I find this whole line of thought useless. While I believe France is wrong in this issue, it maybe the opposite the next time.

Anyway, France has been a leading fighter of terrorism (the world's fight).

Look folks, disagreement IS allowed. Discussion is required. We have to walk away from the discussion as friends and allies.

>Don't go after Israel on human rights records, or you
>show ignorance

But i do, it is plain to see . Israel has an army, the palestinians dont. If they did, rest assure you'd know about it.

And I assume you think they're terrorists? How do think an occupied people, who's randomly arrested, and shot and bombed should do? Sit on their asses? No, they do what they can, and thats guerrilla warfare. Oh please, lets take that guerrilla warfare into the middle of the desert, just to be nice. Not going to happen. Its done where both live, and die for that matter. Of course the Israelits then try to capture any palestinian combatent, no wonder.

Discussion of methods of operation only is relevant when you understand what's at stake. And never by the standard "right and wrong", they dont apply.

The Israelits want to stop the attacks, by attacking. In the mean time , they want to expand their borders.

The Palestinians dont want to give them any more terrain, and keep getting shot for it. And retaliate in suicidal attacks.

Redo from start.

> It is very difficult to do.

Might be, but many israelits feel the palestinians should be all thrown out (or killed). And so does the palestinians. A whole generation grew with this hate wich wont dissipate for quite a while.

>I don't blame Israel from trying to protect itself, and I
>don't blame the Palestinians from wanting a state of
>their own.

Exactly. Thank you.

>The mindless killing that is most often
>spurred by palestinian terrorist activity in order to
>further their cause.

You forget, the palestinians cant go directly agains the israely miliary. They do what they can. And alot is that "mindless killing". Its not mindless, its planned to get a desired effect. Sometimes to media, sometimes internally.

>Don't blame the Israelis for that violence down there.

But i do, alot really. They invaded the Palestine, they forced , killed and took over the palestinians homes. No wonder the palestinians hate them so much. They are the "invaders", and true enough to an good extent.

>If I was running that show, I'd kick every one of their
>asses out of Israel and set my military on the border to
>keep them out

The borders keep growing in favour of Israel. Alot what stopped thanks to the media, the "terrorist" attacks, and a big effort by the UN. If it was 80 years ago, you bet they would have killed every palestinian they could find. Nowadays its "uncivilized" to whipe out a people.

>Blowing up civilian targets with the intent of killing as
>many civilians as possible and inflicting terror upon a
>population IS terrorism, whatever your take on the
>Israeli situation is.

Thank you again. The Israelits did/do that so many times.

> information proving that Iraqis sponsor terrorism:

Even Tony Blair address the people and apologized for the mixup with those fake papers publicly.

As Stated by Alchemy:And this is where you differ from a peace protester...

I'd like to add one point here.

It's very clear to anyone watching the news that the US armed forces are showing great restraint in strikes aginst Iraq so far, compared to what could be done.

This is at a very real risk to our armed forces personel. I hope the Iraqi armed forces dump Saddam now while the butchers bill is still low.

One of the real risks i see is having part of the operation reported in realtime on CNN. It's like waving a big bulleye in front of them. An from the same CNN, they have met no big resistance... supporting the fact that the Iraqian army is smaller than they thought, and poorly equipped. Wich is no big news. It will just make things faster and less prone to skirmishes between them.

See those peace protestors RIOTING in San Francisco and NY today? "Yeah there is a peacfull solution, lets go tear up San Francisco and disrupt traffic on NY bridges to prove it". :rolleyes:

Saddam gives a rats ass about peace. If anyone here thinks he does take the blind fold off. He is hell bent on taking over the countries around him and killing his own people to do it. Not to mention killing his own people and their families that oppose him.

He has been laughing his ass off at the world for giving him 12 years to think about how he is going to get revenge. If he was interested in peace he would have gave up his weapons that are banned. But no, biased inspectors have to drag it out for 12 years and can't find the broad side of a barn and HIDE some of their findings in their the reports like the pilotless drons that are designed to drop bio agents, which are banned by the UN BTW.

So we should just let murderous dictactors who support terrorism, commit acts of mass murder against his own citizens, violate UN resolutions, attack neighboring countries without cause, harass the world, enslave his people, oppress his people, MURDER his people...stay in power?

I just cannot understand why anyone would be opposed of this war. When you anti Iraq war supporters read stuff like this:

Source: http://www.msnbc.com/news/885222.asp?0cv=KA01

Even if he isn't an imminate threat to the USA he is certainly an imminate threat to the people of the country he is running. The people of Iraq are threatened to follow him or they and their families will be executed. Examples of that above in the quote.

Would you rather innocent people die in a war that will liberate them (for a cause)

or

rather they die for Saddams world domination personal goals (for nothing)?

Just do not get it....

Enough of the ANTI whinning BS. The war is on, support the troops, bitch later!
http://www.customcooledpc.com/usflag2.gif

The fact that idiots flock to a particular opinion does not make that opinion wrong, nor does it make the intelligent folk holding that opinion less intelligent.

The fact the war has begun does not make arguments against it invalid. I hope everyone here fully supports our troops in the sense they hope for their safety and do not attempt acts of civil disobedience or otherwise that puts our troops in direct harm (it seems here that most people hope that this action, now begun, will be completed quickly with minimal Iraqui and American casualties, which is a hope I hold as well). I do not expect nor want people to support this war only because it has begun.

To paraphrase, it is "My country, right or wrong. When wrong, to be put right, when right, to be kept that way." Not "When wrong, to be right anyway because we are the USA."

Those who support actions of the USA because it is the USA are as foolish as those who detract against the USA because it is the USA.

Let's have patriotism, not fanaticism.

Alchemy

Give it up. "lets promote peace by causing conflict". Whatever, hypocricy is bliss eh?.

Nor arguments for it invalid, whichare far and away topple argument against it. I see you nicely side stepped my questions above with BS. Answer those questions and then lets hear some more ANTI war BS!

Oil someone says? BS!!!

"If it's only for oil, answer this one question. Why did we not get involved in Venezuela when they had all their political problems just a few months ago? They are our 4th largst oil supplier behind Saudi, Mexico and Canada. They currently produce just under 3 million barrels per day and expect that to more than double in the next few years to 7 million. A lot of oil experts believe that Venezuela's oil reserves that have yet to be tapped contain more oil than almost ANY middle eastern country and more than the majority combined? We are not going into Iraq for the oil, there are too many other countries that use it's oil than the US and I think it would destroy any remnents of respect we have in the middle east.

According to a 2001 oil production report by the IEA, Venezuela produces 2.9 million barrels per day, 59% coming from 10 'giant' category oil fields that are expected to last over 25+ years. Iraq produces 2.5 million, 96% of that from only 5 giant fields, meaning they are tapping their reserves quickly. Also, The only countries outproducing Venezuela in the middle east are Saudi and Iran, with 8.0 million and 3.6 million respectively. The rest of the middle east OPEC members account for a total of 4.5 million barrels per day, 90% being UAE and Kuwait, both whom have very lucrative contracts with the US already. The US itself produces 11.4 million barrels a day, which is more than 3.5 million barrels more than Saudi, the number 2 oil producer. So with Us having 11.4 million from North American production, and deals with Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, ASIA and Latin America and the Former Soviet States which all combined equate to over 30 millon barrels a day we have access to, why would we care for 2.5 million that Iraq would supply us? That's a drop in the bucket! With Venezuals expected to shortly be the third largest oil producer behind the US and Saudi, why did we not help ensure a more US friendly non-government run oil company would result from the stirke and political turnoil there if US' sole agenda is oil?"

I frequent a few message boards, and yet this is the only one where I'm quite regularly accused of spreading or consisting of bullshit. It gets tiring.

Alchemy

Dont mind that Alchemy, i like to read your posts, even if i dont agree with them :).

>The fact that idiots flock to a particular opinion does not
>make that opinion wrong, nor does it make the
>intelligent folk holding that opinion less intelligent.

Totally agree. However destroying "stuff" with something like a riot is hardly the best way. Its like breaking an egg with a mallet.

>it seems here that most people hope that this action,
>now begun, will be completed quickly with minimal
>Iraqui and American casualties, which is a hope I hold
>as well

I have confidence that it will. The Iraqian army is nowhere near what it was 12 years ago, and well, we know how that ended up.


Oil thingy:

Personally i'm convinced it's a win win situation. Look good with the military and get the "mean dictator" out, "free" the people, and get a nice access to a very large oil reserve. Having already kuwait in the pocked just hadded the cherry on top. Both of them together make up for 20% of the world's reserve. Wich is not too shabby.

Venezuela has two problems. One, they followed the IMF (international monetary fund, i think it's like this) who , well... suck. Their main agenda is control over companies and resources, but they say "its helping others, they come to us, not we to them". See how venezuela is, or even several african countrys, or even ethiopia is doing. They followed the IMF and they're at the worse they could get. Specially Ethiopia.

This resulted in the IMF telling them , instead of balancing the costs and income, in cutting the deficit, that is, cutting the expenses, and in the end, selling almost all the public companies, and making some large loans, from very eager international banks. Those public companies are sold to... rich international companies... who's CEO's , along with the international bank owners make up the IMF board. Interesting isnt it? Unfortunatly true. It's like a legalized mafia. Unfortunatly most of the countrys that go to the IMF dont have much of a choise, or get money fast, or the govermnet crumbles for the lack of resources.

Most of third world countrys "ask" the IMF for advice due to "ease" those countrys doing what the IMF tells them have in getting large bank loans, essencial to the development of the countrys. But there's always a catch.

Problem two, they have alot of oil. So, because they need to get out of this financial crisis, they are willing to part from with pennys. You dont have to "go military" when you got them with their pants down. They're controlable like this. Besides, they love the US and the US's money ;). They'd probably be interested in american (and other) companies investing in the country. And reaching a compromize.

Besides, they have nothing to go on venezuela. North Korea has WMD, Iraq has saddam, Iran always supported attacks againts several countrys... etc. Well, if you think of it, you can say they're a bunch of drug lords. Damn, wait, thats Colombia...

Last but not least, the US are not interested in spending their reserve. It's like money in the bank that they are not willing to part. Keeping a steady level of oil favours the economy and it can be used for a future event. I can understand that.

Terra:

The Israelis are trying to take out paramilitary targets in their raids. The palestinians normally target civilians, even though they have ample military targets to hit. There is a big difference there. I fail to see how a reasonable person can't see that.

As far as "the Israelis are the agressors" goes: do you honestly think there would be fewer terrorist attacks from the palestinians if the Israelis just left them alone? We both know that they'd just be emboldened and increase the frequency of attacks. This has been proven before. Whenever the Israelis move back, the palestinians increase the frequency of their terrorist attacks.

That situation is about public opinion: the palestinians are trying to sway world opiinion to their cause by showing the "devastation" inflicted on them by the Israelis through out-of-context photos and horror stories, failing to mention the reason why those situations come about in the first place, like sick bastards lighting off bombs in schools. Should schoolchildren be targetted in military action EVER? Can you conceivably believe that's right for ANY reason? You don't see Israel doing it EVER even by ACCIDENT, though young children have been injured and killed during valid military raids to try to supress atrocities against their people. It also doesn't hurt that many of those injured kids were probably armed to the teeth and trying to kill some Jews before supper.

While harming children sucks by any side, it is more valid to shoot a kid with a gun than to shoot a kid with a pencil and paper, don't you think? Or is your burning antisemetism getting the better of you?

It is no excuse to say that the actions of the palestinians are justified because they don't have a regular army. Regardless, it is a crime to target civilian populations, especially considering the multitude of military targets that they could more easily target.

So?:shrug: Don't like it blunt and to the point? Go somewhere else that suger coats it eh? Not going to answer the questions?

TerraMex: I can't tell if you are arguning my oil point or agreeing? All the points you brought up can be argued either way.

Anyway there will be alot of disapointed whiners when the US does not take over the oil feilds and use them for ourselfs. Only people that think that have no clue what America is about. Not only would it be a political disaster but a public one. The people of the US would not stand for it. That is where our VOTING system comes in. ;) Something Iraqi people do not have the right of. It is Saddams way or you and your family is dead.

Anyways I made my points, non of which I will have time to debate for a few days.

Have a good weekend guys.

>The Israelis are trying to take out paramilitary targets
>in their raids. The palestinians normally target civilians,
>even though they have ample military targets to hit.
>There is a big difference there. I fail to see how a
>reasonable person can't see that.

You're failing to see a particular point. Most of what you consider a civilian area, isnt for them. It's a constant warzone, take the Gaza strip. There a inumerous inhabitants, but there are also a considerable amout of israelit military posts and skirmishes between both sides. So the difference is very blur. It boils down on how the news is treated.

And they do hit israelit military targets ... who then drop a few bombs on palestinian areas by helicopter, or drive the tanks through to the palestinian side... and redo from start. Its a no win situation for both sides.

>As far as "the Israelis are the agressors" goes: do you
>honestly think there would be fewer terrorist attacks
>from the palestinians if the Israelis just left them
>alone?

It's hard to tell.

You'll have to see the general picture. Part just wants to be left alone to keep living their lives without interference, a large part , but another part just will see the redrawal of israelit forces as an sign of weakness , and push more attacks. Others just want the isrealits out of their houses, another part want them all dead. So its a mix of feelings that keep this a explosive situation. Its not easy to predict a certain event.

>We both know that they'd just be emboldened and
>increase the frequency of attacks. This has been
>proven before. Whenever the Israelis move back, the
>palestinians increase the frequency of their terrorist
>attacks.

That's unsubstanciated (and the rest is above) But i'm going as far as to say "its wrong". I cant really tell that far, and i'm safe to assume that its not that linear.

>That situation is about public opinion: (...)

The public opinion is based alot in what they see on tv. They didnt see concentration camps for the captured palestinians , neither the mass executions by the military.

> Or is your burning antisemetism getting the better of
> you?

Nothing to do with that. It's a plain analysis of the events. You're seeing it as antisemitism.

If the palestinians invaded israel, i'd have the same rant about them.

>It is no excuse to say that the actions of the
>palestinians are justified because they don't have a
>regular army.

It's not what i said . It will happen as long they are an occupied people. They fight as they can. Its not about right or wrong (like i've said before). As long as they feel as an occupied people, opressed and hunted, they will strike back. Changing that has to pass in resolving the conflict between them, in order to the palestinians feel safer. And the israelits for that matter.

You keep forgeting an important point, they have a different culture from ours. This determines the methods of operations . You say its terrorism, they say its freedom fighters, and for them that's exactly what it is. Their cultural and religious beliefs have a major role in determining what is done , and how.

The Bottom line is , they'll keep at each others throats until the Old City problem is solved, the Israelits start following the UN's resolutions (wich they havent), and the palestininians form a stable goverment.

The first one is the real "pain", because neither wants to part with the old city due to the religious grounds. Personally i'd put it under the blue helmets, and keep it an international place, with neither have control over it.

>Regardless, it is a crime to target civilian populations,
>especially considering the multitude of military targets
>that they could more easily target.

Also true, and goes also for the Israelits.

Jaydee116 :

It disagrees with you in the point that you say the Iraqian oil is not that critical. It is, alot.

This can have several outcomes. The US takes over the oil, and uses to its own agenda. And that will have serious repercussions on the economy depending on whats done.

The US turns over the oil fields to the new Iraqian govermnent, but "convinces them" to give the exploration to american companies. Wich is not as bad, but since those power and technology scandals, im not very confident.

The US turns over the oil fields to an international , UN agreeded, taskforce , composed also by the US, and keeps things stable, and the oil flowing, with the current agreements with the companies that are exploring them. Probably boosts up confidence, and keeps the economy stable.

PS: I've just heard that the US military have taken over a large area of oil rigs. Wich is not a surprize, having fully operational oil rigs is on the agenda. And keeps the economy from sinking. Another oil crisis wont help anybody.

Just to make sure that this isn't taken out of context, the term is "secured", not "taken over". The latter proposes that the US has taken posession of an oilwell, where it has simply been secured for future use of the privisionary Iraqi government.

Your point still stands though; there is an extremely high value to reduce the fluctuations in the price of oil. Conquering Iraq would certainly have this effect.

I stand corrected. Secured it a more valid statement.

A friend of mine just emailed me this...

http://www.michaelmoore.com/

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...543296,00.html

I havent written them , so dont come after me ;) .

I love Michael Moore! Thanks for a great link!

Ahh thats nothing but dribble :/


Michael Moore! Is nothing more than a liberal democrated lap dog :p

Michael Moore is just an idiot. Stop over complicating the situation

I haven’t really followed Michael Moores more recent acts, but I did follow him a few years back and I can honestly say that I think he has done more good for the people of this country than all the money grubbing politicians in Washington ever have.

I can only assume that this statement is in jest. Even if he is only doing what he is doing to make money, or be a "democratic lapdog" he is doing a damn good job. This in my book would absolve him of idiocy

Well your book is werid then. Because take for example. Mike Tyson (sp?), well he has more money than you can imagine having, and I am sure people will agree he is an idiot. Being able to make money doesn't make you a non-idiot.

Your argument is a fallacy. Being a professional boxer is an entirely different profession. There are probably hundreds of professions where it’s possible to get rich being a moron. However politics, journalism, and film making isn’t one of them.

well everyone is talking about if it was right to attack and crap like that, but has anyone considered the US history in cases like this?

but what i still don’t understand is how can Americans elect a president that doesn’t even speak proper English!!! they actually have a book on his stupidity!!! called BUSHISMS :D,

and if anyone here listens to CNN or any other American news, its all American propaganda screened to tells us what they want us to hear, this is just an example
"Reports in the Dutch newspaper Trouw (2/21/00, 2/25/00) and France's Intelligence Newsletter (2/17/00) have revealed that several officers from the US Army's 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN's Atlanta headquarters last year, starting in the final days of the Kosovo War. "
some more examples
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/cnn-n06.shtml
http://www.counterpunch.org/

anyway, the US only acts to protect their interests!!! (in this case OIL!!) they've even been saying it all along, that they will take control of the oil and let American companies setup their, and thats the only thing they are protecting now, who cares about the looting going on, they are guarding the oil ministry and oil wells

" Iraq has the world’s second largest proven oil reserves. According to oil industry experts, new exploration will probably raise Iraq’s reserves to 2-300 billion barrels of high-grade crude, extraordinarily cheap to produce, leading to a gold-rush of profits for international oil firms in a post-Saddam setting. The four giant firms located in the US and the UK have been keen to get back into Iraq, from which they were excluded with the nationalization of 1972. They face companies from France, Russia, China, Japan and elsewhere, who already have major concessions. But in a post-war military governments, imposed by Washington, the US-UK companies expect to overcome their rivals and gain the most lucrative oil deals that will be worth hundreds of billions, even trillions of dollars in profits in the coming decades.

look at their past, the war between Russia and Afghanistan, the US gave the afgans all the weapons to fight russia not to mention trained them!!!

oh and does anyone know anything about what they did in Nicaragua?

how about fund a military government, by selling weapons to the middle east. and once that government was over thrown by the outraged people in Nicaragua, the US funded a militia cause they thought the new government was to Left wing. and after that they pretty much created their own political party puppet to bring on their style of government.

as for iraq, attacking was on their agenda a long before the UN inspectors went in, their ships and troops were their long before the inspectors finished. oh, and now that its over, did the us find any chemical weapons? NOOO, all cnn says its that, "this might have been used to create chemical weapons" but they still haven’t found any.

now im not one of those US is evil activists, i like the US, but their need to control everything they can is really annoying.
as for the UN to, they should have broken up that bureaucracy a long time ago, and its to bad that the US cant leave, because if they did, they would have to pay off alot of money they owe to the UN.

im not speaking out of personal views here, these are topics i actually wrote papers on, and i dont think anyone should go and state their point of view/comment unless they actually went out and researched whats being argued, those that are just repeating what they hear on the news are the ones that the propaganda is geared towards.

i actually had a really good link about the entire thing in Nicaragua, but surprise surprise, the FBI closed the site.

oh, and another good source of profit the US had used to fund their interests in brazil was that the CIA was involved in drug trafficking!!, once again link doesn't work anymore, this is from memory

but here is a good link i just found that talks about a few of these things http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fo.../Drugs_IA.html

One day you will learn its all propaganda. Inlcuding the crap your socialist country Canada is feeding you. And the only difference between USA crap TV is that ours is run by big business, which acts like an extra check and balance for the govt.


Ohh yeah and Michael Moore is still an idiot.

Sorry for the multiple post, tring to weed through his philibuster of a post.

It wasn't just about the WMD, we went in there and liberated people who had no quality of life other than keep quiet or disapear. Furthermore, more than likey Saddam had already distributed the weapons to terrorist organizations or other partner countries. Ohh yeah and don't forget the oil.

Ohh yeah and stop stroken the UN, we all know they are a useless body of bickering backstabing countries incapable of making any sound decissons. I mean just the other day they put cuba on their human rights commitee, I mean WTF? Backwords ass people I swear.

Ohh yeah, and stop mentioning CNN, j00 know CNN is more on your side so you are just slamming your own cause. Everyone knows CNN is the worst liberal crap running on the air. If you want to slam something try Fox News. They are pretty conservative. But then again you are a liberal yourself, socialist as well, so..... that just stregthens my belief that the leftist are disorganized.


unf unf

Out of curiosity what makes CNN "the worst liberal crap running on the air". I don't really watch tv so I was wondering where this comes from. I had always thought that as far as news goes the big players (CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC etc...) were fairly unbiased.

yeah all they are good for is giving out food aid :D

please, give me a break, thats just a front they put up for the stupid people that dont know whats going on, they dont give a sh*t about the people, thats why they didn't do anything about the looting, instead they protected the oil ministry building from being broken into. and as for the WMD, what weapons? they wouldn't even let the inspectors finish.

as for what canada is feeding us, your right its all the same crap, but for the truth, i dont really consult the TV or newspapers. its all about the internet and finding the truth through more then one source.

oh and no im not a socialist!!!
i think im more of a conservative

but im not letting that get into this discussion. im arguing against the US but i can just as easily turn it around and argue against iraq, im not a one sided person, but i dislike thier motives now and in in the past which is why im arguing against them.

oh one more example of how the US is only after thier own interests
not long ago, (maybe 2 years not sure exactly), isreal attacked palestine and where was the US then? they were saying lets have peace and shit like that. BUT if it was palestine that attacked isreal, the US would get involved 100% if isreal needed them!!!
hopefully everyone knows why, coughJEWISHcough,

OMG im turning into my dad:cry: this is exactly what i argue against with him :p

So your dad is an anti-semitic bigot , too?

I think someone's true colors really came to light here....:eek:

Why on Earth did someone reincarnate this cesspool? For chrissake, people: just let it die.

Fact #1: The US went in. We won. The war is over except for minor craziness here and there that fall more under "law and order" than combat situations. There's no point arguing whether or not we should go in because we did it.

Fact #2: Now that a source of mideast terror funding is gone, it will be easier to attempt a peaceful resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I doubt there will be as many wannabe terrorists willing to blow themselves up if they aren't getting paid obscene amounts of money to do it, and that is just one less thing to hold up the peace process. The results of this, however, are speculation: some people are just stupid.

Perhaps this will lead to better peace and stability in the region. That's my bet. It also helps that Arafat isn't the head of the Palestinians anymore ... that dude was nuts. Perhaps his replacement will see that peace is a better tool than terror to get what he wants for his people. If the conflict in Israel can be settled, I would suspect that many of the problems over there will greatly diminish.

At any rate, there is no point sowing hate and discontent here by bumping these ancient threads so lets just cut it out already. Lets move on to more important topics, like fast cars, fast computers, and fast women (boobies!).

no, he's polish lol, and no, he's not very political/prejudice, but with older polish/european people its always about the jewish, :D, but you cant really pass judgement on that unless you grew up in poland 50 years ago so dont call anyone a bigot unless you know what people have gone through. and no im not a bigot, i actually have jewish friends and the US helping isreal thing in my previous post is something they even joked about.

and just cause im saying this, it doesn't mean thats what my personal views are, which is what i said in my first post!!!

think of it as an essay, you argue for or against something, and like i said in the previous post as well, i could have argued for america instead. read before you pass judgement,

cause its fun to argue :D

:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:

Ohhh Politics and world affairs you just goda love it :D