Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at info@12ozprophet.com and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

STOP THE WAR NOW AND SAVE OUR SOLDIERS

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by grittylifer, Mar 31, 2003.

  1. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    This has gone beyond ridiculous.


    I'LL SHOOT YANKS TO SAVE IRAQ Mar 30 2003




    From Stephen Martin in Baghdad


    THE china has been packed away, the walls are bare and the family silver has been spirited away to a safer place.

    Now all that is left in the Baghdad sitting room is a sagging armchair - and an automatic rifle resting on enough ammunition to kill a hundred men.

    The weapon is more than 20 years old, a relic from the Iran-Iraq war. But when the Americans come rolling into town, Ghazwan Al-Mukhtar will use it to kill as many as he can.

    "The more of those American bastards I get the happier I will be," says the father-of-three.

    Ghazwan, 59, is no ardent supporter of Saddam Hussein. He loves English pubs and American diners, often visited the UK and points out he was even educated in the US.

    He is no friend of the Iraqi regime. He just hates George Bush and Tony Blair more.

    Ask why, and you get a one-word answer: sanctions.

    His business closed and his savings were frozen because of the UN trade embargo on Iraq imposed after the 1991 Gulf War. Humiliated, he and his family now rely on money sent from his brother in London.

    The sanctions were supposed to make Saddam's people rise up against him. But as Ghazwan furiously says: "You stupid fools have done the exact opposite.

    "You have alienated the people in Iraq who used to be your friends.

    "I loved both Britain and America but you idiots have turned me against you.

    "You impose punitive sanctions on this country which bring us to our knees.

    "And now you want us to roll out the red carpet for you - you must be joking.

    "Saddam Hussein is no friend of mine. But when your troops come down my street I'll be shooting at your boys all the way.

    "But it won't be for the president. It will be for Iraq."

    He says he knows of many more who feel as he does.

    Even when confronted with a litany of Saddam Hussein's human rights abuses, torture chambers and secret police, he holds firm. "You say Saddam Hussein has killed many people - I say the UN sanctions have killed our children. Does Saddam Hussein kill children? No."

    Bitterly, he adds: "You weren't calling him a ruthless dictator in the Eighties when this place was dripping with money.

    "Now you say you are bombing us into democracy. Yet since you've unloaded thousands of missiles on us I don't feel more democratic.

    "So you should unleash another thousand - or double that, triple that or more. Maybe then I will feel more democratic.

    "You give me the choice between Saddam Hussein or George Bush. I take Saddam Hussein every time."

    This is why, when our troops come to liberate him, he will be shooting to kill.

    His gun may be a museum piece compared to the Allied tanks. But, with his family sent away, this former Iraqi soldier means to fight. And he is not on his own.
     
  2. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    and furthermore.......

    Bush Warns Iraq May Retaliate in U.S.

    By SCOTT LINDLAW
    Associated Press Writer





    PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- President Bush said Monday that terrorist groups or even, in a last-ditch show of desperation, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein "may try to bring terror to our shores" in retaliation for the war in Iraq.

    "We know that our enemies are desperate; we know that they're dangerous," Bush said.

    Since the fighting began almost two weeks ago, Bush and his spokesman have sought to lower expectations for a quick, easy war. Bush warned last week of many more battlefield casualties before the war is won. He broadened that alarm Monday.

    "Many dangers lie ahead. But day by day we are moving closer to Baghdad; day by day we are moving closer to victory," Bush told hundreds of Coast Guard personnel at the Port of Philadelphia.

    Then he spelled out the potential dangers.



    "The dying regime in Iraq may try to bring terror to our shores," Bush said. "Other parts of the global terror network may view this as a moment to strike, thinking that we're distracted. They're wrong."

    The Coast Guard is helping secure Umm Qasr, Iraq's major port, and is involved deeply in protecting America's shores. Bush came to Philadelphia to promote U.S. efforts to prevent terror.

    For months he has sought to link Saddam's regime with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations, despite widespread skepticism and a lack of irrefutable evidence. The national threat level was raised to the second-highest level, code orange, early this month, just before Bush ordered the attack on Iraq. Officials said intelligence agencies had warned of possible war-related attacks in the United States.

    The principal rationale Bush gave for attacking Iraq was that he said Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and the will to use them. No such stockpiles have been found.

    The president mentioned this fear only in passing Monday, casting the war mainly as an effort to liberate "the long-suffering people of Iraq."

    "We're coming with a mighty force to end the reign of your oppressors," Bush said, addressing Iraqis who might be listening from afar. "We are coming to bring you food and medicine and a better life. And we are coming and we will not stop, we will not relent until your country is free."

    Bush also sought to explain why Iraqis have not rushed en masse to welcome and fight alongside U.S. and British troops.

    "Iraqis who show friendship toward coalition troops are murdered in cold blood by the regime's enforcers," Bush said. "Many Iraqis have been ordered to fight or die by Saddam's death squads. Others are pressed into service by threats against their children."

    Bush said much had been accomplished since the ground war began. Coalition forces have taken control of most of western and southern Iraq, seized key bridges, opened a northern front and achieved almost complete air superiority, he said. Allied forces are delivering large amounts of humanitarian aid and have prevented Saddam from destroying oil fields, he said.

    Democrats, aware of Bush's high approval ratings on the Iraq conflict, questioned the president's homeland security policies but not his war plans.

    Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement that Bush had failed to give the Coast Guard $1 billion it sought to secure ports this year. Bush said he had signed an appropriations bill increasing Coast Guard funding to more than $6 billion, "the highest level ever."

    Obey also said the president requested no money for a U.S. Customs program designed to secure cargo containers.

    Scores of antiwar protesters greeted Bush as he arrived at the port of Philadelphia, their most dramatic props being replicas of oil derricks spewing blood.

    It was Bush's 19th visit to Pennsylvania as president. He has visited Pennsylvania more than any other state, angling to win the state's rich cache of 21 electoral votes in his re-election bid next year
     
  3. Smart

    Smart Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Apr 14, 2000 Messages: 17,017 Likes Received: 174
    All the Iraqi 'leaders' are still raving about how they're winning the war...

    I heard one saying how they were gonna make the Iraqi desert into a gigantic graveyard for our troops... pretty optimistic if you ask me...
     
  4. ctrl+alt+del

    ctrl+alt+del Guest

    and its called Operation Iraqi Freedom
     
  5. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    as far as im concerend, there is way to many personality traits that is similar between that motherfucker hussein and that dickless bush motherfucker if you ask me.

    its like a fight between the tranny that was molested as a child and the molester that molested him.

    ALL BAD YO>

    dont fuck with the iraqis yo. arabs are some gangster motherfuckers that dont give up.

    this is bullshit.

    ok im done.
     
  6. yoink

    yoink Elite Member

    Joined: May 27, 2002 Messages: 3,428 Likes Received: 0
    i swore i wouldnt click on a war thread...

    ha, yeah anyone remember when they said us and british forces would be eliminated when they cross into iraqi soil...yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

    notgoinintoanymorewartalk. :twitch:
     
  7. RAGSOE

    RAGSOE New Jack

    Joined: May 11, 2002 Messages: 11 Likes Received: 1
    i don't support the war, but it's too late for that. now i feel it's time rep our boys, hope they make it home safe, and the same for all innocents. no more death sounds good in theory, but i'm a realist, years of living on the street has me being straight about all this. hope for the best, and prepare for the worst...


    whatever.........
     
  8. NoamChomsky

    NoamChomsky Guest

  9. RAGSOE

    RAGSOE New Jack

    Joined: May 11, 2002 Messages: 11 Likes Received: 1

    HOOOAHH!

    noam, i feel ya..........
     
  10. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    ay rags,

    i hear you dog,

    but hear what im sayin.

    dont send 200,000 innocent younger than you american men into a city the size of LA that is a hardened population of war victims that done been victimized by war for the better part of the last 20 years to liberate them.
    it does not work that way.
    Iraq does not want us to liberate it.
    cut our losses now and start looking for the nuke thats about the detonate here yo.

    FUCK THIS SHIT>
    its stupider than me after several rounds of old e and cocaine.

    nuhh uhh....

    stop this shit now.
     
  11. Rectum

    Rectum Senior Member

    Joined: Nov 13, 2002 Messages: 1,501 Likes Received: 0
    australian troops are the closest to Bagdad..been sighten within 45 mins

    represent
     
  12. RAGSOE

    RAGSOE New Jack

    Joined: May 11, 2002 Messages: 11 Likes Received: 1
    i agree with you as well. this whole situation is fugged up. i'm kinda used to crazyness being where i'm from, making it so much easier to see why war/death is the worst thing imaginable. bleh..........
     
  13. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    right on ragser.

    im over it to the point where it is so easy to tune out the fact that we just invaded a nation and everytime you turn on the news its like a motherfucking halftime show and shit.

    "an american soldier was shot today"
    no fucking shit bitch. what the fuck do you think is going to happen when you illegally invade a country to monopolize their oil.


    ARGH.


    you know what im saying though?
    you can know somthing is wrong and somthing is being done in your name and you ignore it and tune it out. buts its not the the shooting on you block. unfortunatley its bigger than that. its the bombing of a city the size of LA in our names because some downsyndrom cokehead boozer that takes xanax got the power to start a war.

    anyway.

    shutup ********.
     
  14. grittylifer

    grittylifer Banned

    Joined: Nov 14, 2002 Messages: 0 Likes Received: 0
    Our Servicemen's Health in Danger
    by David Weintraub

    The casualty rate among our servicemen fighting the war in Iraq might be far greater than anyone expects. A growing body of evidence appears to demonstrate that Americans were misled about the full scope of deaths and injuries to U.S. troops in the first Gulf War and that a similar tragedy is likely in this war.

    The source of many of these casualties may not come from Iraqi firepower or chemical and biological weapons, but from the after-effects of U.S. armaments. When the desert dust cleared from Operation Desert Storm's record-breaking 100-hour ground war in 1991, American casualties amounted to 147 killed and 457 wounded. However, the long-term damage is just beginning to surface.

    NUCLEAR-WASTE BULLETS

    Of the 700,000 U.S. troops sent to the Persian Gulf, Department of Veteran Affairs statistics indicate that almost 10,000 have died since the first Gulf War, almost 200,000 have filed claims for medical and compensation benefits and more than 150,000 were granted service-connected benefits.

    Col. David Hackworth, one of America's most decorated officers, says that the Gulf War conjures up the worst memories of Vietnam, where soldiers were forced to fight a two-front war against the Viet Cong and against the Pentagon's use of deadly chemicals. He is disgusted that Gulf War vets are getting the same runaround that Vietnam vets faced for more than 20 years in the Agent Orange debacle. He worries that the current war with Iraq will be devastating on U.S. servicemen.

    No one knows the harm done to Gulf War vets better than Dr. Doug Rokke, a U.S. Army major and former director of the Pentagon's Depleted Uranium Project after the 1991 Gulf War. According to Rokke, tens of thousands of troops were exposed to Depleted Uranium or DU, a benign name for uranium-238, the waste product of nuclear reactors and weapons. DU is a bad marriage between two unsavory partners: the nuclear industry, which needed a home for nearly one billion tons of hazardous waste, and the U.S. military that desired cheap and effective munitions. They created DU by molding nuclear-waste tailings into bullets and bombs.

    Because of DU's high density, it makes a perfect armor-penetrating weapon that destroys tanks, armored personnel carriers and underground bunkers. When DU hits its target, it creates a firestorm of uranium dioxide dust, leaving microscopic fragments that float through the air, carried by the wind for miles.

    MANY VETS HAVE CANCER

    Based on his research, Rokke discovered that when DU is inhaled, it ravages the lungs and wreaks havoc in the body, destroying vital organs and immune systems. Rokke called for an immediate ban on DU, costing him his career. His exposure to DU may cost him his life. Of the 100 men Rokke had working under him, 30 have died and the rest suffer from cancers and immune-deficiency symptoms similar to many Gulf War veterans.

    Dr. Asaf Durakovic, former head of nuclear medicine at a Veterans Ad ministration medical facility, discovered that Gulf War vets treated at his hospital showed classic symptoms of radiation exposure. Yet when he tried to investigate a link between DU and his patients' disease, he came under intense scrutiny, ultimately finding his 18-year career abruptly terminated.

    But his duty to his patients drove him to continue his research, discovering life-threatening levels of DU in Gulf veterans 10 years after the war. Those tested demonstrated a significant presence of DU caused by inhalation of uranium dust.

    Depleted uranium munitions are playing key roles in Iraq, where the Pentagon's Abrams tanks and A-10 fighter jets are being used, exposing our troops once again to the serious consequences of our own devices -- quite possibly for periods of time far greater than in the first Gulf War.

    BRING THE TROOPS HOME

    If our brave men and women are placed in harm's way unnecessarily, their only hope may be that we, the people, respond by accepting our duty to protect and defend the interests of our soldiers. We can put our heads in the sand and allow this unjustified war to continue, notwithstanding its potentially staggering consequences to our servicemen, or we can enlist our own constitutional authority by supporting our troops in the only meaningful way possible -- bringing them home immediately.

    After another war on Iraq, who will defend our veterans when they return, their healthy lives left behind on the desert sands of the Middle East
     
  15. BROWNer

    BROWNer Guest

    bush has high approval ratings for this war huh?
    wow, that's somethin'...
    emotionally potent over-simplification reigns supreme.

    meanwhile:

    Undercutting the 9/11 Inquiry from: nytimes op-ed

    It's hard to believe that everything related to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks will not get the most thorough public scrutiny possible. But the federal investigative committee so reluctantly supported by the White House now seems in danger of being undermined. As the first hearings open in Manhattan today, committee members are chagrined to be going hat in hand to Congress for adequate financing. White House assurances led them to believe needed funds would be included in the supplemental war budget sent to the Capitol last week. But the commission's $11 million request was not there.

    Reasonable people might wonder if the White House, having failed in its initial attempt to have Henry Kissinger steer the investigation, may be resorting to budgetary starvation as a tactic to hobble any politically fearless inquiry. The committee's mandate includes scrutiny of intelligence failures and eight other government areas.

    The White House vows that in coming budget initiatives there will be no shortchanging of the nation's duty to face the facts of the tragedy. As things now stand, $3 million budgeted as start-up funding could run out this summer. An estimated $14 million is needed for the task of finding out precisely how the attackers were able to pull off their plot in which nearly 3,000 people died. This seems a bargain given the importance of the mission. By comparison, the inquiry into the shuttle disaster's loss of seven lives may cost an estimated $40 million, and the inquiry into the Whitewater controversy ate up more than $30 million.

    The nation demands an unflinching 9/11 search. A forthright Congress could easily shake the money loose from the Capitol leadership. Everyone claims to have homeland security as a top priority, but anything less than a robust inquiry will amount to a fresh assault on domestic safety. Tim Roemer, a former congressman and a commission member now buttonholing old colleagues for the missing money, makes the case best: "Facing the facts won't kill us. Not getting them might."



    :tongue:
     
Top