I believe this website is connected to the Matt Maupin MIA situation. Though not directly related.
His Mom & Dad live in Clermont County, Ohio about 2 counties east of me…the other side of Cincinnati, Ohio.
No time now will check it out later.
Iraq, again
-
yeah, we’re a democratic republic, not a democracy. a democracy actually does not involve people voting for the people in office, all the people chosen to office are selected by lots, like in classical age Athens (circa 450 BC) the only voting that goes on in a democracy is for laws, and to appoint generals
-
Okay, so how many soliders have died in Afganhistan?
A few dozen. But I find it hard to believe that of that few dozen, not a single one has died from Enemy fire. They all died from “Friendly fire” or accidents, accept for 2 killed in an Ambush. Somehow, I doubt that a only two Afgans were good enough shots to kill people.
How is that inaccurate?
Where is the city fighting? The children being killed by American and Iraqi land mines? The Saudi forces being killed by Iraqi tanks? The destroyed residential building which was near an Iraqi AA site?
We only saw the bright, cheery, clean side of the war. It wasn’t like Vietnam.
Anyways, back to the IRAQ SUBJECT. We already know the man is in material breach of the United Nations resolution. It’s clear as day. Bush has said it, and Hans Blix has said it. We don’t need any other reason to initiate war against Saddam. The people calling for more time for inspectors are NEVER going to support a war (or should I say: "Never going to support a Bush war.). The greater good will come when Iraq is liberated from this monster.
Since you haven’t even mentioned yet (after me asking 5 times) how Saddam is a danger to Americans, I am going to assume he isnt.
A Material breech doesn’t mean war. It is expected that Iraq will be rated a ‘B’ for cooperation.
The people calling for more time for inspectors are NEVER going to support a war
Because of they are rational? Strange, since there are far more Americans, appointed by Bush, on the team than from any other country.
The greater good will come when Iraq is liberated from this monster.
Oh, we’re going Liberating now aren’t we? Great, lets hit Saudi Arabia first. Or maybe Pakistan, or North Korea, or Somalia, or Sierra Leon, or Sudan. All worse off than Iraq. Saudi Arabia even funded 9/11. Oh wait, you don’t care about terrorists don’t you?
-
the whole weapons inspectors deal is so retarded. honestly, do any of you actually think for a second that if Iraqi had nuclear weapons that they would leave them in a place where we could find them?? no way, they probably hid them underground, or loaded one onto a truck and are just driving around the deserts avoiding the inspectors, or they could have them ANYWHERE except for the places where our inspectors are looking. it will be very hard for us to find out if they do have nuclear weapons, b/c if they do then they are obviously hiding them in a secure place away from the inspectors. I know that they still have nuclear/biological weapons, b/c what evidence have they shown us that they got rid of them??? everbody is always saying “what evidence do you have that saddam has nuclear/biological weapons?” IRAQIS are the ones that need to show us evidence, the evidence that he got rid of those weapons. we know FOR SURE that he had biological weapons in '91, when he gassed the Kurds, what evidence has he shown us that he got rid of those??
-
Nuclear weapons, do you actually think they could make those underground? It would require a ton of Uranium, not to mention a large above ground Nuclear reactor. With the amount of Satellite coverage we have over Iraq, we’d see it if it existed.
-
ok, maybe not nuclear, but biological? it could be just as bad… imagine if saddam gassed new york or DC…
and what proof do you have that he got rid of the weapons from '91?
-
ok, maybe not nuclear, but biological? it could be just as bad… imagine if saddam gassed new york or DC…
And how would it be to his advantage to Gas New York or DC? And how do you suppose he would do that? The only successful biological terrorist attack on our country (Anthrax) was likely a domestic terrorist.
and what proof do you have that he got rid of the weapons from '91?
The inspectors went in a destroyed 98% of his weapons. And personally, I don’t care if he has a small stockpile of weapons. He isn’t a threat. Not only does he have no means of delivering weapons, not only does he have no motivation to deliver those weapons, but he knows that if any country, let alone Iraq, sets off a biological or chemical attack, he’ll be dead in a month. So he won’t, he’ll live out his life with 10 Mistresses and a minor position of power in the world.
-
That’s some wishful thinking Yanny. Did the threat of US retaliation stop him from invading Kuwait? Nope. Regarding the nuclear part, need I remind you that when we uncovered his nuclear program during the Gulf War, they were six months away from a nuclear missile, something that we never even imagined! So don’t tell me it’s beyond their capabilities to hind things from us.
And how do you suppose he would do that? The only successful biological terrorist attack on our country (Anthrax) was likely a domestic terrorist.
Becuase he hates America, and has vowed to kill us. :o
All he would need to do is hand anthrax or smallpox off to some terrorist in a dirty bathrobe and they could easily get it in our country. You don’t actually believe we’re secure, do you?The inspectors went in a destroyed 98% of his weapons. And personally, I don’t care if he has a small stockpile of weapons. He isn’t a threat. Not only does he have no means of delivering weapons, not only does he have no motivation to deliver those weapons, but he knows that if any country, let alone Iraq, sets off a biological or chemical attack, he’ll be dead in a month. So he won’t, he’ll live out his life with 10 Mistresses and a minor position of power in the world.
Don’t say 98% of his weapons. That’s misleading.
They destroyed 98% of what they found. What you’re saying is based on the assumption that they found everything Saddam had.It doesn’t really matter whether you care if he keeps a small amount or not. The UN views any amount as a threat, as they made clear in Resolution 1441.
we know FOR SURE that he had biological weapons in '91, when he gassed the Kurds, what evidence has he shown us that he got rid of those??
That’s exactly my point StrongBad. He hasn’t showed us what we need to know, and therefore he is in breach of contract. Yanny, however, wants to give him the benefit of the doubt. It’s absurd if you ask me. :roll:
-
another peacenik speaks.
- Saddam invaded Kuwait, that’s fair, however prior to 1919 Kuwait and Iraq were the same country. They were divided politically by the British. Saddam might have seen his efforts as “re-annexing” Kuwait. At any rate, that was 13 years ago. How long do we get to keep bombing them?
- Iraq is not the only country that may be suspect of producing WMD, or harboring supporting terrorists/funding terrorism. My goodness, if this is America’s only criteria for going after them - some suspicion, then they will have a lot of work to do once they’ve finished with Iraq
- Lots of people hate America and want to kill it. Again, America has it’s work cut out for it if this is the only other thing.
Show us the proof, and then bombs away. Until then, a multi-lateral/national force at the door might be a nice, expensive tool to keep Iraq in line, while generating increasing anger and hostility from the Arab world.
-
but our own leftist attitudes towards the environment have left us with little other choice- unless you want to pay $5.00 a gallon for gas.
Why not? People in Europe and Asia buy gasoline for more than that. This would be a great way to improve CAFE standards and force auto companies make their cars more evironmentally friendly.
you communists have no Idea how well you have it here.
Who are you refering to, me? :) Also I consider myself one of the luckiest men on this planet if that’s what you mean. I just want others to have the same advantages that I have. :)
war makes us great, war helps us insure that - IF YOU WON’T RESPECT OUR RIGHT TO PERSUE OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS WE WILL KILL YOU!
War does not make one great. Meaningless war = meaningless waste. I will protect our freedoms but not from blind ambition.
in America we are taught to tolerate, other countries are taught merely to hate.
Should we not preach our ideals to others instead of spreading more violence? Such people as Martin Luther King Jr or Bayard Rustin spoke of this once.
and there IS speculation that the big red machine HAS working ICBM’s (does anyone remember what those are??)
NK and Iraq should be handled through the UN. :)
PS before you all deny being communists - remember that they call themselves socialists too
Wait… so you think communist = socialist? :lol:
BTW, don’t make us Conservatives look bad ;)
The Chinese government is responsible enough to know the danger in using such weapons.
Yes, and unlike NK, they are a large part of the international community.
The USSR did not want to conquer the world and make it Communist.
And that’s what they did wrong. :)
Just because someone may be a Communist, doesn’t mean they don’t believe in attacking Iraq.
Yes, me and my communist friends often debate on what to do with Iraq. Personally, I am more in the line with Bush, though my friends are against any acts of imperalism. However, we can all agree that Bush cannot act unilaterally and without the proper approval of the UN.
their doctrine was to crush all opposition!
No, under communism opposition parties would still be allowed to exist…
Communism is exactly like that, pure democracy.Have you ever heard of the belin air lift? that was just one of countless tugs of war to see if we’d flinch so the soviets could dominate Europe.
Every Marxist-Communist that I know of can agree with me, the USSR of the old was not communist but a perversion Stalinist Dictatorship.
HOWEVER that being said Kruschev was a great man- he was a hero at stalin grad- and even took gen. paulus’ pistol. HE alone knew the true danger of the cuban missle crisis. while american generals urged kennedy to storm the beaches in cuba, he knew the soviets had orders to nuke the US on sight. HE backed Down when HE had the position of strength, even though it meant his career and reputation were over- to save his grand daughter and the entire world.
Kruschev was a very two-sided character. Sure there are some positive aspects like you mentioned (such as his denunciation of Stalin), however there were also some fallbacks like his ordering of shooting at protesting workers in Novocherkassk. Anyways, if you read more into history, it was the American politicians who more likely wanted to jump the gun when it came to the use of nuclear weapons.
besides communist societies suck- they rob the wealthy and middle class to create an almost serf like class (I said serf like not smurf like)- subjegated by and oppressed by a large military, controlled by wealthy an priviledged members of the party. we don’t run over anti gov. protesters with tanks. unfortunately we have to let them BLA BLA BLA
Yanny this thread is getting to big. please tell me how to fast forward to the end (of every posting ?) or can you start a new thread?What you are talking about is not communism but offbreed bonapartism. However if you think this thread is getting too big, I suggest reading my two previous debates on Communism against YourButtocks and Horten. Here I will explain to you indepth your misconcepetions.
The kibbutz is democratic, people may enter and leave if they wish, everyone gets an equal allowance and there are no Israeli froces there to make sure the voting council has its own way.
Then what happened to it? As for a Kibbutz society, it differentiates from Marxist-Communism as some people will need more than others according to their needs.
He forced the Americans to withdraw from Turkey.
Weren’t there also missile bases in US-friendly Europe or were does not removed? :)
The original goal of Stalin was not to take over the world, but rather along with the Americans, to ensure that Germany could never threaten the USSR or the world again like it did in World War 2. Stalin wanted to set up Eastern Europe as a buffer zone between the USSR and Western Europe to prevent another Operation Barbarossa. His fear was that a United Germany could stop once again invade the USSR, and 15 million dead was a lot to the Soviets in WW2, another invasion could cost many millions more.
Yes, twice in less than half a century did German armies roll across Russian soil. Also Stalin had a obsession over Hitler.
This left the vaccuum open for Germany to unite and become the next major power on the continent until after World War 2, where the Allies re-shaped Europe to stop GErmany from rising.
Not exactly. The Western Nations realized early on that a strong, stable Germany was critical to the rebuilding of Europe. A rebuilt Germany was vital to the European economy, though the USSR was determined to keep it parts of Germany lost in the past.
-
@Deviant:Scripter:
What was the evidence? So now you’re never going to believe another word the CIA says? That’s a dangerous game you’re playing if we start believing the word of our enemies over that of our own country…
What was the evidene? Well, they never showed it, just like they didn’T show us their evidence for SH up to now.
For me playing a dangerous game if you don’t belive your secret service (? i am not sure i see what you wanted to say with that)….
@Deviant:Scripter:
@cystic:
They lie:
…4.) To protect the national security of this country.
But still they lie…. and for me (not coming from that country) the more important thing is that they lie and try to influence everyone in sight (including other countries governments) to protect their own country.
Somehow like convincing others that they have to pay part of your bill (i know, i’ve stretched far with that, so no need to comment on that last one, but the reasons behind both are the same: trying to involve others for mainly your profit, not theirs)
-
- unless you want to pay $5.00 a gallon for gas. and I gaurantee you- that all of you nonsense spouters would be ready to nuke saddam if that was to happen.
how much is a gallon?
If i had / wanted a car, then i would have to pay about 1.1€ per cubic decimetre. And i don’t mind. All you have to do is not drive one of these tank-like cars, and drive it for the 10 metres to the next bakery for your morning rolls.… when I grew up as a boy in germany - under carter- americans were FREQUENTLY targets for terrorist bombings and executions.
But not in germany, at least not FREQUENTLY……
My own family visited a shopping complex in78-79 the day before terrorists blew it up. now of course we knew these were communist trained and armed insurgents, but it’s amazing how little we could do about it until reagan came in.
It was not Reagan who solved that problem. The main wave of terrorism in
Germany was in 1977, and apart from some areas (Northern Ireland, Northern Spain) this was for most of europe. The later eruptions were not much compared to those.he restored pride to the military-
Hitler did that as well, but i would not cheer him for that.
and thru necessary - yet reckless- spending he broke the soviet union! which until that time I lived in daily fear of. I lived about 100 miles outside of Fulda- and the Fulda gap was their main avenue of entry into the rhine area. you communists have no Idea how well you have it here. you’ve never lived with duck and cover, or had to reherse evacuation plans so you could get back to the US before your dad’s unit had to blow up the country. nothing!
Well, i live in the country “your dad’s unit (would) have to blow up”, thank you. And from the wording you used right there, i don’t mind that you had to suffer that much from that american paranoia. As long as there was a german-german border, i never lived more than 50 km from that…. 100 miles from the border to the west, and you would have been in another country!
I have seen that turtle from the fifties, promoting duck and cover… we saw it in school, and the whole class laughed it’s ass off: Sure a newspaper would protect you from an atominc bomb hmmhmmm…So, i have lived there, and i never feared the Soviets would come. I feared the US would do something stupid more often!
war makes us great, war helps us insure that - IF YOU WON’T RESPECT OUR RIGHT TO PERSUE OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS WE WILL KILL YOU!
“Viel Feind, viel Ehr’” …. that was one of the things they said during WWI here: Many enemies means much honour to be earned.
War helps insure that the mighty can force its will to everyone else.
Something like (i will elave out the caps): If you won’t respect our people’s right to persue its collective goals of aquiring more land in the east, we will kill you!..PS before you all deny being communists - remember that they call themselves socialists too. :D
From who has been called communist by US-americans, it is more a compliment than an insult.
-
the 70’s and early 80’s were a rough time for american’s in europe. I was only a small child then (I’m 29) I grew up only knowing that these people wanted to kill me and my dad. I didn’t understand why. there isn’t any reason, they have serious problemssomeone tells them it’s your fault, then they get a gun and try to kill you for some percieved injustice.
They were a rough time for anyone who was a symbol for capitalism in europe. And the reason is what you said: terrorists feel there is (at least) injustice against them, and see no other means to fight it than violence.
Some feel threatened and take up the guns…… even today, and even governments. -
Even the crazed Kruschnev in the Cuban Misile Crisis knew the danger and msot likely would not have used his nuclear arsenal. He was jsut trying to win a victory for the USSR.
That’s why i wouldn’t call him crazed, he was more sane than the whole bunch of US generals at that time.
What’s wrong with Communism? …
clap clap clap Always a surprise when i have to agree with EmuGod.
-
I can’t believe you just said the communists never wanted to take over the world! are you insane? their doctrine was to crush all opposition! I know I lived there!! Have you ever heard of the belin air lift? that was just one of countless tugs of war to see if we’d flinch so the soviets could dominate Europe.
And now explain the difference between Stalin and Trotzki, and what Krushevs peaceful coexistance means……
The american doctrine was “commies are evil and they want to crush us”, i guess you mixed that up a little there. The Berlin Air lift was a try, but come on: If your western allies were too stupid to fix land-transit routes to Berlin in the treaties, wouldn’t you have tried?
-
It’s like my daddy always said if you want friends don’t discuss religion or politics
If i want friends than i do exactly that, otherwise i have “buddies”, and i don’t know how far i could trust them…
That’s one fo the misperceptions again: The US is pissed that someone of their allies stands up and says: “I don’t think that is smart”. In europe, that’s what friends are for: telling you when you are about to make a mistake. It seems like in the US friends are something obedient and submissive… then it must be a really strange country…
-
we know FOR SURE that he had biological weapons in '91, when he gassed the Kurds, what evidence has he shown us that he got rid of those??
The gassing of the Kurds was before '91 and he used chemical weapons for that.
-
@cystic:
- Iraq is not the only country that may be suspect of producing WMD, or harboring supporting terrorists/funding terrorism. My goodness, if this is America’s only criteria for going after them - some suspicion, then they will have a lot of work to do once they’ve finished with Iraq
Actually, there are UN weapon inspectors in 70 (!) countries around the globe…. let’s bomb them all!!!
-
@TG:
He forced the Americans to withdraw from Turkey.
Weren’t there also missile bases in US-friendly Europe or were does not removed? :)
That was later. Pershing 2 and Cruise Missiles were put in by Reagan…
-
@F_alk:
It’s like my daddy always said if you want friends don’t discuss religion or politics
If i want friends than i do exactly that, otherwise i have “buddies”, and i don’t know how far i could trust them…
That’s one fo the misperceptions again: The US is pissed that someone of their allies stands up and says: “I don’t think that is smart”. In europe, that’s what friends are for: telling you when you are about to make a mistake. It seems like in the US friends are something obedient and submissive… then it must be a really strange country…
Americans confuse “healthy discussion and criticism of a world superpower” as well as “disliking of its foreign policy” with anti-Americanism - more propaganda - “its everyone against us”. There’s a football coach here who uses that mentality to inspire football players to win football games.
-
did falk really just reply 9 times in a row?
Suggested Topics
