree that Hitler was a grave threat to peace in the world. But in 1939, without the benefit of hindsight, what would you think at that point using the logic of today's peace activist? Hitler seemingly had no desire to invade Britain, so long as we left him alone. And it would seem a bit hypocritical to go to war against a regime we only helped along to some degree. Yet in 1939, the British people had enough foresight to see that Hitler was a disaster waiting to happen, and took action accordingly.

Over in the USA during 1939, we had yet to see it in those terms. The debate here was much along the lines as what we are seeing now with Iraq.....it was a European problem....Hitler wasn't a threat to America.....we don't want to commit our boys to war for interests located halfway around the globe...blah blah blah. It took a devastating suprise attack on December 7, 1941 to shake most Americans out of their sleep.

In 1939, Hitler's reach was minimal. Japan was just beginning to project it's power into China. Yet by 1941, an almost unchecked Hitler had conquered most of western Europe and had set his sights on Eastern Europe and Russia. Japan's umbrella reached almost to Australia. How could things have been different had the USA entered the war earlier? Would millions of people have died in the costliest war in human history? Or would WWII have simply been written as a major European and Asian regional conflict that ended in a couple of years?

Just some stuff to think about. And I'm not necessarily pro-war...just a realist. I do admire those who refuse to resort to violence no matter what....I just don't have the total trust of other humans to feel that way.

 

[46Driver]

Slapstick,
I live down here in Florida and there were a few other things going on. 1) Amazing how all of the big liberal media proclaimed that the polls in Florida have closed and we say Gore wins it - conveniently forgetting that the Panhandle is in the Central Time Zone (considering that the Panhandle voted 3 to 1 for Bush, no wonder they were trying to discourage us from voting) 2) How about Gore calling for recounts in only some of the biggest Democratic counties where the Democrats were in control of deciding whether or not the ballot itself was legal 3) And lets certainly not forget how the Democrats drafted attorney Mark Herron to put together a 5 page document on how to specifically disqualify military ballots. Nothing like watching an army of Democratic lawyers show up in your county with the express intent of making Gore the Commander-in-Chief by preventing the military from voting. (You could also talk about how the Clinton Administration did its utmost to suppress the military vote by outlawing polling places on military stations. The Republican House tried to remedy this with House Resolution 5174 but was unsuccessful.)

 

[Deftone45075]

I think one of the most entertaining things i've seen was Gore trying to say that the ballots were confusing and people may have mistakinely voted for Bush.

SNL did a very funny skit on it.

 

[flywithastick]

Re: Re: Re: An abbreviated response...

Which "class warfare" label are you using?

The one the Democrats have refined into an effective tool used to divide the citizens of the country, directing all the minority and fringe groups against the producers.

For ref, see the banner these missfits are carrying.

http://sf.indymedia.org/uploads/4_no_war_class_war.jpg

Just wondering. Using labels to throw a whole disparage a whole bunch of ideas didn't start with the silly political correctness movement.

Silly PC movement - sounds like we may have something we agree upon. Though I'd probably describe it as something a little more dangerous and destructive.

 

[Snakum]

Its about time this discussion turned intelligent and stopped simple name-calling.

Long over due.

Minh

 

[100LL... Again!]

What about Gore's DELIBERATE suppression of the abentee (military) ballots in Florida using a minor technicality. He didn't want those ballots in the recount. Hah! I say.

 

[slapstick]

Bush pushed to count absentee ballots postmarked after the due date and ballots with unreadable postmarks. Gore responded with equally idiotic tactics. Let's just agree it was an ugly mess, and hope this next one is a lot cleaner. And I didn't vote for Gore.

I thought the confusing ballots made people vote for Buchanon, not Bush?...

 

[100LL... Again!]

See y'all in 2004. And let's hope they fix them there ballots in FL.

If Bush wins in 2004, which I give him a 55% chance of doing, I don't want any contoversy.

Why 55%? Because the public has a short memory, and they absolutely love to be lied to. This leads to clinton-types eing elected. I will vote Democrat or Republican based on wo I think is the more moral person. It turns out that character DOES count.


Go W.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Originally posted by 100LL... Again!

Interesting:

Lying about having an affair while in office: BAD!
Lying about the reasons for going to war so that American men and women can kill and die: GOOD!

 

[Timebuilder]

A bit testy here, eh? And I was only gone for two days..

For those of you noting possible illegal trades between France/Russia et al. with Iraq -- need I point out the Iran/Contra affair of the '80s? Or what about the US aid to the Afghan resistance fighters during the same time period?

As a nation we strive to be an effective, positive force in the world for justice and freedom. Is it possible to always behave with the highest, irreproachable standards of behavior, and still retain your effectiveness? No, not in the real world, where you are not joined on a level playing field by the other participants. To use a martial arts metaphor, you can't always win a Judo match by a "perfect throw". It can happen, but not often. Usually, you have to get down on the floor with your opponents and roll around with them, grappling and escaping. It can be sweaty, painful work. In the case of the US, we make stands based on the national interest, tempered with moral parameters that are the bedrock of our society (trying to play by the rules the best we can) and achieve our goals for our own nation in particular, and the world in general. We don't need to apologize for that.

Interesting that other countries are expected to live up to "US standands" while the US is not. I can assure you that the trading that took place was not to meant to support Hussein's regime, but rather, being capitalism at its worse, was for a quick profit for all parties involved. And let us not forget that the US itself supplied and armed Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War. Rumsfeld himself met and "danced the friendly danced" with Hussein at this time. We cannot shun those with blood on their hands when it was us that gave them the knife.

Intersting, indeed. But that isn't what we are talking about. We ARE talking about the UN resolutions that these counties supported, and pledged not to break. What "US standard" is the US living up to? The standard that was set up as a fixture of the agreement to cease hostilities at the end of the Gulf War, twelve years ago. Those standards are being enforced, right now, by the US against the country which has broken the agreement on dozens of occaisions. 1441 only recognized the current status of the situation, and no additional approvals were required for the US to hold Hussein LEGALLY accountable. Now are the other countries, such as France, Germany, China, Russia permitted by their OWN standards to vilolate their agreement? Sure they are. And, they willl have to be willing to take the heat when they do. Stating that they are expected to meet a US standard that the US itself does not meet is not adressing the situation as it exists. It is their OWN standard they are currently failing to meet, not ours. Have we made mistakes in the past with our short lived support for Hussein? Certainly. In a region with so many devils, it's often difficult to keep accurate track of who is the most evil.

What does the war have to do with Boliva? What does it have to do with Bulgaria or any of the other nations that support the US war with Iraq that have no vested interest in Iraq? They are simply seeking US dollars and other aid that the US is handing out fist over fist to its allies. The countries that have the most to benefit from a "regime change," such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and other Iraqi neighbors are offering lukewarm, if any, support at all. They fear, as they rightly should, that once the US is finished democratizing Iraq, they will feel motivated to extend their "message" to Iraq's neighbors. It is not the US's place to morph, change or otherwise modify a sovereign nation's government or social structure. We wouldn't want it done to us, so what makes us think that they want it done to them.

What does it have to do with the many nations who were already slated to receive US aid, and will now receive more? Plenty. These countries are "growing up" to join us on the playing field of life on the world stage, and the fact that our system of government is the most fair, most successful, and most envied of any on Earth is not lost on them. Are the countries in the region afraid? They sure are. The rulers have maintained power by keeping their citizens uninformed, and by appeasing the Wohabi sect that threatens their rule as much as it threatens the western nations. They don't fear the US coming to topple their government, they fear that an Iraqi republic, governed by the people, will by its own success and the word of mouth bring a similar movement to their own countries. I can't fathom how anyone could suggest that these suffering people in Iraq should be left to the rapes, torture, and mass execution of a virulant dictator like Hussein because the US needs to be less "ethnocentric", and should not try to change the mideast cultures, or that a representative republic form of government may not be the right form of government for them. What nonsense! If we were Hussein, we certainly "wouldn't want it done to us". If we were a country that routinely gassed, tortured, and killed their people without due process, we no doubt might want that to continue.

We should also be moving to form a coalition of the willing to stop the slaughter of millions in the Sudan. What has Kofi Annan and Jacques Chirac done to end this killing, or the active slave trade of fellow Africans? Sadly, nothing. When good happens in this world, most of the time it will be America that is behind it, from the Peace Corps, Christian missionaries, and to a coalition of the willing against an evil tyrant.

From the previous page...

On the other hand, North Korea, which we know without any uncertainty had a nuclear program, now ejects UN inspectors, restarts plutonium production, refuses ALL UN and US demands and threatens millions of people, yet the DoS simply says, "We want to open a dialogue." To me, this seems to be an unfair and dangerous double standard.

Not all situations require the same response. There are far different dynamics here. China, the nearest neighbor, will play a large part. While is doesn't seem fair, the concept of "fairness" would be better applied if everyone was playing by the same rules and beliefs. They aren't. That's why differeing approaches are warranted.

 

[Timebuilder]

I can't resist answering this one. Excuse me, while I "butt in".

Which "class warfare" label are you using?

First, you have to understand the basis of our current political struggle in this country. There are two groups. Not rich and poor, specifically, but instead makers and takers. Makers cover those who create and lead businesses, provide the human fuel that moves the economy, those who give life to the traditional American work ethic. Those who are unable to sit and let the world pay them a living. These are the people that make America great by their hard work, their inspired leadership, and their acts of kindness and caring for all people through their churches and charities.

Then, there are the "takers". Those who cling to the "victim mentality", often led by the nose by fast talking politicians who charm, finagle, rhyme, and otherwise focus the energy of these takers to maintain them as a political interest group. Taken in by misinformation and a sense of entitlement, the takers are being used for the political aspirations of their self-annointed "leaders". "Vote for me, and I'll ensure a continual flow of government tax money and legal preferences as long as I am in office". Like a parasite, they keep these victims weak, blinded to the idea of moving ahead based on their own worth and hard work. Instead, these "takers" believe that they can only succeed if special benefits and preferences are bestowed upon them. One of the best spokesmen for those who ignored the self appointed "leaders" and became "makers" is Walter Williams, who grew up in the Richard Allen Homes in Philadelphia.

That's the basic situation. Oh, and General Motors. Who owns it? Thousands of individual investors, and hundreds of thousands of American preparing for their retirement. In short, the owners can be anyone from Donald Trump to Joe Six Pack. So, in a very real sense, what is good for General Motors really is what is good for America, along with what is good for a thousand other corporations, large and small. Corporations are legal entities, but they only have life through their PEOPLE. Mostly, they are American people.

Now, as a former liberal journalist pinhead (my word for me in those years) I can tell you that there is a small and vocal minority in this country that will constantly try and promote class warfare against the makers in America for the purpose of arousing an angry group of takers. Why? They need them for their own livelihood and political power.

As soon as someone starts to make money by the sweat of their brow, and are guided to save or invest that money, they are buying a share in the franchise of the American Dream. They are becoming makers. Now, as taxpayers, they start to figure out that they have been horribly mislead by the snake oil salesmen who were promoting class warfare, or envy, really, by those who are making entire careers as the "voice of the oppressed".

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain....I am the great.....and powerfull.....the Reverend............"

Apologies to the Wizard of Oz.

In the end, Dorothy and her friends learned that they already HAD everything they had been seeking. They just weren't AWARE of it. Most of the "takers" aren't aware of their worth either, since that would lead to them leaving the dependent class that supports their charlatan "leaders".

If you let someone convince you that you are a victim, you will remain one.

 

[Timebuilder]

Oh, yes. The Election.

One of the most liberal papers in America, the New York Times, did their own recount. Their result? Bush won Florida, and had legally gained the electoral votes necesssary for election to the Presidency.

I invite anyonone with direct knowlege of any illegal activity on the part of ANYONE during that election to bring it to the attention of the proper authorities.

Oops. I'm sorry, that's already happened, and the accusations were without substantial basis in fact.

I guess that puts the election question to bed.



Confused voting? My home district STILL uses the "butterfly" ballot with the metal stylus pin punch. We don't have any trouble with it. I'd be embarrassed to be a West Palm Beach voter, since the media made them out to be idiots.

 

[Timebuilder]

Lying about having an affair while in office: BAD
Lying about the reasons for going to war so that American men and women can kill and die: GOOD!

Now let's not bring LBJ into this!!

 

[EagleRJ]

Sigh...

Originally posted by 100LL... Again!

Interesting:

Lying about having an affair while in office: BAD!
Lying about the reasons for going to war so that American men and women can kill and die: GOOD!

So what IS the reason we (excuse me- President Bush) are going to war? I guess I don't really know, so maybe you could enlighten all of us.

Anyway, back to the original topic of this thread. Late yesterday, our troops found 3000 chemical warfare suits and hundreds of doses of atropine (the nerve gas antidote that you inject into your heart) in a hospital that Iraqi troops were using as a staging area (!). I guess they were getting ready for the inevitable US chemical attack, since as they've told us repeatedly, they no longer have any chemical weapons.

 

[jergar999]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/26/sprj.irq.mural/index.html

Anyone seen this yet?