WAR IN IRAQ - YES/NO/DON'T KNOW

[teach]

Does anyone have any opinions?

[musimarek]

that very diffcult subject! I say no. Money only reson for this war.

[teach]

I agree.

Money is all important.

The countries with the biggest and most profitable arms industries are the USA
and Great Britain. War means weapons - and who supplies them.

America needs cheap oil.

Israel wants tame rule in neighbouring countries.

The Jewish vote and money in the USA is VERY important to Bush.


OK, ENOUGH FOR NOW!

[Gość: TED]

NO, MONEY AND OIL TALK

[eliz123]

This is heavy stuff!

[Gość: Lil Mom]

Remember the movie "wag the dog"?
And now isn't it amazing that President Bush, D.Cheney, R.Perle - one of the
Pentagon advisory panel members, Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense,
have never served in the active military, yet they are the ones pressing for
war?

President Bush somehaw got a very hard-to-get slot in hte National Guard
during the Vietnam conflict (and he never even fulfilled its easy
requirements).

Secretary of Defense D.Rumsfeld was a Navy pilot between wars.

Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage,
former Secretary of State Larry Eagleburger and frmer National Security
Advisor Brent Snowcroft all advise against it.

Isn't it strange the US military is also advising against it, while the
politicians and advisors who know nothing of war themselves are perfectly
willing to send others into battle?

When the military are against going to war, there must be a compelling reason
because anyone who has served knows war brings promotion, power, prestige,
etc, along with a nice pension at retirement.

My guess is that President Bush has to do something to get all his fat-cat
friends who have stolen, cheated and swindled thousands of people out of
millions of dollars off the fron page!!!!
So let's wag the dog.

[Gość: Bert]

The War Party successfully filled the empty space in the
presidency?s head with American Likudniks and the Knesset
on the Capitol Hill to put this country on the warpath
for oil and Israel?s interests, not necessarily in this
order. National boundaries will be re-arranged, hegemony
re-established, natural resources taken over, American
economy propped up. At the same time the chosen will be
choosing the land to live on under the protectorate of
Israeli-firsters residing in the occupied territory of
Washington, DC.
Before all this happens, the UN Security Council will be
placated. Whatever deals are to be made will be made.
Putin will step on Georgia, China will have her way with
the Uighur separatists of Xinjiang. Even the Frenchies
will gladly bend over for an oil contract or something.
UN a problem? What problem? Everything is doable.

Who runs this country anyway? Will the real president step
forward?

P.S. Lil Mom, I love you.

[jamesbond007]

complex - but intersting - stuff.

I say it's time for action.

BERT you are my hero

[Gość: GOYnotGAY]

nobody could put it better (except me offcourse)
I would go little stronger on the Chosen One's.
They got out of hands and they doing with this world what ever they want. They
control USA wich in reality means, they control the world.
It is very ironic that our long time enemy Germany looks like the only ones who
openly are not afraid to say NO to USA?IZRAEL neo-hitlerism.
Bravo Schreoder.
UN is pathetic, they make all kind's of resolution but they do not force them,
they too scared of Uncle Sam and SSharon.

[namonik]

maight I say a few words.
some of you describe the question as complex. No, it is not. It's eitrer yes or
no. What's so difficult.
Some of you write that Bush and others have at best limited, military
experience.
I'd like to remind you that former president was a confirmed draft dodger and
the military has neccessary experience. As for other arguments they all seem to
be taken from the liberal media. I dismiss that.
Thank you.

[jrzy]

Why is this war only supported by the USA and Great Britain?

[Gość: Bert]

jrzy napisał(a):

> Why is this war only supported by the USA and Great
Britain?

Because we have the right to claim to have the compelling
evidence of Saddam's tresspasses without having it.
Others have doubts, we are inventive. They want to see
the proof, we have not found any, so we mumble: "We can't
find Iraq's biological weapons labs because, because,
because, uhmm, because? they put them in?trucks! No,
wait, mobile homes! That's it. Mobile homes... and
recreational vehicles, and they drive them around making
germs and what not... in the backs of these... camper
vans. That's it. That's why we can't find any evidence...
Honest! Really! And now we have convincing evidence
linking this evil man to the deceitful manipulation of
our accounting methods, and...and, and, and the death
of,of,of... of Elvis...Elvis... Presley! Yes! Elvis
Presley! What??? Where is it? Well, it is, it is...
ahh...hmm... it is, it is, it is...it is in those trucks,
I mean, I mean... RVs! Yes, RVs! I told you they keep
driving these...these things around. Here you have it. Ha!

[jrzy]

Gość portalu: Bert napisał(a):

> jrzy napisał(a):
>
> > Why is this war only supported by the USA and Great
> Britain?
>
> Because we have the right to claim to have the compelling
> evidence of Saddam's tresspasses without having it.
> Others have doubts, we are inventive. They want to see
> the proof, we have not found any, so we mumble: "We can't
> find Iraq's biological weapons labs because, because,
> because, uhmm, because? they put them in?trucks! No,
> wait, mobile homes! That's it. Mobile homes... and
> recreational vehicles, and they drive them around making
> germs and what not... in the backs of these... camper
> vans. That's it. That's why we can't find any evidence...
> Honest! Really! And now we have convincing evidence
> linking this evil man to the deceitful manipulation of
> our accounting methods, and...and, and, and the death
> of,of,of... of Elvis...Elvis... Presley! Yes! Elvis
> Presley! What??? Where is it? Well, it is, it is...
> ahh...hmm... it is, it is, it is...it is in those trucks,
> I mean, I mean... RVs! Yes, RVs! I told you they keep
> driving these...these things around. Here you have it. Ha!


aha ... mystifying, but enlightening!

This is how this board should be!!! Keep on posting, PLEASE.

[Gość: Prezes]

namonik napisał:

> maight I say a few words.
> some of you describe the question as complex. No, it is
not. It's eitrer yes or
>
> no. What's so difficult.
> Some of you write that Bush and others have at best
limited, military
> experience.
> I'd like to remind you that former president was a
confirmed draft dodger and
> the military has neccessary experience. As for other
arguments they all seem to
>
> be taken from the liberal media. I dismiss that.

what an argument !!! really convincing...

> Thank you.

[Gość: Prezes]

teach napisała:

> Does anyone have any opinions?

I think that the war in Iraq is a done deal.
Bush will attack Iraq no matter what
the Iraqis government does or does not do,
no matter what the UN resolution would recommend.

I have no doubt that Hussein is a ruthless
and dangerous tyrant, but so are many others
all over the world. Why don't we attack North Korea,
for instance ? They might be even closer to developing
atomic bomb than Iraq is.

The risk of another terrorist attack on the US
will not be lowered by changing the guy who rules
in Baghdad.
In fact any attack on Iraq might intensify
the hatred towards the US and give Al-Qaeda
new recruits.

Do we really want another blowback ?

[Gość: Dick Cheney]

I just hope we don't start the war before Christmas. It'll really spoil it for
the kids. Can't we do it in the new year some time? How about February?
There's usually not very much going on then? Any alternative dates?

[Gość: Prezes]

Gość portalu: Dick Cheney napisał(a):

> I just hope we don't start the war before Christmas. It'll really spoil it for
> the kids. Can't we do it in the new year some time? How about February?
> There's usually not very much going on then? Any alternative dates?

You are probably right. It will be most likely January or February.

Sunday Herald says: no kidding...

[Gość: Bert]

No kidding, this is heavy stuff!


www.sundayherald.com/print27735


Sunday Herald - 15 September 2002
Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President
By Neil Mackay

A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that
President Bush and his cabinet were planning a
premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change'
even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the
creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for
Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld
(defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy),
George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby
(Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled
Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And
Resources For A New Century, was written in September
2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the
New American Century (PNAC).
The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military
control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein
was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades
sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional
security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq
provides the immediate justification, the need for a
substantial American force presence in the Gulf
transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'
The PNAC document supports a 'blueprint for maintaining
global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great
power rival, and shaping the international security order
in line with American principles and interests'.
This 'American grand strategy' must be advanced for 'as
far into the future as possible', the report says. It
also calls for the US to 'fight and decisively win
multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core
mission'.
The report describes American armed forces abroad as 'the
cavalry on the new American frontier'. The PNAC blueprint
supports an earlier document written by Wolfowitz and
Libby that said the US must 'discourage advanced
industrial nations from challenging our leadership or
even aspiring to a larger regional or global role'.
The PNAC report also:
l refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most
effective and efficient means of exercising American
global leadership';
l describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American
political leadership rather than that of the United Nations';
l reveals worries in the administration that Europe could
rival the USA;
l says 'even should Saddam pass from the scene' bases in
Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently --
despite domestic opposition in the Gulf regimes to the
stationing of US troops

[magbak]

interesting reading ...

[Gość: h]

definetly aye...:]

Bert you are my Hero

[Gość: GOYnotGAY]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nobody could put it better (except me offcourse)
I would go little stronger on the Chosen One's.
They got out of hands and they doing with this world what ever they want. They
control USA wich in reality means, they control the world.
It is very ironic that our long time enemy Germany looks like the only ones who
openly are not afraid to say NO to USA?IZRAEL neo-hitlerism.
Bravo Schreoder.
UN is pathetic, they make all kind's of resolution but they do not force them,
they too scared of Uncle Sam and SSharon.

[Gość: erwas]

Gość portalu: GOYnotGAY napisał(a):

talk about your nick some, would you?...

erwas

[Gość: Roose]

So was Pearl Harbour a 'preventative attack'? Time to revise those history
books!

[Gość: kasia_ania]

The comparison with Pearl Harbour is a very apt one. No democratic country (or
one that pretends to be democratic) has the right to interfere with another
country. In plain langauge this is called a declaration of war, no matter how
one justifies the attack.

[mirekmil]

"WAR! It's fantastic !" Hot shots I/II

[Gość: Dick Cheney]

Maybe, but I still think it'd be better to have the war after Christmas. Or
then again, maybe we could get it over before christmas and then we can
get 'our boys' back home to their families. Obviously the matter is a very
pressing one, otherwise I can't understand why we have to kick Saddam's ass now

[Gość: Alien]

No chance to finish it all before Christmass. Unless Goerge W. will send
Charlie "Hot Shot" Sheen! Or the generic Rambo - Sylvester! Ehh? Let them go
together!

[Gość: Monika]

Definitely YES.
It is a real shame for UN that USA has to do their job. This organization is
simply useless. Sorry to say it but I think all Afghans should be grateful to
Osama that for his attack at WTC. As the result of this, Talibs were abolished
and now there is a chance that this country will recover after so many many
years of so many wars.
The attack at WTC was something horrible, it should never happen. However this
type of shock was needed, to show the whole world that there are countries
which do not respect any human right and UN is doing simply nothing about it
(except stupid discussions).
I agree that money is what counts for Americans and believe me I am not the fan
of USA.
Just I feel relieved that now finally Iraq will be attacked and even UN is not
going to prevent it.
I hope US has more countries of this type on their list.

[Gość: Monika]

Definitely YES.
It is a real shame for UN that USA has to do their job. This organization is
simply useless. Sorry to say it but I think all Afghans should be grateful to
Osama that for his attack at WTC. As the result of this, Talibs were abolished
and now there is a chance that this country will recover after so many many
years of so many wars.
The attack at WTC was something horrible, it should never happen. However this
type of shock was needed, to remind the whole world that there are countries
which do not respect any human right and UN is doing simply nothing about it
(except stupid discussions).
I agree that money is what counts for Americans and believe me I am not the fan
of USA.
Just I feel relieved that now finally Iraq will be attacked and even UN is not
going to prevent it.
I hope USA has more countries of this type on the list.

[Gość: Dick Cheney]

Gość portalu: Monika napisał(a):

> Definitely YES.
> It is a real shame for UN that USA has to do their job. This organization is
> simply useless. Sorry to say it but I think all Afghans should be grateful
to
> Osama that for his attack at WTC. As the result of this, Talibs were
abolished
>
> and now there is a chance that this country will recover after so many many
> years of so many wars.
> The attack at WTC was something horrible, it should never happen. However
this
> type of shock was needed, to remind the whole world that there are countries
> which do not respect any human right and UN is doing simply nothing about it
> (except stupid discussions).
> I agree that money is what counts for Americans and believe me I am not the
fan
>
> of USA.
> Just I feel relieved that now finally Iraq will be attacked and even UN is
not
> going to prevent it.
> I hope USA has more countries of this type on the list.


I was outraged to read in today's Herald and Tribune that Bush has published
such a list of countries earmarked for "preventative attacks". Along with the
usual suspects - Syria, Iran etc he's also got Georgia, Belarus and
Liechtenstein down. This is utter madness. Where will it end?

[Gość: Alien]

Gość portalu: Dick Cheney napisał(a):


> I was outraged to read in today's Herald and Tribune that Bush has published
> such a list of countries earmarked for "preventative attacks". Along with the
> usual suspects - Syria, Iran etc he's also got Georgia, Belarus and
> Liechtenstein down. This is utter madness. Where will it end?

Dick, give us a link to this article. I think many people would like to check
if their countries are in danger. Should the Pope be ready for the visit of the
US Marine Corps, too? Maybe it is easier to make the "negative list" of who
cannot be the target of a "preventative attack". It could be an one-position-
list.

It looks to me George W. thinks he's the God. Do you think he is?

[Gość: Lil Mom]

is proving to be quite a problem solver.
Got wildfires in the west? Cut down all the trees!
Got a surplas in the Treasury? Give it away. Give the average taxpayer a
couple hundred dollars, give foreign dictators and monarchs $10 billion or
more. You can buy almost anybody.

King George "asserts the right of the United States, as the only superpower,
to judge the degree of potential danger itself - and to take whatever action
deemed necessary to eliminate that threat." - D.Broder(columnist for
Washington Post).

Sly King George will solve everything.