War? Has this administration gone crazy?

[mindtank]

Wake the fuck up people!!!! All you Bush supporters need to mosey on down to tha library and read some history because we are on a REALLY bad road right now. You have got to be kidding me with this bullshit about attacking ANY other country. IT IS 2002 for Christs sake I mean cmon already are we fucking savages? We are supposed to "America" RIGHT? We have such high standards of living yet we go out punching people in the nose? What kind of bullshit republican sense does that make. Please think twice before voting this putz back into office if you treasure your sweet little American pie. I cant believe some of you would still vote for this guy. I guess you dont care that the rest of the world is laughing at us.

<IMG SRC="http://www.carisi.com/mindtank.gif">
What if we are really on Earth2 and the other one is Earth1 ?

[TheMojoPin]

I'm pretty anti-invading Iraq as you can get, but the post above was just insane. Was it supposed to make sense?

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[DC Reed]

so umm, i guess we know who NOT to ask for opinions about foriegn affairs...........

Im pretty much a warbird and a pacifist for the Iraq situation, i would like to have Hussien removed, but theres no proof his sucessor will be any better. But id like the assurance they wont have nukes.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/dolphinssig.jpg"

Thanks Aggie + Silent Spic!
<marquee behavoir=alternate>RonFez.net Secretary of State - "A Jailbait Studmuffin -Angel Amy" - Proud half of the Dolphins Fans on the board - Aggies bitch and key money maker</marquee>

[Captain Rooster]

are we fucking savages?


No. Actually we are trying to protect our country from a dictator who has used every weapon in his arsenal at least one time.

We cannot allow a vicious maniac like Saddam, who funds Palestinian terrorists and is pursuing WMD, to continue to threaten our very survival as a nation.

During the Cold War, we always kept a doctrine of taking preemptive action as a possibility. This should not change now - especially now.

If those terrorists were able acquire a nuclear weapon under the table from Saddam, they would have used it and 100,000 New Yorkers and others would be dead or dying.

Please, don't kid yourself. We cannot lie down, roll over and die because we don't have the balls to act this time. We have the capability; we also just did it in Kosovo with a few surgical strikes.

The time to act decisively has arrived. We must end that man's reign of terror or risk being destroyed.

I say he goes first.




<CENTER><img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/roostiecloseupSig.jpg></center>

[onogs33]

*edit*

If you cannot remain in control - please, do not post on this board.



This message was edited by LTRooster on 9-24-02 @ 8:03 PM

[DarkHippie]

Can I make a request here?

I know I'm not a mod and don't have any authority, but i have to ask that if we're gonna argue about this, that we try to keep it civil and coherent, or else every thread is going to degrade into name calling, just like every thread in the past.

<IMG SRC=http://czmachine.50megs.com/images/dhsig1.gif>
<marquee>Who is DarkHippie? "You look like an Amish child molester"-- Jim Norton. "Watch out for this one. Someday he's gonna snap and kill you all."-- Rich Vos </marquee>
<i>LABELS ARE FOR PRODUCTS, NOT PEOPLE!
</i><a href=http://www.freeopendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=A537085>Transcendental Blues: a journal</a>

[Jackie Sloan]

Thank You Rooster.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/jackie.jpg">
There's nowhere else We'd rather be.
Huge thanks to Aggie n' Silent for the sig/TM@Aggie-SilentSP Productions

[Contra]

i'm with rooster on this one. even if saddam isnt connected with osama he still hates us. so if he makes a nuke whats going to stop him from devising a plan of slipping it in the country and setting it off in times square?

just remember what "saddam" backwards is, it desribes him very well.

<img src=http://members.aol.com/vikorynotvengnce/images/contra.gif>
Batosai The Manslayer

[Yerdaddy]

Saddam is not a threat to us. We are our own worst enemy right now.

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/billyact.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

[TheMojoPin]

going to stop him from devising a plan of slipping it in the country and setting it off in times square?

He's not stupid. He's just an evil asshole. But the last thing he wants is to loose his cushy job and his nice palace. Power is most important to a douche like that, not suicide nuttiness.

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[Knowledged_one]

So we should go to the library and read history about what, why dont you specify what to look at to make your point more valid.
And you dont want us to attack another country. Well maybe we can be like Sadamm and bomb our own people who dont believe in what Bush wants us to like Sadamm does with the people in the North and South of his own country.
What does wanting to eliminate a known murderer, liar, kidnapper and all around bad guy have to do with being savages, by trying to rid the world of a madman we are the savages.
What does are standard of living have to do with anything about punching people in the nose and more importantly how do you equate republicans and standard of living im not so sure about that one. All i can say is survival of the fittest. And maybe if in iraq women were allowed to do things without husbands consent or the iraquis would choose to modernize more things then their military then maybe their standard of living would be higher. The sad fact is the only ones who live in iraq to be old are the elite in Sadamms circle who are privy to good medical care.
So voting bush into office a second time would somehow ruin america, well i think if we can live through 8 years of a president who continually lied about things, raised taxes, who was militarily unintrested, accomplished neither of his goals of Social Security or Medicare reform, and because of his own lack of morals and ethics just about every business for the last 8 years has lied about their profits so that they to could pull the wool over the eyes of those that work for them. Well after eight years of Clinton i think we can survive anything (not to mention we survived 4 years of Jimmy Carter)

All in all why not make a point with some facts to back it up rather then writing some assinine commentary with no facts. I suggest you go to the library and read a couple things like the Star Spangled Banner, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights maybe then you will be able to answer your own question of we are supposed to be "Americans" right. How about taking some pride in your country and remember those who died in WWII because of are lack of jumping in before things got to crazy with hitler. Because if we dont do something with Hussein we are actually headed down that "bad road" you talk about.
And we are looked at as leaders of the world in this country not just some random offshoot 3rd world republic. We have our permanent spot on the UN Security Council for a reason, and thats because we are looked up to.
Has bush attacked Hussein yet, no he is going through the proper channels to get this done. He is trying to get weapons inspectors involved. He spoke to the U.N. to try to get support for the case against Iraq, and to try to get stiffer resolutions in place. He has not acted unilaterally in attacking he is waiting which is the proper thing to do.
And if bush is so bad then why is it that bush a staunch republican is able to agree on this topic with a leftist liberal in Tony Blair--i mean these guys are polar opposites of each other politically but agree on the topic of a madman how about that.
And how about the fact that now Italy is climbing on board with us, and germany is sending delegates to meet with blair to hear his case against iraq, or the multitude of countries that are agreeing to let us use their land for bases of operation---obviously they are on board against the menace of Sadamm.

So if you dont like bush how about this you go live in Iraq or some other 3rd world country and try to speak your mind--because it wont happen.
Maybe then you will want to come back to us "savages" who are so anti-madman, and then you can have a piece of our sweet little american pie as you put it.
Why dont you put some thought and fact behind what you post instead of some anti-american drivel that you are spewing now. The bottom line is you make this "american" sick to think of you as a citizen of our country

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/wusig.jpg">
Dropped her off at the L, now I

[blakjeezis]

Saddam is not a threat to us. We are our own worst enemy right now.
While I agree the country is rotting from the inside out, Saddam is a much more imminent and physical threat than the "Liberal" cancer eating away at the core of our great nation. I put Liberal in quotes because those who claim that moniker, Dick Gephart, Jesse Jackson, Bill Clinton, Tom Dasc-hole, et al. are, in actuality, self-serving, dishonest, criminal, amoral, and in some cases murderous, elitists. Anything but true liberals. They have destroyed the voice of true Liberalism in this country and unfortunately, the true Conservative voice is starting to falter as well.


<IMG SRC =http://ltrooster.homestead.com/files/sABRETOOTHsIG.jpg>
Thanks to LtRooster
"What was the middle one?" - Otto, A Fish Called Wanda
<marquee>White people are so scared of blakjeezis</marquee>

This message was edited by blakjeezis on 9-25-02 @ 10:25 AM

[JerryTaker]

the true Conservative voice is starting to falter as well

The "Conservative voice" faltered when the republicans sold out to every big business in America: Oil, Tobacco, the gun lobbies, and the Catholic Church. I get so sick of hearing everyone blame the Democrats for everything that goes wrong in this country...

And in case you haven't noticed, Afghanastan's new "Northern Alliance" government we were so happy with is becoming just as oppressive as the Taliban, so again bush sends in some hardware, shoots some guns, makes a big speech, and Nothing was accomplished. These people will blow something else of ours up in a few years, I guaruntee it, and getting rid of Saddam will also accomplish nothing.
I admit, I have no idea what the answer is, but this bi-partisan blame game is just setting things back further...

....whatever, we're all doomed...

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/Angelsig2.gif">

<marquee width=300>I look around my room is filled with candles; Each one a story but they end the same. I'll hide away in here the law will never find me; The walls will tell the story of my pain</marquee>

[Jackie Sloan]

Stupid? No. Suicidal? No. Genocidal? DEFINITELY. If he gets a chance, he will kill you and your entire family. Never forget that, because if you do, you're helping him, subtle or otherwise. Remember, while we debate whether or not to strike, he is consumed with the destruction of Israel AND America AND any or all of our friends or allies. Get your head out of the sand, the time to act is now. Thank God Israel blasted their nuke plant back in '83.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/jackie.jpg">
There's nowhere else We'd rather be.
Huge thanks to Aggie n' Silent for the sig/TM@Aggie-SilentSP Productions

[Yerdaddy]

Let's get one thing straight about Saddam's use of chemical weapons and attempt at genocide of the Kurds. Saddam was already using chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers in 1983 when the Reagan administration removed Iraq from the state sponsors of terrorism list and began supplying Saddam with $5 billion in food aid, diverting US weapons to him through Egypt and other countries, supplying battlefield intelligence to aid his continued gassing of the Iranians, and gave diplomatic cover to him to ease the pressure of international condemnation. When Donald Rumsfeld, then a private citizen, was sent to Baghdad by Reagan to negotiate the new aid package Rumsfeld's only mention of the chemical attacks was that they may "inhibit" the American aid package. Apparently it didn't because the aid was increased over the next 7 years and included dual-use items that aided Saddam's biological, chemical and nuclear weapons production. When the Anfal campaign of genocide against the Kurds began in 1987, the Reagan, and then the Bush administrations initiatlly denied it, then blamed Iran, then, when faced with pressure from members of congress, frinally condemned Iraq but made it a joint condemnation of Iran for continuing the war. (See this has the effect of nullifying the condemnation and justifying the genocide - an old and pathetic diplomatic trick used often.) In any case, Saddam wasn't interested in verbal condemnation because the important thing was that he had so many friends in America and Europe, who were continuing to aid his weapons production and his aims at becoming the regional powerhouse. When the Senate finally passed a bill that would impose sanctions against Iraq for gassing the Kurds, the Bush administration and companies that were making huge profits from the aid to Saddam killed the bill in the House of Representatives, thus assuring that the United States would not punish Saddam for committing genocide on his own people. The result was that, while the genocide campaign started slowly, largely forced relocation to concentration camps, Saddam's military accelerated the campaign to include mass executions, mass graves, and gas attacks. In 1988, a year into the genocide and months after the gas attack on Halabja, (which killed 5,000 instantly and brought international attention), the administration doubled the amount of farm credits to Iraq from $500 million to $1 billion a year. Only with the invasion of Kuwait did the US turn on Saddam.

So when this administration gets on its high-fucking horse about Saddam's "human rights record" remember that these were the same cocksuckers that when the world found out what was happening to the Kurds, they came to Saddam's defense, not the Kurds.

Let me also note the difference this scenerio makes on the claims that "Saddam has used these weapons before, and will surely use them again": he used them against his defenseless enemies while his powerful friends looked the other way. This is in absolute contrast to any current or future scenario, in which even the thought of using these weapons would be suicidal. Let's put it this way: when we gave him the green light - he used them, when we gave him the red light - he hasn't used them. Maybe Rumsfeld should have given him the red light before he killed 100,000 Kurds, instead of waiting 19 years to use their deaths as a political tool to win midterm elections?

This war is not about the UN resolutions, (we still owe the UN $500 million, and Israel has been in violation of UN resolutions for 40 years), or 9-11, (the administration has finally stopped trying to fabricate a connection between al-Quaeda and Saddam), or even weapons of mass destruction, (the administration has done everything it can to undermine UNMOVIC's attempts to get into Iraq, while eggagerating the same old speculative reports and defector "intelligence" to scare the public into backing an invasion), and it's certainly not about the Kurds. This war is about republican control over the congress and American control over Iraqi oil, and a global agen

[TheGameHHH]

Yea ok, then when that camel fucker bombs us, you're gonna be the one bitching about how we should have seen it comming and done something about it.

IT'S TIME TO PLAY THE GAME-AHHH!

<IMG SRC="http://wwfallon.50megs.com/RFnetTheGameHHH2.jpg">
Thanks Fallon for the sig!
Co-Founder of the OddJob Fan Club

[A.J.]

we still owe the UN $500 million,


And how much do UN members owe the US? Bono wants THEIR debt to be forgiven, why can't ours be?

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

[Yerdaddy]

Yea ok, then when that camel fucker bombs us, you're gonna be the one bitching about how we should have seen it comming and done something about it.
Bombs us with what? His longest missiles reach 300 miles, (if they even work). When al-Quaeda attacks us again I'm going to be bitching about why we deverted resources from the war on terrorism to invade Iraq. What are you going to bitch about? Whatever they tell you to bitch about I suppose.
And how much do UN members owe the US? Bono wants THEIR debt to be forgiven, why can't ours be?
I don't know. How much do they owe us?

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/billyact.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

[DC Reed]

If we attack Iraq, we will get support. The Worlds to small for it to be our problem alone.

I think Bush is trying to prevent any danger to us. Think about sept. 11th, we didnt see it coming, and we acted on the situation. Bush only wants to try and prevent another national tradgedy, and with the Middle East in the state of emergency it is now, anything is possible.

But some may believe Bush just wants to finish what daddy couldnt.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/dolphinssig.jpg"

Thanks Aggie + Silent Spic!
<marquee behavoir=alternate>RonFez.net Secretary of State - "A Jailbait Studmuffin -Angel Amy" - Proud half of the Dolphins Fans on the board - Aggies bitch and key money maker</marquee>

[Hawiian shirt craig]

I guess you dont
care that the rest of the
world is laughing at us.


its kind of hard to laugh
when we kick their faggot
french teeth in!!!! listen,
being a leader isn't easy. i
think bush is a monkey.
hes just doing what any
american would do.

are we fucking
savages


yes. we are the braveheart
of the world. we are warrior
poets capable of making
anyone dead. look at us!
when we go to war the
country feels no threat,
feels no economic pinch.
the world is so dependant
on us we can do what we
want. we are educated, we
are capable and its all a
matter of money and how
much we feel like
spending. so mind tank, i
hope you like the sand, b/c i
belive the black helocopters
are coming for you tonight.


-Hawiian Shirt Craig
THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T
HAVE NICE THINGS!!

<img src="http://home.ix.netcom.com/~camman/_uimages/HSC.gif">

San Diego Chargers 3-0

[furie]

What kind of bullshit republican sense does that make.


why does it have to be about parties? America has spent more years at war with a democrat in that seat than a republican. And that's not to blame democrats, with the exception of vietnam, there was nothing they could do.

And what section of history is it that you want us to refrence?

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/thansurfadam.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>

<marquee>Where in the nursery rhyme does it say Humpty Dumpty was an egg?
</marquee>

[sunndoggy8]

If we attack Iraq, we will get support. The Worlds to small for it to be our problem alone.


Sorry, but that statement makes no sense. When you openly aren't getting support from around the world, and then invade Iraq, support will not increase. Do you really think all the countries that are telling the US not to invade will just say, "oh well, they did it anyway, GO USA!"?

Your statement was half right. To successfully wage a war in Iraq, you need the support of countries around Iraq and countries around the world. And the reason for that is because in today's world, you are OBLIGATED to rebuild whatever country you go to war with, if you're the US. Yea that policy sucks, but it's the way it is.

Without world support, you'll have a mess of a country left, and that will not only lead to more animosity towards the US, but who knows what that country might turn into.

Oh, and by the why, whatever happened to Afghanistan? It's still torn apart by infighting and tribal territory fights...the capital is barely safe. Have we all just forgotten about the idea of rebuilding that place? Guess so.

<IMG SRC="http://home.att.net/~sunndoggy8/sunnysig1.jpg" width=300 height=80>

<i><b><font color="#0F00CD"> </font color="#0F00CD"></b></i>

[TheMojoPin]

who was militarily unintrested

Clinton raised the millitary spending level even higher than the first Bush did.

and because of his own lack of morals and ethics just about every business for the last 8 years has lied about their profits so that they to could pull the wool over the eyes of those that work for them.

Oh, WOW. A blowjob in the Oval Office led to Enron? How IS life in Candyland?

Get the hell out of MY country, nutjob, if you're gonna tell me how I HAVE to think.

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[TheMojoPin]

Oh, and by the why, whatever happened to Afghanistan? It's still torn apart by infighting and tribal territory fights...the capital is barely safe. Have we all just forgotten about the idea of rebuilding that place? Guess so.

That's the problem. A full scale occupation of Iraq would probably take at least a decade, and the American public and politcal system no longer has any patience for funding foreign operations like that. September 11th changed nothing, it just made people yell empty promises and threats even louder. I want to be safe, I want terrorists dead. What the hell is this?

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[DC Reed]

Sorry, but that statement makes no sense. When you openly aren't getting support from around the world, and then invade Iraq, support will not increase.


Other nations wont just sit there and ignore the conflict. IF action is taken, theyll realize the threat and begin to provide more support or aid in someway. Plus Victory in war = Patriotism/Nationalism and some world leaders may want that to help them in new elections and such.

I understand where you got confused, and remeber im just a crazy 16 yr old.

As for Afghanistan, thats why were helping build up an army for them, so we can get outta there and let them being to function as thier own country, in a sense, they are a bit like a US colony.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/dolphinssig.jpg"

Thanks Aggie + Silent Spic!
<marquee behavoir=alternate>RonFez.net Secretary of State - "A Jailbait Studmuffin -Angel Amy" - Proud half of the Dolphins Fans on the board - Aggies bitch and key money maker</marquee>

[TheMojoPin]

As for Afghanistan, thats why were helping build up an army for them, so we can get outta there and let them being to function as thier own country,

They better build it huge and make sure the current president has strong control, because outside of the major cities, his word means bupkis. There are warlords scrambling for power left and right.

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[sunndoggy8]

Other nations wont just sit there and ignore the conflict. IF action is taken, theyll realize the threat and begin to provide more support or aid in someway. Plus Victory in war = Patriotism/Nationalism and some world leaders may want that to help them in new elections and such. <P>
Give me some examples of this type of response by other countries. Taking action DOES NOT EQUAL other nations deciding to throw their support at you...

<IMG SRC="http://home.att.net/~sunndoggy8/sunnysig1.jpg" width=300 height=80>

<i><b><font color="#0F00CD"> </font color="#0F00CD"></b></i>

This message was edited by sunndoggy8 on 9-25-02 @ 10:35 PM

[DC Reed]

Stalingrad = the allies sat back and let germany pound russia, but eventually we had to give in. of course part of the reason we sat back was to let to facists kill each other, but it eventually got to the point where we needed to help.

World War 1: The USA entered because the conflict was reaching a pivital point, and help was needed on the french fronts.

Revolutionary War = While Britan and The USA squabbled over the colonies, Spain and France jumped onto the US side after the continental army proved it had a fighting chance.

Some of the examples are a bit extreme, and there WAS support for the efforts taken, but its just a little picture of how nations will jump onto the winners side and give support in other ways other than fighting.

Otherwise im just a dumb teen sundoggy. You still rule

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/dolphinssig.jpg"

Thanks Aggie + Silent Spic!
<marquee behavoir=alternate>RonFez.net Secretary of State - "A Jailbait Studmuffin -Angel Amy" - Proud half of the Dolphins Fans on the board - Aggies bitch and key money maker</marquee>

This message was edited by DC Reed on 9-25-02 @ 10:32 PM

[Recyclerz]

But some may believe Bush just wants to finish what daddy couldnt. <P>
As much as it pains me to defend a Republican I have to stand up for old man Bush. It wasn't that he couldn't kill Saddam, i.e. wussed out, it was that he made a reasoned decision not to. If we had taken out the Baath dictatorship and didn't leave a huge army in the Persian Gulf there would have been nothing & nobody standing between 80 million crazy Iranians and the oilfields in Iraq, Kuwait & Saudi Arabia. Iran is still there & although there are a few positive signs coming from the country, it is still ruled by crazy mullahs who hate us more than Saddam & they are also working on the bomb & and they are proved to support terrorists (Hezzbolah or however you spell it). All I'm saying to the Kill Saddam crowd is don't force America to be like Sonny in the Godfather. <P>
PS *Partisian alert* Props to Yerdaddy & Mojo for your posts on these topics. <P>

If you can't laugh at the misfortunes of others, what can you laugh at?

[DC Reed]

in reality we all have Europe to blame for these problems, thier expansions into Africa, Asia and the Middle East created tension as the indgenoius people were pushed out of their lands.

Ironic that something that seemed like a good idea (imperialism) is biting the world in the ass.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/dolphinssig.jpg"

Thanks Aggie + Silent Spic!
<marquee behavoir=alternate>RonFez.net Secretary of State - "A Jailbait Studmuffin -Angel Amy" - Proud half of the Dolphins Fans on the board - Aggies bitch and key money maker</marquee>

[TheMojoPin]

The scariest thing is that Iran is miles beyond Iraq in their nuke development, and it seems like we're not doing anything. I'm hoping this Iraq shtick is all a ruse and the second the planes take off they veer off over the Iranian border...

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[The Mad Mongo]

2019 the world will end when the asteriod hits the earth

[Knowledged_one]

The real problem with Iran is they had a democratic government, and we then put the Shah in power who proved to be anti-american and as bad as it is we funded the taliban so that they could fight against russia during the cold war--i guess we chose the lesser of two evils at the time but now the moves of the late 70's and early 80's have really started to blow up in our face....I just hope we dont let it happen again

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/wusig.jpg">
Dropped her off at the L, now I'm flipping the cell
That's right I had to call up L
Yo L. What up. I hit. What else. Plus dome. Say word
And we got it on tonight

Thanks Aggie for the Pic and SilentSpic for the sig host

[mindtank]

Ping Pong
it's alright 'cause the historical pattern has shown
how the economical cycle tends to revolve
in a round of decades three stages stand out in a loop
a slump and war then peel back to square one and back for more

bigger slump and bigger wars and a smaller recovery
huger slump and greater wars and a shallower recovery

you see the recovery always comes 'round again
there's nothing to worry for things will look after themselves
it's alright recovery always comes 'round again
there's nothing to worry if things can only get better

there's only millions that lose their jobs and homes and sometimes accents
there's only millions that die in their bloody wars, it's alright

it's only their lives and the lives of their next of kin that they are losing
it's only their lives and the lives of their next of kin that they are losing

it's alright 'cause the historical pattern has shown
how the economical cycle tends to revolve
in a round of decades three stages stand out in a loop
a slump and war then peel back to square one and back for more

bigger slump and bigger wars and a smaller recovery
huger slump and greater wars and a shallower recovery

don't worry be happy things will get better naturally
don't worry shut up sit down go with it and be happy

dum, dum, dum, de dum dum, de duh de duh de dum dum dum... ah ah
dum, dum, dum, de dum dum, de duh de duh de dum dum dum... ah ah






<IMG SRC="http://www.carisi.com/mindtank.gif">
What if we are really on Earth2 and the other one is Earth1 ?

[Knowledged_one]

Treehugger

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/wusig.jpg">
Dropped her off at the L, now I'm flipping the cell
That's right I had to call up L
Yo L. What up. I hit. What else. Plus dome. Say word
And we got it on tonight

Thanks Aggie for the Pic and SilentSpic for the sig host

[TheMojoPin]

Weirdo.

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP

[mindtank]

Treehugger

Wierdo

And proud of it bitch.

<IMG SRC="http://www.carisi.com/mindtank.gif">
What if we are really on Earth2 and the other one is Earth1 ?

[Col.Kurtz]

In the first gulf war the mission was to get Iraq out of Kuwait. When that mission was completed the war ended. Should we have continued? probably, but world opinion was changed after the "Highway of death" incident. We were being told by the rest of the world that we were going to far. This time, if it happens, its going to be a differnt war, an urban setting that is not going to be over in a week. If its going to be done, I hope its done correctly, effiently and with as little loss of life on both sides as possible.

drop the bomb, exterminate them all.

[furie]

They better build it huge and make sure the current president has strong control, because outside of the major cities, his word means bupkis. There are warlords scrambling for power left and right.


yeah, the moment we leave, he's dead.

in reality we all have Europe to blame for these problems


One problem that must be addressed and that is the main source of anti-American feelings in the Middle East is the Isreal-Palistine conflict. And we have Europe to thank for that.

It was European guilt of their treatment of the jews of Europe culminating in the holocaust (but strong anti-semitic movements were started evident in the Dreyfus Affair in France circa 1890's) that the push for a jewish state started.

So Europe does share some of the blame for the destabilization of the entire region. Some of the blame, none of the responsibilities.

must be nice.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/thansurfadam.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>

<marquee>Where in the nursery rhyme does it say Humpty Dumpty was an egg?
</marquee>

[Yerdaddy]

So Europe does share some of the blame for the destabilization of the entire region. Some of the blame, none of the responsibilities.

must be nice.
This is only true up to a point. It was Britain that promised the Palestinians and the Jews their own state, but only created the state of Israel. However, it has been the United States who has supported Israel in every war against Arab countries since the 1967 war, regardless of who was the aggressor. We have averaged $5 billion in military aid to Israel each year, and full diplomatic support in the UN Security Council. This is important to the war in Iraq because if Saddam does throw SCUDs at Israel and Israel then joins the US in the war it will be the first time that the US and Israel have had to fight side-by-side against an Arab country. We can expect the Arab world to be none-too-pleased with this and withdraw from supporting our war on terrorism, step up support for Palestinian terrorists, and possibly directly attack Israel themselves. It will give more legitimacy to Islamic extremist propaganda that the US is "controlled by Israel" and increase their activities against us. The current situation in the Arab world is that while the undemocratic regimes love us for the guns and oil money we give them, their poor populations fuel the Islamic extremist groups that hate us. This US-Israeli relationship and US-Arab authitarian regime relationship is what we do to fuel hatred against us. A US-Israeli invasion of Iraq only adds more fuel to that hatred. This is just one of the many ways that an invasion of Iraq would seriously undermine our security in America.

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/billyact.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

[furie]

This is only true up to a point.


Didn't I say that Europe shared some of the blame? I didn't say all of it.

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/thansurfadam.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>

<marquee>Where in the nursery rhyme does it say Humpty Dumpty was an egg?
</marquee>

[Yerdaddy]

Didn't I say that Europe shared some of the blame? I didn't say all of it.
I wasn't criticizing you, just pointing out the problems of our own relationship with Israel and its effect on the prospect of a war on Iraq. Ni!

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/billyact.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

[Captain Rooster]

OK! Please tell me the answer to this issue.

We have debated this attack and I still have not read 1 decent rebuttal with a solution that is possible.

Inspectors?
Stick our head in the sand? (The Clinton Doctrine)

Let me know


<CENTER><img src=http://ltrooster.homestead.com/files/wolviethinkingSIG.jpg></center>
<center></center>

[furie]

Ni!


It!

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/thansurfadam.jpg" width=300 height=100>
<marquee behavior="alternate"><a href="aim:goim?screenname=furie1335&message=You_are_Number_6">IM:Furie1335
</a></marquee>

<marquee>Where in the nursery rhyme does it say Humpty Dumpty was an egg?
</marquee>

[Yerdaddy]

Rooster, I posted this article in an earlier thread, (before I got spanked by Jeff - pants down per his insistance), and I doubt anyone read it. Tell me what problems you may have with it. I have some, but as a whole I think the actual threat that Iraq poses merits this type of solution. And nobody is claiming that we do nothing - only the pro-war crowd in the administration is claiming that anyone who opposes them is advocating doing nothing, which is a lie.
<a href="http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2002_09/cortright_lopez_sept02.asp">Disarming Iraq: Nonmilitary Strategies and Options</a>

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/billyact.jpg" >
If I don't make you laugh, you don't know what felch means.

[TheMojoPin]

Inspectors?

I think that's what most of us are pushing, yes. And do it right, send in OUR troops to escort them. And I still see no problem with getting with Hussein, just not NOW. Terrorism is the threat, it needs to be stopped, but how can we do our best to stop it when our focus is on Iraq? We can't afford to be involved in a large scale millitary operation that's going eat up a massive part of our manpower and defense budget for the better part of a decade. And again I ask, where do we stop after Iraq? Which countries do we NOT invade? And why didn't we invade Iraq LAST year? What could this administration possible know that the last one didn't? The CIA operations in that region are still getting into gear and are barely at levels higher than they've been at for the last 10 years. Clinton had awful foreign policy, but I'm sorry, even he wasn't stupid enough to ignore a report that said "IRAQ HAS NUKES AND WILL USE THEM ON US", a report that somehow "magically" appeared for this new administration at the most appropriate of times.

Iraq will simply placate the impatient and unsatisfied masses through the election. The war on terror will never be against a single nation, and the kills and captures we achieve will never be near the immediate and tragic impact of what happened on 9/11, and that leaves people restless. But in the end, that's just what happens if this is done right...IF...

<img src=http://www.ltrooster.homestead.com/files/themojopin.jpg>
"You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."
-TMP