You HAD to ask:

And what is Saddam Huseins role in all this, G-Nasty? What blame does he bear?

You're quick to blame your own government, and slow to blame a man who has murdered tens of thousands, all in the name of himself.

MY REPLY:

He is a dictator in a Region that allows and perpetuates that type of leadership.
He has viable amounts of VX, mustard and crude ways of delivering them to neighboring countries. He was actively persueing bigger & better weapons & threatened Isreal if they continued killing palestinians when we submitted 1441.
The types of weapons he has have been afforded to him by U.N. as to protect and defend his borders. He has no nukes. He has no WOMD. But yes would love to pay to have them as most in that region would or already have. With Pakistan, India, Isreal, Iran, Saudi Arabi and N. Korea actively persuing this type of technology we choose to mess w/ him. Thats Ok. Thats what America does-I can live with it. FACT: Most folks in Middle East want occupying troops out.

What disturbs me MOST is DU bombs (depleted Uranium). Apparently the U.S. has used them in the past. And maybe using them in this invasion. There are laws in place at the U.N. that stipulate using these types of bombs are a crime against humanity. These bombs cause luekemia, cancer and many other serious health issues for those "in the zone". They also have a half-life of about 2 billion years, which means that several generations will be affected.
If we are using these, the military will be highly confidential about it. They are effective bombs, but thier usage is inhumane, unamerican & plain wrong.
Both the Chinese & Russian govts are aware of this weaponry & have added interests against the U.S. using them. If there is absolute proof of using these in Iraq, the U.N. will issue warrants for all those involved. This maybe one reason the U.S. is against the ICC. Both the Soviets & Chinese will approach the U.S. in an effort to enforce this fundamental & globally important humane law.

The U.S. cannot afford or undertake such ambitous campaigns (regime changes / nuke proliferation etc) around the world without the help of the U.N. We simply need all the nations to rebuild and help restore order after we bomb. Our president has undermined the U.N. & his actions are both impatient and illegal. Ted Kennedy has asked this administration about the costs & Ari Fleischer would just smile. For reasons unknown, they have secretly & illegally hidden these costs.
I want to see the money flow. From Iraqi bureacrauts salaries (that will be payed by U.S. taxpayers) to full disclosure on warlord & other bribes & fuel & arms costs.
$24k to fly a F-16 in less than an hour...you get the idea. These wars are astronomical in price and who really will pay for them? Or is it all a sham & they just print money? The American People NEED to know the COST who gets the $$$ & how future generations will be affected by them. Secrecy. This is what the New World Order wants. Not America. We will all be naked under bridges if they continue to spear head this country. I never knew why we adopted thier ideas. We need to reflect on what helps every day Americans & not the world or the rich or global control thru financial manipulations/laws.

Another problem with wars: We have biased & corporate funded press & channels. What may appear to be good coverage is actually disinformation. Our president has the power of perception. It his greatest asset. Its something my college govt professor told me once. I never knew what he meant until now. Thanks to Republican bill, the FCC has recently allowed anti-trusts on media mogul ownership to dissapear further allowing conflict of interests. I dont even want to talk about the EPA or other institutions affected by these assholes in Washington.

Yes we are cleaning up George Bush Sr & CIA's handywork. And yes, we should have never been there in the first place. Our interests (OIL) put us there so lets be honest and show humility to at least admit that ALL those that have died in the dessert sands have died for Americas needs & wants- And not for the liberation of the people getting bombed in Iraq. Operation Iraqi Freedom? Goto hell. Free this.

You cannot convince me otherwise. Not your patriotism, nor your unquestionable love of this country or hate for Saddam.

Might will never make right.

Im with the rest of the worlds population on this one.
Now only if the entire world actually was a democracy & took a vote (think about it)
But damnit dont let Jeb Bush anywhere near the ballots.
OUT>

Yawn....

Look around... Your so-called majority that you think you are part of is dwindling fast. You keep on talking about this majority but where is it? Certainly not in the polls- but of course you say those are rigged. Not in the list of countries aligned with the US for this fight - but I know you'll discredit that too. We don't really care what Iraq, France, Russia, and North Korea think.

But please do keep on writing... I love fiction.

BTW - I'm looking forward to all of the excuses when Saddam starts unleashing these weapons he doesn't have.

That was a very long response, G-Nasty, and it didn't answer my question. So, I will ask it again.

Does Saddam have any blame for this mess?

A simple "yes" or "no" will do.

------------------
Ed Dana
88 Coupe.

If the VX is the same sh** they had in The Rock, then I would call that a WOMD.

I really feel sad to apart of the human race, where they unleash weapons that are beyond horrifying, thinking they are gods and can do whatever they wish.

I hate people that think they are so unstoppable like Saddam does. But will they find him? It's already public knowledge that he has people masquerading as him. And do you really think he's still in Iraq? That spineless POS is holed up somewhere probably in another country. He thinks he is so big and spews endless diatribe, but then he just runs away and hides like Bin Laden does when something happens. I hate useless people like that.

I say if they find him, make him suffer for being such an a******.

The worlds population is AGAINST this INVASION but I would be curious to see what the real ratio is if everyone in America voted.
I know British Parlament is still AGAINST IT.
217 For and over 300 Neah. Blair is looking like an idiot for going against the will of his people & thier representatives by backing Bush. But both he & Britain stand to gain the perks, money & aid we have pledged for doing so. That seems to be the case in Turkey & several other small hungry nations.

That brings up this point about money.
Seeing that this Republican controlled govt.
HOUSE/SENATE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH have spent
ZIGABILLIONQUADZILLIAN in military spending should come to no surprise UNLESS you really believed GWB when he ran his campaign for smaller govt and tighter budgets in 2000.

I knew 911 would call into using & appropriating more monies.
But I want to focus on Dick Cheney for a second.
His entire career was spent w/ military types & lobbyists for big military contractors. They undoubtly hit him up for some cash & contracts while they wined & dined him. That is afterall the nature of doing big business here in America.
So we have lobbysists for massive spending increases AND our 4 star generals & Bush AND Cheney AND Powell/Wolfowitz all sitting around these decision making tables...
It is also fair to say they have run up a tab for military & homeland security that can never be repaid. It is literally into numbers none of my calculators can even reach.
BY THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES NOT HAVING A VOICE AT THE WARMONGERS ONLY TABLE;
We lost monies that SHOULD have went into private & public sectors. Maybe new industry stimulus or even some to help elderly & sick seeing how that entire sector has gone to hell. The standard of living will go down due to this sudden tremendous militarized DEBT. FACT: It already has.
The amount of money this guy and his cronnies have spent on our behalf is unimaginable. I cant believe in an age like this we have let this happen. This is N. Korea American style politics.
Lets put everything into the military basket and none for the people.
Like I said, its no longer "by the people for the people" but rather "screw the people"

RR[Ed]: Like any good politician I have answered your question. My answer is he has very little to do with this in spite of what the Egyptian leader says (Least I say we gave hime some funny money as well).

OUT>

[This message has been edited by G-Nasty (edited 03-19-2003).]

quote Originally posted by G-Nasty: The U.S. cannot afford or undertake such ambitous campaigns (regime changes / nuke proliferation etc) around the world without the help of the U.N. We simply need all the nations to rebuild and help restore order after we bomb....

10 years ago, the UN seemed to think that an armed Iraq was bad when they invaded Kuwait and killing Kurds.

6 months ago, the UN unanimously agreed that Saddam needed to be disarmed.

Now after Saddam has continued to ignore the UN resolutions that everyone seems to think so important, the US is the one who has to step up and make him comply by disarming him as laid out in the resolutions. We deal with it now or later. If we were to sit back and slap Saddam on the hand for a few more years, you better damn sure believe that the US would be expected (by the entire world) to respond in a hurry when Saddam went on an invasion kick again. How expensive will it be then? How many innocent Turks, Kuwaitis, etc. would die then? How many of the Iraqi women and children have to be tortured, raped, killed IN THEIR OWN DAMN COUNTRY before the rest of the world wakes up and decides that Saddam is a bad guy?

All this antiwar crap pisses me off to the point that I almost wish that the US would back off until Saddam is posing for pictures in front of the Eiffel Tower like Hitler did before we take action.

--Dillon

G-Nasty, the black helicopters are on the way for you. Did you think all that up on your own or did you read an actual anti-war pamphlet and paraphrase?

RICE:
Im not anti-war.
I am anti-invasion.
GET THAT PART RIGHT. This is NOT a WAR it is an illegal non UN sanctioned INVASION.
WAR is totally different.
Look at what caused this whole ball of **** to begin with.
U.S./Isreali interests.
Thats a big IF he wages terrorism.
He has no link to 911. Hammas or Al-Queida
No WOMD or nukes/detonators/weapons grade plutonium like N. Korea does.
BLIX said stockpiles are within UN. We didnt care. U.S/Isreal wants regime change period.
There is always a better way to approach this issue.
Bankrupting America for this IS NOT THE WAY.
U.S forced him to destroy weapons that were questionable.
Dissarmament does not mean getting rid of EVERYTHING. JUST those things that the U.S. errr U.N. has told him he cant have.

OUT>

So if the UN doesn't say it is a war, then it is not a war... Ahhhhh! Why didn't you say so in the first place and save us from all this senseless banter?

Just lay Ray and his Armenian MiGs.. Say it with authority and a few people might believe it is true... Face it, nasty boy, YOU are in the minority. The world is aligning behind the US other than a few countries that have something to hide in their dealings with Iraq. You want polls all the time.. I posted one from AOL yesterday about what people in the US thought about the war. With about 1.5 million Americans voting it was about 68% to go in. That is way more than a majority.

In an AOL poll right now about support for the war...
Rate your support level for a war on Iraq:

56% · Strongly support 263,426
22% · Support 100,968
12% · Strongly against 53,741
10% · Against 48,280
Total votes: 466,415

That 78% supporting and only 22% against. AOL is a major cross section of this country.

I noticed you didn't respond about the other poll on the other thread. Tell us here how President Bush is 'fixing' AOL polls.

Admit it. You are just a Bush-hater and nothing else. That is all EVERY post of your wreaks of. Too bad it is not based on fact. Like it or not, President Bush has good numbers. He is a popluar President.

Please tell me how your warped logic works. A President that you say is unpopular is using a war that you say is unpopular to save his Presidency? That just doesn't make sense.

[This message has been edited by Songman (edited 03-19-2003).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by G-Nasty:

The worlds population is AGAINST this INVASION but I would be curious to see what the real ratio is if everyone in America voted.
I know British Parlament is still AGAINST IT.
217 For and over 300 Neah. Blair is looking like an idiot for going against the will of his people & thier representatives by backing Bush.
Huh according to USA TODAYLONDON -- Even by shrill Fleet Street standards, the tabloid's headline was arresting. ''Blair: Back me or I quit,'' screamed the Evening Standard.
Such were the elevated stakes for British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) when he addressed members of Parliament on Tuesday, kicking off a much anticipated day of passionate debate and more resignations.

In the end, Blair's argument that withdrawing from war would provide the United States ''the biggest impulse toward unilateralism'' found receptive ears, as ministers capped 12 hours of debate by voting 412-149 in support of a war with Iraq (news - web sites). Though a prime minister can unilaterally order troops into battle, Blair said that a ''no'' vote would send the wrong message to the world and that he ''would not be party to such a course,'' a strong hint that he might step down.

quote Originally posted by G-Nasty: What disturbs me MOST is DU bombs (depleted Uranium). Apparently the U.S. has used them in the past. And maybe using them in this invasion. There are laws in place at the U.N. that stipulate using these types of bombs are a crime against humanity. These bombs cause luekemia, cancer and many other serious health issues for those "in the zone". They also have a half-life of about 2 billion years, which means that several generations will be affected. If we are using these, the military will be highly confidential about it. They are effective bombs, but thier usage is inhumane, unamerican & plain wrong.

So how are we going to keep the use of something a secret that will be pegging Geiger counters until the sun burns out? Where did we use them in the past? How are we keeping it a secret?

G-Nasty:

You've typed some very strong anti-American statements there, and I'd like to respond to some of them. I'm not going to quote everything that I'm responding to, because that would make for a very long post. So here goes:

You trashed the President and accused him of committing crimes. You looked into your crystal ball and saw that G.W. Bush is going to bankrupt our country. That's funny, considering that the first Gulf War didn't bankrupt the USA. Neither did the military actions in Yugoslavia, or Vietnam, or Korea, or WW2.

You've mocked our military, accusing them of preparing to use inhumane weapons and planning to bomb innocent civilians. Not even a half hour ago, I saw on CNN where a salvo of cruise missiles were launched at a suspected hiding place of Saddam's, in an attempt to get a "quick-kill" and instantaneously end the conflict. In other words, a surgical strike. Quite different from carpet-bombing innocent civilians, isn't it?

And speaking of cruise missiles, the missiles being unleashed on Iraq are satellite-guided. The cruise missiles used in the first Gulf War were self-guided, following terrain landmarks. The satellite-guided missiles are much more accurate.

quote Im not anti-war. I am anti-invasion. GET THAT PART RIGHT. This is NOT a WAR it is an illegal non UN sanctioned INVASION. WAR is totally different.

So how are we going to fight a war against Iraq without invading? Do we invite them to come and occupy New York, so we can fight a "legitimate" war to get them out?

You say that we're fighting this war (and the one before it) for oil and Big Business interests. That's funny, considering that less than 15% of America's oil is imported from the Persian Gulf ( SOURCE ). That's not just Iraq, but the entire Persian Gulf. Yeah, we have some big oil interests there.

After the first Gulf War, some very restrictive oil embargoes were imposed on Iraq. As a matter of fact, there are still oil embargoes in effect against Iraq. If we were so interested in Iraqi oil, then why do we impose these embargoes? Why don't we just lift the embargoes and enjoy lots of cheap Iraqi oil?

You say that we never should have been there (Iraq) in the first place. So you're saying, in effect, that the Iraqi invasion and occupation of Kuwait is OK. You don't mind allowing Saddam to become a 21st century Hitler. And your statement also implies that we should just sit back and watch Saddam using poison gas and military troops to kill his own people.

You finish by stating your stolid refusal to listen to reason. Hey, whatever floats your boat. If you want to remain a close-minded and ignorant person, that's your prerogative. But so far it doesn't look like you're getting much support here in PFF. Maybe the Prez is pulling all our strings?

[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 03-19-2003).]

In all seriousness.....does it really matter whos wrong, or whos right, or who started it, or who has what etc etc....?

Instead of trying to make the leaders of our country out to be a horrible people we should be praying and thinking about the soldiers who are over there risking their lives. Also, what about the people who will be liberated? Shouldnt we be trying to think about them too?

Just my 2 cents....

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

A picture speaks a thousand words.

[This message has been edited by JEDI (edited 03-19-2003).]

I couldn't have said it better myself

quote Originally posted by G-Nasty: RR[Ed]: Like any good politician I have answered your question. My answer is he has very little to do with this in spite of what the Egyptian leader says (Least I say we gave hime some funny money as well).

I see.

So, he never invaded Kuwait, and he never agreed to a cease-fire?

------------------
Ed Dana
88 Coupe.

The standard of living has gone down due partly due to the 9-11 attack, and partly that it was going down anyway from it's over-inflated state it was in.

But if you consider this standard of living difficult to live with, you are just a spoiled American.

Hey, how would you like to have the standard of living of the people killed in the World Trade Center towers?? (this is a rhetorical question. In no way do I actually wish that on you.)

And if all the world was a democracy, we wouldn't have this problem in the first place. But it isn't, so we deal with it the best we can.

And there were hardly ANY innocent Afghani's killed, and I'm sure WAY less than if the Taliban was still in power.

And, and, and...

SHUT UP YOU MORONS. LISTEN UP.
GET YOUR ASSES IN GEAR.-SERIOUSLY-
*CHINA JUST DEMANDED THAT WE HALT THIS ATTACK IMMEDIATLY AT 1:00 TODAY (THURSDAY).
EVERBODY PUT THIER CAMOS ON.
THIS MAY GET HAIRY.
We may not be here much longer so that being said- to whoever posted the stats on the English Parlament vote I saw those #'s on Tuesday. I will doublecheck what the exact measure was and where it stands (IF THE U.S. doesnt get bombed by CHINA & all of PFF's U.S. & Canadian members arent Deep Fried)
It was a measure on backing the U.S. on this conflict. At that time they were AGAINST IT.

But w/ the latest attack using bunker busters we missed our mark. Just like the Balkens & Afghanistan we have failed to get the leaders. The Taliban leader Mohaad & Osama are still at large. Typical GOVT work.
AGAIN: This matter w/ CHINA could be dangerous.
That being said; I WANT Songman & Blacktree to head up the frontline.
DRH & the rest will follow right behind.
I'll command you grunts from my underground command post.
Now GET ON IT- Off to CHINA you all GO-
OUT>

I will take the time to say that if Chinas threats go unheeded> Maybe Walmart will go under & there will be more manufacturing jobs here. SCREW CHINA!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=574&ncid=574&e=1&u=/nm/20030320/wl_nm/iraq_china_dc

This is also worth quoting:
The oldest voice in the U.S. Congress rose on Wednesday to denounce as misguided President Bush's march to war with Iraq. "Today I weep for my country," said West Virginia Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd. "No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. ... Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

[This message has been edited by G-Nasty (edited 03-20-2003).]

Just ignore the chinese. Their just 'posturing' to make everyone and themselves feel good.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Just ignore the chinese. Their just 'posturing' to make everyone and themselves feel good.

Actually we need to ignore this thread. This guy makes rayb look downright Republican

I know I will certainly be flamed for this but... chicken little the sky is not falling and China would not dare attack the USA because this would kill it's economy. Where do you think all of our jobs are going? If they attack us we will not trade with them and right now we are their biggest trader. They are just going to complain right now but will do nothing, neither will Russia or North Korea. They all are a bunch of loudmouths that like to talk the talk but won't walk the walk.

China's upset because we just destroyed the brand new fiber-optic communication center that they built for Saddam. We didn't miss it, nor the eleven or so emplacements that might have hurt our troops' advance from the south, not the airstrip in the north.

quote Originally posted by g-nasty: ...said West Virginia Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd...

'nuff said. The Democrats, led by Minority Leader Tom Dashole, think that we can't bring our militairy into play without approval from the UN. That's not what the Constitution says, so this makes them, and anyone who agrees with that stance, IMHO, Domestic Enemies of the Constitution of the United States of America.

People are trying to pigeonhole us as imperialists, taking over those we "invade." We haven't taken over Afghanistan. Strike one. They say that this is about oil. If it were, we'd invade our #1 source of foreign oil: Canada. Strike two. They say that this is an "illegal" war. Well, the Constitution, the War Powers Act, and the resolution that Congress passed, voted FOR by all of the Democratic presidential candidates, incidentally, all say otherwise. Strike three.

Forty five countries now form the coalition to liberate the Iraqi people from an absolute, oppressive Dictatorship.

Go move to France.

quote Originally posted by G-Nasty: AGAIN: This matter w/ CHINA could be dangerous.

This matter with China is nothing. No consequences were threatened by them. You, once again, are blowing things out of proportion.

Go get a brown paper bag, stick your face in it and breath deeply for at least five minutes.

After you are done, please give the rest of us a break...

You never answered my last question, btw.

------------------
Ed Dana
88 Coupe.

[This message has been edited by RoadRocket (edited 03-20-2003).]

The more of a MINORITY someone is, the louder and more offensive someone has to be to feel like the lies they are telling are true...

And, don't worry, if any of these attacks come, I'll gladly be there defending my country. But not commanded by you, you obviously are on the other team.

quote SHUT UP YOU MORONS. LISTEN UP. GET YOUR ASSES IN GEAR. -SERIOUSLY-

YOU are calling ME a moron? Oh, the irony!

China scares me EXTREMELY, but not over this. They don't care enough about Iraq to make an issue of it.

Now if they invade Taiwan, and THEN we have to decide to do something, THEN please repost about being afraid. I'll be reaching for the DEPENDS.