Esai Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 ^^^ I would think Bush has done a much better job at turning a well respected(or at least feared) government into a rogue regime(which was illegally stolen) that has become the biggest threat to the rest of the logical world, including many millions of cognitive citizens in the US. Judging from the actions of our very powerful conservative elite, along with the mindnumbing ignorance of anglo america and the millions of uncle toms, I wouldnt give our planet another 100 years before either: all out armageddon, some kind of huge revolution, or full on slavery(which is actually a harsher word for global economy and NAFTA).I really hope the Iraquis will contro their vast natural resources and the wealth accrued from these rescoureces will be fairly and equally shared with its citizens. I severely doubt it(judging from US history), and I feel the Iraquis are being taken for a ride, and we're footing the bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zodiac ying Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 were definitely footing the bill, as usual. time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Roe on a killin spree... choke on it kiddies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zodiac ying Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Re: PATRIOTISM IS GAY Originally posted by razeagainst Honestly, i'd like to see the entire nation-state system crumble... honestly i wish you rolled through my world so i could see if you too would fit into the category of pussy bitch i mentioned earlier in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phism Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 "You'll see the celebrations and we will be happy Saddam has gone," one of them said to me. "But we will then want to rid ourselves of the Americans and we will want to keep our oil and there will be resistance and then they will call us "terrorists". ------------- "Nobody wants to see the Americans win. We're willing to suffer as long as it takes but not to see them occupy our country," said Nabil Suleiman, 40, a businessman. ------------- "We're fed up, we're terrified of this war but we're willing to put up with all this rather than see the Americans in our country ruling us," said Mona Fathi, 34, an academic. ------------- Iraqi worker Adnan said he felt compelled to go back to Iraq after six months in Jordan: "It's matter of national pride and dignity," he said. "I can't bear to see my country occupied by foreign troops, I believe we can kick them out. They may have incredible weaponry but the will of God is stronger," he said angrily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mental invalid Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 they are killing me tess....slowly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fr8lover Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 america is being so nearsighted with this war, i doubt most people have even begun to think "what next?" great we cut a swath through iraq and killed a bunch of people for "regime change." now the "fun part" is watching us slowly forget about it with another conflict we dont belong in (see afghanistan). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Originally posted by freightlover (see afghanistan). look Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 ..or how about some DU? Gulf War Syndrome, The Sequel Steven Rosenfeld, _April 10, 2003 Soldiers now fighting in Iraq are being exposed to battlefield hazards that have been associated with the Gulf War Syndrome that afflicts a quarter-million veterans of the 1991 war, said a former Central Command Army officer in Operation Desert Storm. Part of the threat today includes greater exposure to battlefield byproducts of depleted uranium munitions used in combat, said the former officer and other Desert Storm veterans trained in battlefield health and safety. Their concern comes as troops are engaged in the most intensive fighting of the Iraq War. Complicating efforts to understand any potential health impacts is the Pentagon's failure, acknowleged in House hearings on March 25, to follow a 1997 law requiring baseline medical screening of troops before and after deployment. "People are sick over there already," said Dr. Doug Rokke, former director of the Army's depleted uranium (DU)project. "It's not just uranium. You've got all the complex organics and inorganics [compounds] that are released in those fires and detonations. And they're sucking this in.... You've got the whole toxic wasteland." In 1991, Desert Storm Commander Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf asked Rokke to oversee the environmental clean up and medical care of soldiers injured in friendly fire incidents involving DU weapons. Rokke later wrote the DU safety rules adopted by the Army, but was relieved of subsequent duties after he criticized commanders for not following those rules and not treating exposed troops from NATO's war in Yugoslavia. Rokke said today's troops have been fighting on land polluted with chemical, biological and radioactive weapon residue from the first Gulf War and its aftermath. In this setting, troops have been exposed not only to sandstorms, which degrade the lungs, but to oil fires and waste created by the use of uranium projectiles in tanks, aircraft, machine guns and missiles. "That's why people started getting sick right away, when they started going in months ago with respiratory, diarrhea and rashes -- horrible skin conditions," Rokke said. "That's coming back on and they have been treating them at various medical facilities. And one of the doctors at one of the major Army medical facilities -- he and I talk almost every day -- and he is madder than hell." DU, or Uranium-238, is a byproduct of making nuclear reactor fuel. It is denser and more penetrating than lead, burns as it flies, and breaks up and vaporizes on impact -- which makes it very deadly. Each round fired by a tank shoots one 10-pound uranium dart that, in addition to destroying targets, scatters into burning fragments and creates a cloud of uranium particles as small as one micron. Particles that small can enter lung tissue and remain embedded. Efforts to contact Pentagon officials for comment at the Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses and officials at the Veterans Administration who deal with DU-related illness were not returned. What Rokke and other outspoken Desert Storm veterans fear is today's troops are being exposed to many of the same battlefield conditions that they believe are responsible for Gulf War Syndrome. These illnesses have left 221,000 veterans on medical disability and another 51,000 seeking that status from the Veterans Administration as of May 2002. "Yeah, I do fear that," said Denise Nichols, a retired Air Force Major and nurse, who served in Desert Storm and is now vice-chairman of the National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition. "We're sitting here watching it happen again and wondering if the soldiers are going to be taken care of any better [than after the 1991 war]." Nichols' lobbying sparked Congress to pass a 1997 law requiring the Pentagon to conduct a physical and take blood samples of all soldiers before and after deployment. In a House hearing on March 25 on that requirement, Public Law 105-85, Pentagon officials said the military had not conducted those baseline tests for Iraq War soldiers, saying they asked troops to fill out a questionnaire instead. "Their actions not to fully implement PL 105-85 and go beyond the words of the law, show their lack of caring for the human beings that do the work and place their lives in jeopardy for this nation," Nichols said in testimony submitted to the Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn.) the Government Reform-National Security Subcommittee chairman, who held the hearing and told military officials they were "not meeting" the letter or spirit of the law. "I hope that when the soldiers return that the standard tactic of blaming PTSD [Post-Traumatic-Stress Disorder] or stress will never be allowed to block soldiers from getting fast answers to what is happening to their health," Nichols testified. "If you don't look, you don't find," Rokke said, commenting on the Pentagon's failure to assess soldiers' health. "If you don't find, there is no correlation. If there's no correlation, there's no liability." Both Rokke and Nichols says health problems associated with DU exposure are likely to be more widespread in the current war than in 1991. That's because the military relies more heavily on DU munitions today and there's more fighting in this war. When Rokke sees images of soldiers and civilians driving past burning Iraqi trucks that have been destroyed by tank fire, or soldiers or civilians inspecting buildings destroyed by missiles, and these people are not wearing respirators, he says they all risk radiation poisoning, which can have lifelong consequences. "He's going to be sick," Rokke said. "He's supposed to have full respiratory protection on. That's required by his Common Task [training manual]. And when he comes by and he's downwind, he supposed to have a radio-bio-assay. That's urine, feces and nasal swabs within 24 hours." When asked why those protocols -- part of the DU rules he wrote for the Army -- apparently aren't being followed, Rokke said the military doesn't want to lose the use of DU weapons. He said as early as 1991 the military issued memos saying DU ammo could become "politically unacceptable and thus be deleted" if health and environmental impacts were emphasized. Outside the military, medical journals say the jury is still out on DU's potential health impacts. Although the government says it is safe, medical researchers say not enough is understood about DU's acute and long-term effects, wrote Brian Vastag in the April 2 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Veterans disagree, however, saying the military has known about low-level radiation poisoning since the development of atomic weapons in the 1940s. They say the military will not disclose its DU test results and that it's almost impossible to do medical research while combat rages. Meanwhile, in political circles, the White House has dismissed DU issues. On March 18, it issued "Apparatus of Lies," a report which, among other things, attacked claims that DU fallout from Operation Desert Storm has caused higher disease rates among Iraqi citizens. Those claims were part of "Saddam's disinformation and propaganda" campaign, the White House said. www.tompaine.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Catch22 Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 There have been some good points on both sides but my questions are, Do you think it would've been better if we didn't invade Iraq & Saddam was still in power? Should we have just ignored the whole situation? What would've been your alternative to war? I'm not a big fan of George Bush I think our gouvernment is shady at times I'm not a big fan of war but I didn't see a better/more effective solution & I believe it was the right decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phism Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Originally posted by Catch22 There have been some good points on both sides but my questions are, Do you think it would've been better if we didn't invade Iraq & Saddam was still in power? Should we have just ignored the whole situation? What would've been your alternative to war? I'm not a big fan of George Bush I think our gouvernment is shady at times I'm not a big fan of war but I didn't see a better/more effective solution & I believe it was the right decision. well, u.n. intervention is a much more peaceful way to do it... the u.n. can often pull off things without even going to war. the inspections were working, and iraq was complying... of course, as soon as they started complying, we changed our reasoning from WMD's to regime change. but in that case... if our reason for war is "saddam is a bad guy"... well, for one, that's kind of illegal. second, there are tons of countries with oppressive leaders, including our own, in many ways. there is no specific reason of that sort to kick hussein out. aside from self-serving reasons.... you ask about a more effective solution, but this wasn't really a solution to anything! the people are still starving, many more dead than would have been without the war, the sanctions are not lifted. in fact, saddam hussein's government was already showing signs of weakness and implosion. one thing that would have allowed it to collapse is lifting the sanctions. this would keep the people from starving because they could make their own money via trade, rather than wait for the government to (not) give them any food or cash. money is power, and if the people were empowered, they wouldn't have to settle for saddam. nay, this war had nothing to do with any of that. it was all the PNAC. Project for a New American Century - http://www.newamericancentury.org - read their statement of principles and its signatories. they've been planning this war for a long time. the attack on afghanistan was planned out before september 11th (how'd we get all those soldiers there so quick?), paul wolfowitz wanted us to attack iraq on september 15th, 2001 - 4 days after 9/11, when no evidence could have possibly pointed to iraq. we're going to attack Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia next. because they are enemies of Israel. that's why we're ignoring North Korea - they aren't involved with Israel, a.k.a. America Jr. (and you thought it was Canada). if you want to know more about the PNAC, read this article: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC20Ak07.html also, one of the american corporations' incentives to enter this war (because we all know that the corporate world and the government are butt buddies) is the enforcement of trade in the U.S. Dollar. Saudi Arabia and OPEC agreed a long time ago to trade in the U.S. Dollar.... this is the real reason america is so prosperous. in the 60s we were about on the same level as other major world powers, maybe with a little bit more in natural resources... but now that we have middle eastern countries 'buying' our money to use in oil trade, as well as making oil easier to buy for the u.s., our economy skyrocketed..... we depend on the middle east and the rest of the world's value of the u.s. dollar. pushing up the value of the dollar greatly increases the value of our country's overall wealth. now, with that in mind, know that Iraq was the first country to switch from using the dollar to using the Euro. at the time it was seen as a political move, you know, not wanting to use our money because we don't like each other. everybody thought the plan would flop, but! they actually profited from it. and right now, the Euro is beginning to out-compete the dollar. if other countries catch on, and the petro-euro becomes the preferred currency of the oil trade, the entire American economy will fail. dollar value will plummet, now that it no longer has a basis in actual physical gold, and american corporations will crumble. so no, it's not about oil, really.... but it is about the scrilla.... peace to kozyndan (http://www.kozyndan.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Originally posted by razeagainst Yea Saddam was a malicious dictator... what's your point? you know, whatever about your opinions, you can believe whatever you want but now... fuck off, you lost all respect, trying to take my reply to a quote out of context and portray me as raving. You can get fucked little boy, you and your idealitic fantasy world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rectum Posted April 11, 2003 Author Share Posted April 11, 2003 please refer to ANTI WAR CHUMPS VOL. 2 thread for more of my insight esppecially you razeagainst you silly chump! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rectum Posted April 11, 2003 Author Share Posted April 11, 2003 smart has got it on lockdown!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Re: WWSD? (what would saddam do) Originally posted by razeagainst Hey, you did it to yourself, holmes No, YOU did it to ME... YOU took the quote out of context. YOU misportrayed my words. You are a measly little pussy who is as unwilling to take responsability for your own blatant actions against me as you are unwilling to admit that you are sadly uninformed and generally ignorant in regards to world events and the intricacies of foreign policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S@T@N Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Smart with the harshness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Not my words, but my thoughts. http://www.thismodernworld.com/weblog/mtar..._06.html#000433 And let's acknowledge up front that it was easier than a lot of people expected--including many military and intelligence analysts--and let's posit that that's a Good Thing. The shooting's not over yet, and even Rumsfeld says that declarations of victory are premature--but if we soon reach a point at which no more American soldiers have to die on Iraqi soil, and no more Iraqi children have to have their arms blown off, then I think we can all be grateful for that. The devil's just going to be in the details. Can order be restored and maintained? Is democracy something which by definition can even be "imposed"? Does the United States have a long enough attention span to see this one through? (To that last, I suspect the answer is yes--if only because the oil's there--though what "seeing it through" means remains anybody's guess.) In the meantime, congratulations. You've just adopted approximately 23 million Iraqis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krook Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Originally posted by mr_president wars over, eat a vegan! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fr8rokr Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 rectum get your head out of your ass http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/a...article2842.htm get educated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serum Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 i'm all for sadaam getting a boot to the dome i'm all for for the iraq people's liberation i'm all for getting rid of chemical and biological weapons however i'm not for the american government stating that they are going to iraq to free the people, because this is bullshit. don't even mention them because the only time they care about them is when the media's is broadcasting coverage of civilian casualties. i'm not for the americans blaming starvation and lack of medical care on sadaam because thats mostly due to our sanctions. i'm not for america pulling out of iraq and putting in a puppet regime, [see afghanistan, and even cambodia] i'm not for bush taking iraq's oil and distributing it where he pleases. i'm not for going above the UN. it's called bureaucracy, yes it's slow, and doesn't always weigh in your favor but if i wanted to plead my case that solient green is people in a court of law i'd have to prove it BEFORE i blew up their factory, not after the fact. shit we break our own rules to get what we want. the only reason that we aren't going after n.korea is because they have nothing there for us if we beat them. we would foot the bill, lose american soldiers, take out kim jong ill and we'd be lucky to get some kimchee with our rice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effyoo Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 waiting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NoamChomsky Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Re: Re: rectum get your head out of your ass Originally posted by razeagainst Smart... you should change your name to "DUMB"... check out this article, kid... maybe you'll learn something for once... Smart runs shit around here,he's the new Beardo, please believe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Re: Re: rectum get your head out of your ass Originally posted by razeagainst Smart... you should change your name to "DUMB" This is the most original thing you have ever said, seems like you even thought it up yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotherEffer Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Originally posted by razeagainst You're worried about protesters? People are being bombed, man.... At least they're raising their voice and standing up for something they believe in... what have you done to make this shitty world a better place? i haven't done shit to make this shitty world better. what have you done? went to a few protests, stood around yelling anti war and anti goverment slogans to other protesters? protests aeren't gonna changer bush'd mind. he's out for revenge, so nothing you or i say is gonna change his mind. personally i think tis war has nothing to do with oil. it's more of a personal vendetta than anything. what would you do if someone wanted to kill your pops? i would fuckin try to kill him, and i happen to be in charge of the strongest military in the world, shiiiiit homeboy is gonna die... that sux but that's life...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodice_ripper Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Re: Been on both sides Originally posted by KaBar I had my doubts when we first started getting resistance down in southern Iraq, but watching people looting government warehouses of rice and dancing in the street really brought it home to me that we have done a good thing. THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING. George W. promised the Iraqi people democracy. LET'S SEE IT. I give them five years to achieve self-supportting, independent statehood, and ten years to achieve a Constitutional republic, with one-citizen-one-vote, universal suffrage (women too), free public SECULAR schools and an ARMED CITIZENRY THAT SUPPORTS THEIR GOVERNMENT. I would think that after all these years, the Iraqis know that when a tank rolls down your street, you come out and fucking cheer for it - regardless of who's tank it is........................ I agree with the proof bit - let's see those mountains of WMDs they have hmmm.............................? And lets see the US achieve Model Democracy Status, with a president who respects the Constitution, and one-man-one vote............................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 I get the feeling from so many of you that... if this was WWII, and Hitler had been beaten by 1943, you would all boo and hiss because you didn't get to 'discover' the graves of the last 3,000,000,000 Jews... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodice_ripper Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 ^^^^ that was weak, and you know it Such a fuss was made over these weapons - to the point of fucking up the UN. These were the reason (allegedly) for going to war - not the wellfare of the Iraqis (the US is usually quite happy to ignore human rights abuses...) SHOW ME THE WEAPONS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Originally posted by bodice_ripper ^^^^ that was weak, and you know it no, just because you think it, doesn't make it so... I've NEVER given a fuck about the WMD, not even for an instant. I do, however, believe that they will eventually be found. I also think that no matter what, when they are found, haters will claim it's a sham. So... whatever, the people are free, sorry that makes you so sour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodice_ripper Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Jesus Smmart, I come back for ten minutes and already you have your panties in a knot i was just pointing out that you weren't basing you little analogy on anything - it was just HYPERBOLE http://www.healthstore.com/photos/053111.jpg'> take two of these and call me in the morning. Relax them kacks, you crazy bint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 yeah, no, well... I wasn't talking to, or about, you... and then you said something to me... anyway, I'm glad you got to use your little 'chill pill' joke, hope you don't feel like you wasted it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.