Kennedy Says Case for Iraq War Was Fraud

[Seraphim]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030918/ap_on_go_co/kennedy_iraq_2


By STEVE LeBLANC, Associated Press Writer

BOSTON - The case for going to war against Iraq (news - web sites) was a fraud "made up in Texas" to give Republicans a political boost, Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) said Thursday.


In an interview with The Associated Press, Kennedy also said the Bush administration has failed to account for nearly half of the $4 billion the war is costing each month. He said he believes much of the unaccounted-for money is being used to bribe foreign leaders to send in troops.


He called the Bush administration's current Iraq policy "adrift."


The White House declined to comment Thursday.


The Massachusetts Democrat also expressed doubts about how serious a threat Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) posed to the United States in its battle against terrorism. He said administration officials relied on "distortion, misrepresentation, a selection of intelligence" to justify their case for war.


"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud," Kennedy said.


Kennedy said a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office (news - web sites) showed that only about $2.5 billion of the $4 billion being spent monthly on the war can be accounted for by the Bush administration.


"My belief is this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops," he said.


Of the $87 billion in new money requested by President Bush (news - web sites) for the war, Kennedy said the administration should be required to report back to the Congress to account for the spending.


"We want to support our troops because they didn't make the decision to go there ... but I don't think it should be open-ended. We ought to have a benchmark where the administration has to come back and give us a report," he added.


Kennedy said the focus on Iraq has drawn the nation's attention away from more direct threats, including al-Qaida, instability in Afghanistan (news - web sites) or the nuclear ambitions of North Korea (news - web sites).


"I think all of those pose a threat to the security of the people of Massachusetts much more than the threat from Iraq," Kennedy said. "Terror has been put on the sidelines for the last 12 months."

[Trigger]

What a douchebag.
The only threat is the one posed by Kennedy to any loose slices of cheesecake. He's failed to account for the nearly 4 billion slices he's shoved down his gullet in the last 20 years...the fat bastard. :slap:

[Vance]

And he's a stereotypical douchebag, at that.

[txajas]

What a douchebag.
The only threat is the one posed by Kennedy to any loose slices of cheesecake. He's failed to account for the nearly 4 billion slices he's shoved down his gullet in the last 20 years...the fat bastard. :slap:

Besides personal insults, I guess you have nothing inteligent to say to counter his points: almost 2 billion dollars a week are going unaccounted for. Maybe you feel very strongly about cheese cake, I however tend to pay more attention to billions of dollars being scammed: Please let me know when they find those pesky weapons of mass destruction with 45 minute deployment capabilities. Remember that was the reason for the war, I don't know if you have forgotten it since your main focus seems to be the terror implications of cheesecake.

LOL....

[Deuterium]

He is a liar and a murderer(manslaughter). I'm sorry but before I will listen to him he must admit what a coward he was on that fateful night and the days that followed. Only in America can a person of his ilk rise to be a US Senator.

[JiJoMacLE45]

Teddy can kiss my Irish ass.

[Mortimer]

He's not the only one saying the case for war was fraud.......David Kelly suggested it, an Australian intelligence officer suggested it, numerous politicians from all over the world suggested it as well as the media. Hans Blix even suggested.

Before you guys start dismissing these claims look into it and look at the facts.

(i'm not saying this article is 'the facts' but its a good read.)
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/01/1059480556267.html



How the war was spun

By Mike Seccombe
August 2 2003

War and the myths to justify it are two constants of history. Julius Caesar "spun" a slaughter in Gaul by calling it a pacification. The Crusades were sold to the fervent masses as being a battle of faith, but began as a trade dispute. When the truth is morally complicated - as it tends to be in international relations generally and war in particular - fiction is often easier to handle.

Governments lie because it puts them on the front foot, makes them appear to be in control of the agenda. Messy realities must be simplified and sanitised lest they undermine the objective. And it was ever thus.

Still, modern technology has revolutionised things: warfare itself, of course, but also the means of finding out what really goes on in war. Vietnam is generally considered a watershed: the first television war, which the US lost not so much militarily as in public relations terms.

By the time of the Gulf War in 1991, we had real-time combat footage and the beginnings of the global tool of instant reportage and analysis, the internet. We also had military/government PR terminology that imbued weapons with human characteristics - "smart" bombs, which allegedly were considerate of civilians. And we had military propaganda pictures of these brainy, discriminating munitions falling down chimneys and lighting up Baghdad like the Fourth of July.

But it was September 11, 2001, that, as George W. Bush might say, changed the world. The attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon precipitated the international war on terrorism, a war unlike any before it. It came with no defined territorial goals nor ultimate military objective. Nor, most importantly for those governments committed to it, much action for long periods. And that posed a major problem. How do you persuade an outraged public that the war is progressing when there are few signs of it?

The answer, in a word, is "spin". Not spin as people usually think of it, like a press release or advertisement hyping the virtues of some product or government initiative, but spin as it has grown up in America over the past couple of decades, where giant firms and government combine to mould reality. To cite just one pertinent example, the Iraqi National Congress, which was marketed as the alternative government to Saddam Hussein's, was substantially the creation of the Rendon group, a PR organisation connected to the CIA and contracted to the Pentagon.

Such spin drove the war in Iraq from the beginning. International spin, in three-part harmonies, with George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard all singing from the same song sheet on the need to rid the world of the threat posed by Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

Their problem is that after the war no such weapons were unearthed. And, suddenly, three governments have seen the political capital they accrued melting away as they pay, in varying measures, the wages of spin. Across three continents, the allegations are mounting: of supposedly impartial bureaucracies politicised, intelligence material massaged and falsified, intelligence agencies cowed and corrupted, media manipulated and lied to.

The questions about exactly what they did are still being explored, but the question of why they did it is easy. Nothing unites a public behind its government like a clearly perceived external threat. John Howard had proved how easily a perception of external threat could be manufactured, when he sooled the SAS onto boat people rescued by the Tampa, and triumphed in the subsequent "border security" election. Bush went from being a laughing-stock President to a hero over September 11 and the Afghanistan war. While Blair had not experienced the political dividend of war, he had seen Margaret Thatcher's apparently terminal government live again, on the basis of a war over the ownership of some tiny, God-forsaken islands in the South Atlantic.

At the inconclusive end of the war in Afghanistan, there was a hiatus. The terrorist threat was still there, but it was nebulous. It had to be furnished with a field of combat and a rationale. Iraq was the obvious choice for many reasons, among them a nasty government, oil, weak defences and no allies. But the one agreed on, for what the US Deputy Defence Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, described as "bureaucratic convenience", was WMDs.

However, the really insidious weapons exposed by the Iraq war, say Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber in the title of their new book, are another kind of WMD: "Weapons of Mass Deception".

The book makes for a wild read. The authors are not Washington insiders but a couple of leftie activists with a sweeping conspiracy theory: that the Bush Administration harnessed public intelligence agencies, private "think tanks", White House staff, a huge PR machine, cynical media proprietors, opportunistic journalists and vast amounts of money to fabricate "evidence" supporting war on a country that might not even retain WMDs.

Just three months ago, at the time the authors finished writing, this would have sounded fringe flaky. Not now, though. The more you read of this detailed and comprehensively sourced book, the more compelling it gets. And the post-mortems being conducted in the US and Britain keep confirming more and more of their detail.

Adding an interesting aspect is the fact the pair make most of their living exposing the excesses of the PR industry in America. Thus their detail of the role of private PR firms is fascinating and sometimes quirky. Did you know that just three days after the twin towers fell, the PR giant Burson-Marsteller signed up to provide "issues counselling and crisis management" for the government of Saudi Arabia? Or that Osama bin Laden's wealthy family first tried to hire a PR consultant named Steven Goldstein (he knocked them back because he thought they were trading on his Jewishness) before settling on another firm to rehabilitate the image of the rest of the (rebadged) Binladin family? At times the book reads like Bill Bryson Does Advertising.

If you are looking for a comprehensive primer on the way the Iraq war was spun, this book is it. The trouble is, it ends at the American declaration of victory, before the congressional and parliamentary inquiries began turning up even more dirt. Thus there is no mention, to cite just one example, of the Office of Special Projects, set up by the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess the CIA.

Now it emerges that the Bush Administration gave the office access to CIA and other intelligence material, even though its staff were not intelligence officers. Instead, most were heavily ideological "consultants" - lawyers, congressional staff, members of right-wing think tanks - employed off-budget and therefore beyond the scrutiny of Congress. The office turned the relationship between "intelligence" agencies and government on its head. Traditionally, agencies give advice on the basis of the best possible intelligence, in order that governments can make informed decisions. In the case of the Office of Special Projects, the task was to find intelligence, whatever its source or quality, to fit a predetermined course of action: war. Then the office's job was to publicise it.

In reality, there was precious little new intelligence, as even Rumsfeld was forced to admit a couple of weeks back, when he told Congress: "The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit of weapons of mass murder. We acted because [after September 11] we saw the existing evidence in a new light ..."

You have to admire Rumsfeld's form. Even when he sounds like he's confessing, he's still spinning. The fact is the Bush foreign policy hawks had not seen anything in a "new light". They had wanted to make war on Iraq for more than a decade before the World Trade Centre attack. September 11 provided the pretext, and the post-Afghanistan hiatus added PR urgency.

Across the Atlantic, only three months before September 11, a government that lived in a perpetual state of PR urgency - Blair's - had just been re-elected. And there a second new book, The Wages of Spin, by Sir Bernard Ingham, serves as another tool for understanding how the Iraq issue spun out of control between the US and Britain and then around the world.

Ingham was no mean spin doctor himself, as Margaret Thatcher's combative mouthpiece, and his overbearing behaviour resulted in descriptions such as "a malevolent guerilla" (by a former Thatcher cabinet minister) and "a mound of poisoned suet" (by a writer in the Independent newspaper). But even given the number of pots calling kettles black in his attacks on the Blair spin machine, his book does a good job of tracing the way Britain was infected by a similar type of spin to that long practised in the US.

The American system of governance is both pervasively politicised - Ingham notes that every time a new president comes in, it results in the turnover of 7000 to 8000 posts - and highly transparent, compared with Britain's. Those twin features mean there has always been a lot of spin in the American system, but ultimately it usually gets exposed, or at least counterspun.

The British way of government, however, has always relied on a supposedly apolitical, if opaque, civil service giving unspun advice to government and staying out of partisan politics. (Australia had a similar system, until governments began politicising it, starting with Gough Whitlam in 1972 and culminating in John Howard's purge of the public service in 1996.)

But that changed in 1997, with the arrival of Blair and his chief spin doctor, Alistair Campbell. Suddenly everything was spun. Even the Queen's speech at the opening of Parliament, says Ingham, quoting the Guardian, "wasn't really a royal speech at all, but a party political broadcast". His book is replete with examples of the Blair/Campbell spin machine at work. For instance, within an hour of the first jet hitting the twin towers, an email had gone out: "It's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury."

Ingham's bete noir is Campbell, and the author must be kicking himself for not holding off publication a few months, now "Cynical Ali" is really in the gun for allegedly having "sexed up" British intelligence and contributed to the death of the British biological warfare expert David Kelly, whose suicide note to The New York Times cited "many dark actors playing games".

The Wages of Spin is not a book about the war, but it does a good job of showing why Blair's too-smart-by-half spinners supported war. Policy was never their strong point, marketing was. Having dispensed with "dogma, political principles and the baggage of belief", all Labour had to offer was pragmatism - which Ingham derides as "Clintonesque government by focus group" - and the appearance of purposeful activity.

In its first three years, the Blair Government set 8636 new "goals" in media releases. But pragmatism does not excite the electorate, no matter how much you spin it. At the 2001 election, about 40 per cent of potential voters didn't bother.

Opinion polls already showed the majority of people thought Blair relied too much on spin, but in response his team simply cast about for a new product to sell. One thing you can say for war is that it engages the populace, so Blair's people went for it. And, before you knew it, Campbell, nominally a press secretary, had supplanted the chairman of the British Joint Intelligence Committee during the final stages of compiling that dodgy dossier on Iraq's WMD.

Of the three governments involved, the British one has come out of this in the worst shape for several reasons. First, it was a Labour government, which meant its political opponents in the push to war were not on the other side, but within its own ranks. Second, the worst example of spin from the war - the claim based on forged documentation that Iraq had sought to buy African uranium for a nuclear weapons program - originated there and the fingerprints of the Prime Minister's office were all over it.

Third, in spite of Blair's efforts, the British civil service culture of impartiality and discretion lives, even if it took David Kelly's death to prove it. Fourth, and this is important, Britain enjoys a degree of media diversity lacking in the US and Australia.

Recent polls suggest about two-thirds of Britons think they were misled, and they resent it. Blair may never recover. In America, close to 40 per cent of people also think they were deliberately misled, but they appear not to resent it as much, so far at least. Maybe Americans have become used to similar deceptions, which are relatively common in the US. Or maybe they have greater faith, based on past experience of the much stronger checks and balances in the US system, that the inquiry process will get to the bottom of it. Public anger is possibly mitigated, too, by the fact that, so far, the President himself has not been directly implicated in making up lies, only in parroting them.

The risk for Bush is not so much the way he spun the war but the way he spun the peace that was to follow: the Iraqis would welcome their liberators and a new democracy would quickly become a beacon to the whole Middle East. But peace has been as elusive as the WMDs. Meanwhile, Americans keep dying in Iraq.

And the government that has emerged in the best shape? The Howard Government. According to a poll taken from July 18 to 20, 67 per cent of Australians think they were misled, and more than half of those think they were deliberately misled. Yet that belief has made no difference to the popularity of Howard and his Government. Are we so conditioned to deceit, after the children overboard affair?

Maybe that's part of it, but more likely it's down to the fact Howard was more cunning than his fellow leaders. As soon as the war was over, our modest troop commitment was out of there, without a single casualty. And, while Howard ran hard on the same "garbage grade" (to quote the former intelligence officer Andrew Wilkie) information about the uranium purchase, his excuse is that he was just reading the script handed to him by our allies. And, as with the children overboard affair, the Prime Minister is able to shelter behind his firewall of politicised bureaucrats and staff. No fewer than three agencies have admitted they knew of concerns about the accuracy of the information the Prime Minister used. Yet none of those doubts, according to the Government, was passed up the chain to Howard. He was the leader of the coalition of the willing to believe anything.

The suspicion is that the Prime Minister is being disingenuous. But it is far harder to prove improper intent through an act of omission than through an act of commission. Given the much weaker system of accountability in this country, the chances are we will never get to the bottom of it, or, if we do, it will be because of information turned up overseas, more likely in the US. But don't count on it.

The circumstances of this case are perhaps less important, though, in the scheme of things, than taking steps to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass deception. The fact people such as Rampton and Stauber, well out there on the left of politics, and Ingham, from way out on the right, are saying similar things, is significant, too. This is not a matter of ideology, but of ethics. The systemic corruption resulting from the new spin is just as serious in Britain or Australia as in the US. The tools of manipulation are as available to the Labor Government of NSW as to the Liberal Federal Government.

In this country, that means taking steps to reinforce the notion that governments and ministers are accountable for what is done in their name. And that means breaking down the firewall of political advisers whose most important job these days seems to be not telling politicians things it would be inconvenient for them to know.

[He219]

One word, Chappaquid****!


almost 2 billion dollars a week are going unaccounted for.
Unaccounted? Try running costs for the rehabilitation of a country that endured several decades of homicidal tyrannical rule. You don't just leave a situation like that in shambles. I wonder how Europe would have been for the past 58 years had we just left in '45. The US TAXPAYER along with COALITION PARTNERS are bearing the financial burden along with the death of soldiers for the benefit of the whole. Two Billion is some statistical measure. The action initself is incalculable.


Please let me know when they find those pesky weapons of mass destruction with 45 minute deployment capabilities.
I believe the 45 min part came from London. Even Saddam's implied threat of having WMD (as Blix now says) was taken as a credible threat at the time. Somehow I don't think you will be kissing our backsides even if WMDs are found. You will find something else to harp on other than admitting that SADDAM NEEDED TO BE REMOVED.

As for Kennedy, sounds like he's spewing pre-election propaganda...
:P

[Mortimer]

As for Kennedy, sounds like he's spewing pre-election propaganda...
:P

hehhehehe
propaganda...

[JiJoMacLE45]

Oh give me a f*cking break, the world is a better place w/o that man in power. And what happened to the bio/chem weapons the UN inspectors found that he was told to destroy and he never produced evidence that he had. They haven't been seen since. You think he just destroyed them and let that be that.

UN "Hey Saddam, can we see the evidence that you destroyed WMD?"
Saddam "No, no you can not."
UN "So how do we know for sure they are gone Saddam?"
Saddam "Trust me."

Call him a maniac, call him a butcher, whatever, the man knew how to push the buttons and play the game. He puts a couple 'elite' republican guard divisions on the Saudi border, we move forces into the region, tell him he has a week to back off, six days later the Iraqi troops fall back. He knew how far he could push it. He constantly pushed right to edge of the envelope and as soon as he was threatened with force, he'd back off. Every now and again he'd have to duck a few cruise missiles, but he still was in power. The man is a power freak who would have and had done everything within his power to stay in control. Proving that he had destroyed his WMD could have kept him in power. It certainly would have made President Bush's push for going after him and his regime a harder sell than it already was. Why didn't he do it? You don't have to be a genius to figure out that something is fishy.

Now these pussy-can't hack it-cry baby politician's wanna bitch that we are finding ourselves in a quagmire that this 'republican administration' got us into. Excuse me, but didn't you pussy-can't hack it-cry babies sign off on this war before it began. If you had reservations before hand, grow a pair, stand up and say something. That's why your a friggin politician, to make hard choices that you believe will benefit your nation, whether they are popular or not. Not to jump on or off the band wagon when it's convenient for your career.

And American imperialism. Don't even get me started!

[usa320]

Who gives a flying rats ass... The bottom line is that a terorrist supporting mass murderer who used torture and rape to get ahead in the world is no longer in control of a country, and the lives of thousands have undoubtably been saved. Thats the important part. The rest is just partisan politics.

[jdbjdb]

Sen. Edward Kennedy needs to crawl out from under that bootle of scotch, i don't see how his fat ass can fit

[Seoulstriker]

kuck fennedy.

[96B]

WMDs or not, the world is a much better place without Saddam in power. I once read that rebuilding a nation from thirty years of oppression is tough, but I am not so sure because some seem convinced it is easy *sarcasm*

After eight years of draft dodging Clintonian rule, the world is used to us kissing ass and doing what they want. Meanwhile despite the so called "eight years of peace" terrorists were training and planning to kill Americans and non Muslims abroad, regimes like good ole Saddam are mass murdering those that stand in his way while Uday has a hobby of mass rape and murder. Not to mention all the terrorist attacks against us abroad that Clinton didnt do **** about besides a few cruise missiles. The world is now seeing that we are still standing strong in this fight even after the daily attacks and bombings because in the end we are going to win this and Iraq will be a much better place because of it.

The way I see many people talk, I am almost convinced they want to see our soldiers killed and have the mission in Iraq a failure. Despite how many times America has saved asses and bailed nations out of trouble, there is still a disdain and hatred toward us. Much of it is indeed a resentment and jealousy of the nation in the #1 spot. I commonly use the analogy that America today is like a policeman. Many talk **** about him and dislike him, but when they themselves are in trouble they come crying for his help. Because it is his duty, despite the disrespect and treatment, he does it anyways because it is the right thing to do. Also, the hatred of America particularly from the Middle East is because of ignorance of their people caused by the typical Islamic fundamentalist regimes disrespecting their own peaceful religion and calling for jihad.

Pansy Democrats like Kennedy who can lick my middle class white ass are just mad that they dont have the balls to stand up to any terrorist or enemy of ours across the globe so they sit back and critique the war effort or attempt to run wars from 35,000 feet. Wake up, its a war, people die. You can have all the training and high tech equipment available, but it doesnt make you invulnerable. God bless our boys over there and may they come home as soon as business is taken care of.

[txajas]

LOL, it is just funny to see how no matter what excuses are give, you all find it totally OK to invade another country. I am sorry the US invaded Iraq because of those WMD's, OK? Not because Saddam was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why Rumsfeld was shaking his hand in the mid 80's I guess that makes Rumsfeld a grade -A hypocrite then.

Oh, but just follow on your wonderful leader.... I guess as long as your prez has no oral *** is OK, and it is OK if he sends hundreds of your soldiers to die on a phony war just to boost his numbers. So yeah Saddam was a terrible man, but other countries could say the same of the current US administration, does it give them the right to remove your president then? What about all those terrible men some of which are right now Allies of the united states, what is the "benchmark" for evil doerness then?

Oh, well... I assume the crap will hit the fan soon, it was funny to see your nervous responses. LOL, "Saddam was a bad man" Is that the best excuse you have left with since no WMDs have been found? Is that the reason why hundreds of US soldiers have been sacrificed, and why the US taxpayer will be left with the burden of this war for years to come?

"Pansy Democrats like Kennedy who can lick my middle class white ass are just mad that they dont have the balls to stand up to any terrorist or enemy of ours across the globe so they sit back and critique the war effort or attempt to run wars from 35,000 feet. Wake up, its a war, people die."

You are the one that needs to wake up, it was the Reaganites and Poopy Bush that told Osama all those neat tricks in Afghanistan, and it was the same cabal that were best buddies with Saddam during the 80's. You may call the dems pansies, but in a sane society some could call those previous administrations traitors. Oh, and you can laugh all you want about Clinton, last I checke repubs were crying out loud whenever he tried to go hard ass on other countries. Oh, and last I checked the guys who put the first bomb in the WTC were caught, Tim McVeigh was caught and fried, so did the guys in the Cole. And last I checked 9/11 happened almost 1 year into a Republican administration, so where is Osama, heck were is Saddam? Pretty tough crowd you guys have in charge.

"The way I see many people talk, I am almost convinced they want to see our soldiers killed and have the mission in Iraq a failure. Despite how many times America has saved asses and bailed nations out of trouble, there is still a disdain and hatred toward us."

Ignorant comments like those are part of the problem....

[Mortimer]

LOL, it is just funny to see how no matter what excuses are give, you all find it totally OK to invade another country. I am sorry the US invaded Iraq because of those WMD's, OK? Not because Saddam was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why Rumsfeld was shaking his hand in the mid 80's I guess that makes Rumsfeld a grade -A hypocrite then.

Oh, but just follow on your wonderful leader.... I guess as long as your prez has no oral *** is OK, and it is OK if he sends hundreds of your soldiers to die on a phony war just to boost his numbers. So yeah Saddam was a terrible man, but other countries could say the same of the current US administration, does it give them the right to remove your president then? What about all those terrible men some of which are right now Allies of the united states, what is the "benchmark" for evil doerness then?

Oh, well... I assume the crap will hit the fan soon, it was funny to see your nervous responses. LOL, "Saddam was a bad man" Is that the best excuse you have left with since no WMDs have been found? Is that the reason why hundreds of US soldiers have been sacrificed, and why the US taxpayer will be left with the burden of this war for years to come?

"Pansy Democrats like Kennedy who can lick my middle class white ass are just mad that they dont have the balls to stand up to any terrorist or enemy of ours across the globe so they sit back and critique the war effort or attempt to run wars from 35,000 feet. Wake up, its a war, people die."

You are the one that needs to wake up, it was the Reaganites and Poopy Bush that told Osama all those neat tricks in Afghanistan, and it was the same cabal that were best buddies with Saddam during the 80's. You may call the dems pansies, but in a sane society some could call those previous administrations traitors. Oh, and you can laugh all you want about Clinton, last I checke repubs were crying out loud whenever he tried to go hard ass on other countries. Oh, and last I checked the guys who put the first bomb in the WTC were caught, Tim McVeigh was caught and fried, so did the guys in the Cole. And last I checked 9/11 happened almost 1 year into a Republican administration, so where is Osama, heck were is Saddam? Pretty tough crowd you guys have in charge.

"The way I see many people talk, I am almost convinced they want to see our soldiers killed and have the mission in Iraq a failure. Despite how many times America has saved asses and bailed nations out of trouble, there is still a disdain and hatred toward us."

Ignorant comments like those are part of the problem....

ditto, glad to see some people who aren't retarded around.

And the Saddam badman 'come back' its stupid....sure SH is evil, sure he needed to be removed. But the motives behined the USG's actions are wrong, there are plenty of places where actions need to be taken against dictators, but we don't hear about it and the US doesn't do anything about it becuase there is no political or monetary advantage for them...simple.

Example....oh this is not to mention the oil profits the US is getting out of it.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/19/1063625189001.html

[Ratamacue]

So now that we don't share your opinion on an issue, we're retarded?

[Mortimer]

no, but if you think the Iraq war was legitimate, you are willing to forget bush lied to you, you endorse Bush and his henchman, you think the war on terror is legit etc etc THEN i think your retarded...sorry for being so arrogant....

oh and if you think 'corporate sponsorship' of congressmen is legit as well

[Zach R.]

I bet you fifty thousand fu*king dollars those WMDs are in Syria or Iran, or some other God forsaken place like that. I don't have fifty thousand dollars but if you take me up on that bet, I'd be living large. Oh yeah, that thing about the retardedness of the Republican party, umm, pardon but now I'm gonna have to cyber-kick yur ass.
&#()#@*@&%@@(%_!*((!)_@U!)&!$&!)!!!!!!
Wanna know someone who's really retarded? Robert Bird. I don't think it was wise to vote that crazy KKK freak into congress. Isn't it the dems who have been saying that the republicans are racist? Jesus Christ! Just look at this big heaping pile'o retardedness. Yes, mortimer, I'm talking to you and Robert Bird, and that other txjalas dude.
Besides, Kennedy has had his head too far up his ass all these years to even see a twinkle of light.

[JiJoMacLE45]

Before the flaming starts, I want everyone to hold off on the onslaught.

OK then Mortimer and txajas, you seem to disagree w/ the way things are going. So be it. You know I'm hearing a lot of critiques and nitpicking by the opponents of the current administration and the way they are handling their foreign policy. But I'm not hearing alternatives. I'm seeing the left pointing fingers but not offering solutions. So I'd like for you two to offer some up. You seem very unrelenting in your stances so I want to hear what you would do. Before you start to flame, this is an honest question. I want to know how you would handle things post 9/11. If you were the President, what steps would take, what would you do different.

And please, everyone, let these two respond w/o the flaming. I'm really curious to hear what they have to say.

[Ratamacue]

I agree. Let them answer, guys.

[Mortimer]

lol interesting question
but your assuming that S11 couldnt've have been 'avoided' by the USG....

Assuming S11 was totally beyond the control of the USG it's their foriegn policies in the middle east that sparked it, their 'americanisation' of the world, their global hypocracy, their 'prancing' around the planet without giving a flying **** for other countries, their corruption as in corporate companies playing a 'role' in government.... the US allowing corporate companies to gain a foothold in the progress of humans such as fossil fuels....

5% of the worlds population contributing to 35% of the world fossil fuel emmissions and not giving a stuff

a culture which allowes 11,000 firearms related deaths a year

a country that spends close to 300billion dollars on its military while it faces huge health and education problems at home.....

If i was president it would be a very neo socialist form of government, more focus on domestic issues not foreign.

[Mortimer]

a country which throws it weight around the UN like it owns it the US has virtually made the UN redundent.

namely the recent veto of an resolution to protect Arafat...while i won't get into it..its wrong and goes nowhere in promoting peace in the region.

And if i won thee presidency now? lol i couldn't becuase i'm not american but....i would:

pull out 90% of US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, 'review' the military presence in the middle east and the role America plays in it.

actually put some effort into the roadmap, install real governments in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Relieve foreign debt of 3rd world countries.
IMPEACH BUSH!! lol

[JiJoMacLE45]

Your not answering my question. This is what I want to know. Your sitting in the oval office on September 11th and someone tells you that hijacked airlines have just flown into the WTC and the Pentagon. Your country has been attacked. Regardless if it was justified or not, that's another issue. What do you do? How do you respond to that? You have a country on it's knees, realing from a blow more devastating than possibly any other event in the history of the nation. What do you do?

[Mortimer]

a more specific answer
i would reveal all investigations into S11 to the American public, prosecute the offenders and then work on real peace in the middle east

simple as that

[budanski]

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."


Yes, speaking of "fraud", Senator Kennedy wore a neck brace for only one day after the accident occurred -- when he appeared in court some 30 days after his car ended up in the surf. Not before the court appearance and not once afterwards. Are we to believe that he just suffered a neck injury that emerged on the day of his trial? Or was it all a "fraud"?

Teddy: "I fought hard to save Mary Jo --- it wasn't my fault she drowned. In fact the whole story was made up in Texas."

[JiJoMacLE45]

It's got to be a little bit more complicated than that. How do you conduct the investigation, how do you go after the people responsible, what measures do you take, what levels of force do you use? I'm not trying to berate you so don't take it that way. And out of curiosity, are you from the US?

[jdbjdb]

There would be no freedom if it weren't for The United States of America, No other country in the world gives more money then The United States of America, We are the only superpower in the world, therefor we are obligated to help those who are in need. My grandmothers brother is buried in France, he went there to free France, and now the French **** on him, if it were up to me, I would have him dug up and brought back to his country The United States of America.

[Mortimer]

The investigation would be done by some sought of team i don't know what you have in America but in Australia its called a Royal Commission.

The investigation would focus on:
where the terroists came from, how they got into the country, training, funding etc....this has been done i think.

Arrests would be made domestically or diplomatically resolved overseas..if a country failed to co-operate then i would send in 'specialist' teams to 'extrodite' the people in question, they would simply 'go missing' and turn up in the USA for some strange reason.

All terrorsits would be tried in the courts, not a military court.

All results of the investigation would be made public with nothing censored.

The commission would then submit reccomendations and i would act on them...not trample on the liberties of Americans by making such things as the patriot act.

There's nothing special about this...its how anyone would do it

there was no need to invade Afghanistan and Iraq...S11 was just a justifaction to invade sovereign nations and control their resources
in Afghanistan its the pipline in Iraq its the oil....

[Seiyuuki]

LOL, it is just funny to see how no matter what excuses are give, you all find it totally OK to invade another country. I am sorry the US invaded Iraq because of those WMD's, OK? Not because Saddam was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why Rumsfeld was shaking his hand in the mid 80's I guess that makes Rumsfeld a grade -A hypocrite then.

LOL, it is just funny to see how no matter what excuses are give, you all find it totally OK to invade another country. I am sorry the German invaded France because of those (various reasons), OK? Not because Hitler was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why France was one of Germany major trading partners in 1938-39 I guess that makes (whoever) a grade -A hypocrite then.

If you want to play the history game...how 'bout we go further and further back and talk about Spain quest in building an empire until they were prevented by the British. The Yanks are just following your footstep, is it really appropriate to criticize your successor? p-) p-) p-)


Oh, but just follow on your wonderful leader.... I guess as long as your prez has no oral *** is OK, and it is OK if he sends hundreds of your soldiers to die on a phony war just to boost his numbers. So yeah Saddam was a terrible man, but other countries could say the same of the current US administration, does it give them the right to remove your president then? What about all those terrible men some of which are right now Allies of the united states, what is the "benchmark" for evil doerness then?

I miss the memo, when was the last time that Bush have thousands of US citizens tortured, killed and raped. An American could say the same thing with regard to the French and Germans:

So yeah Bush was a terrible man, but other countries could say the same of the current French or German administration, does it give them the right to remove Chirac and Schröder then? What about all those terrible men some of which are right now Allies of France and Germany, what is the "benchmark" for evil doerness then?

For all the rhetorics on US aids to these "terrible men," maybe it would be wise if one consider researching the fact that the US isn't the only country on this world that provide aids to "terrible men," that bring up a repetition:

"Not because Saddam was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why France was one of Iraq arms dealers during the embargo I guess that makes Chirac a grade -A hypocrite then."

"Not because Saddam was such a bad man. And if he was, please could you explain me why Germans' engineers build many of Saddams' bunkers and other infrastructures I guess that makes Schröder a grade -A hypocrite then."


Oh, well... I assume the crap will hit the fan soon, it was funny to see your nervous responses. LOL, "Saddam was a bad man" Is that the best excuse you have left with since no WMDs have been found? Is that the reason why hundreds of US soldiers have been sacrificed, and why the US taxpayer will be left with the burden of this war for years to come?

Oh, well... I assume the crap will hit the fan soon, it was funny to see your nervous responses. LOL, "Where the WMD?" Is that the best excuse you have left with since you have no other substantiated reason? Is that the reason why hundreds of US soldiers have been sacrificed, and why the Spanish taxpayer will be never be left with the burden of this war for years to come?

I still don't get this anti-war rattling now considering the fact that the war HAD HAPPEN!!! Instead of the continuation in the bitching and whining about the war, perhaps it might do some good to offer productive suggestion on how to responsibly speed up the re-construction process. I find this support the troops, sorry for their sacrified, but be against the war harmfully contradictory. You're basically saying, "I was against the bombs being dropped, the bullets being fired and the tanks rolling in Iraq from the beginning, but I'm all in support for the pilots who fly the bombers that release all those bombs, the soldiers pulling the triggers shelling out all those bullets, the tank crews commandeering those tanks and the officers who sent them all into battle."


You are the one that needs to wake up, it was the Reaganites and Poopy Bush that told Osama all those neat tricks in Afghanistan, and it was the same cabal that were best buddies with Saddam during the 80's. You may call the dems pansies, but in a sane society some could call those previous administrations traitors. Oh, and you can laugh all you want about Clinton, last I checke repubs were crying out loud whenever he tried to go hard ass on other countries. Oh, and last I checked the guys who put the first bomb in the WTC were caught, Tim McVeigh was caught and fried, so did the guys in the Cole. And last I checked 9/11 happened almost 1 year into a Republican administration, so where is Osama, heck were is Saddam? Pretty tough crowd you guys have in charge.

Again with the history, there should be an emoticon for *sigh*. Last I checked, Clinton go "hard ass" in Kosovo without UN support (where was the anti-US rhetorics there?) and Afghanistan in the form of a few cruise missiles. The investigation and captured of the guy who put the first bomb in the WTC were made years before the Clinton administration, the credits are hardly wholly exclusive to his administration. Tell me, could any of the other 200 something other countries in this world do a better job at finding Osama or Saddam?


And the Saddam badman 'come back' its stupid....sure SH is evil, sure he needed to be removed. But the motives behined the USG's actions are wrong, there are plenty of places where actions need to be taken against dictators, but we don't hear about it and the US doesn't do anything about it becuase there is no political or monetary advantage for them...simple.

So, when the US become more involve, it is branded as "Imperialist," but when the US isn't, it is branded as "not doing enough."

Has the rest of the world become delusional? Among the entire world, like the US is the only country that act with regard to political or monetary advantage.

I'm sorry, I forget myself, the US is the "Great Satan" and the entire world is a perfert moral utopia.

[Seiyuuki]

Mortimer is an Australian, as such, hardly or if never live in the US. I doubt he has even a little understanding in the American's way of life. As such, being a foreigner, it is completely recommended that he criticize the US concerning all matter even domestic one and only he and other foreigners can dictate how all Americans should live their life.

[Seiyuuki]

Arrests would be made domestically or diplomatically resolved overseas..if a country failed to co-operate then i would send in 'specialist' teams to 'extrodite' the people in question, they would simply 'go missing' and turn up in the USA for some strange reason.

Yes, it would only a team of "specialists" to go into Afghanistan and "extradite" the people in question. After "extraditing" Osama or whoever is in question, that would leave how many terrorists left? Hundreds? Thousands? And they would all gladly put down their arms because their leader somehow mysteriously show up in a US's courtroom.

[JiJoMacLE45]

That's an awful lot of specialist teams to take out 10,000 Al-Qaeda Mortimer. How about Yemen or the Philippines or Colombia where we have sent people into the country to fight terrorism w/o a full scale invasion a-la Afghanistan or Iraq. That's right there are no resources to milk in those nations. We have more troops stationed full time in Germany, Japan, Korea, and Kuwait than Afghanistan. We have tied Saudi Arabians to the 9/11 attacks, if we wanted to invade a nation for it's natural resources, under the guise of the war on terrorism, why didn't we invade Saudi? The amount of oil available in Iraq pales in comparison to the petro on hand in Saudi. Your reaching for straws buddy. You know what you're absolutely right that oil plays a part in this situation, but let me ask you a question, name one resource more important than oil in the modern age, besides air and water.

[Mortimer]

i'm not saying anything about your way of life...and you think that your countries way of life as no influence whatsoever on that way Australians live their lives?

please, what part of the words 'americanisation of the world' did you fail to understand?....have you recently been outside the US and seen how other countries function?

[Ratamacue]

Morty, I've been to Australia. Spent 18 days there as part of "People-to-People," an org that sends American teenagers abroad. I spent 3 days living with an Australian family. And I must say, Australians are almost more American than Americans. See that as negative or positive, but we are very, VERY alike.

[Mortimer]

That's an awful lot of specialist teams to take out 10,000 Al-Qaeda Mortimer. How about Yemen or the Philippines or Colombia where we have sent people into the country to fight terrorism w/o a full scale invasion a-la Afghanistan or Iraq. That's right there are no resources to milk in those nations. We have more troops stationed full time in Germany, Japan, Korea, and Kuwait than Afghanistan. We have tied Saudi Arabians to the 9/11 attacks, if we wanted to invade a nation for it's natural resources, under the guise of the war on terrorism, why didn't we invade Saudi? The amount of oil available in Iraq pales in comparison to the petro on hand in Saudi. Your reaching for straws buddy. You know what you're absolutely right that oil plays a part in this situation, but let me ask you a question, name one resource more important than oil in the modern age, besides air and water.

10,000 Al-Qaeda members didn't participate in the S11 attacks....

Take the bali bombings for instance...they have successfully prosecuted and sentenced four of the suspects, the scale was much smaller but the outcome was appropriate and the same actions should have been taken in the US....there was no need to invade other countires, the people who were directly connected to the attacks should be the ones held repsonsible, not whole countires!

And who says the US isn't going to invade SA?

[Seiyuuki]

Assuming S11 was totally beyond the control of the USG it's their foriegn policies in the middle east that sparked it, their 'americanisation' of the world, their global hypocracy, their 'prancing' around the planet without giving a flying f*** for other countries, their corruption as in corporate companies playing a 'role' in government.... the US allowing corporate companies to gain a foothold in the progress of humans such as fossil fuels....

Of course, I forget, the perfert world with an imperfect America where it is only in the American's government does industrial lobbyists exist.


If i was president it would be a very neo socialist form of government, more focus on domestic issues not foreign.

Do I want a President with this kind of view to run the country in post-9-11?

[JiJoMacLE45]

And we pushed these ideas on the world. I wonder why every day Cubans drown trying to swim to Miami. I wonder why Haitians will take their chances floating into the Keys onboard a cardboard box, than spend another day in their country. Mexicans risk drowning, shootings, and heat related death to get over a wall. During the Cold War how many East Germans, Poles, Soviets, and other assorted East Bloc nationals defected to US? How many Americans defected to the other side? We ain't perfect, but name one country that does it better?

[Mortimer]

your not understanding what i am saying in the right context seiyuuki

[Mortimer]

And we pushed these ideas on the world. I wonder why every day Cubans drown trying to swim to Miami. I wonder why Haitians will take their chances floating into the Keys onboard a cardboard box, than spend another day in their country. Mexicans risk drowning, shootings, and heat related death to get over a wall. During the Cold War how many East Germans, Poles, Soviets, and other assorted East Bloc nationals defected to US? How many Americans defected to the other side? We ain't perfect, but name one country that does it better?

your assuming your country is the only one with immagration problems
and if it wasn't for the huge debt that their countries were in because of western countries then they wouldn't face such problems.

[Seiyuuki]

please, what part of the words 'americanisation of the world' did you fail to understand?....have you recently been outside the US and seen how other countries function?

I was born and raise for 9 years in Vietnam. Immigrated and have been a US citizen for the past 10 years. Every time away from school in the US, I split my time between families in Japan, Taiwan, Cambodia and Vietnam. As for "Americanisation of the World," I hope this help:


NOW to my sig
Its there becuase day after day i see see America EVERYWHERE! on TV on posters on my computer on my cloths on my food etc...i can choose not to use all these things but in this day and age thats basically impossible.

Denial of a globalized consumer culture accentuated through accension and adoption of American 'Pop' culture is hardly validation of your rhetoric.




Someone said its globalisation and they're right, while i do agree with some parts of it i do however resent the American dominance and exploitation of it i.e. 3rd world countries.

Globalism is an inherent affirmation of consumer-culture. To claim American expoitation of third world countries is a matter of personal speculation and conjecture. In 19th century England a populus transitioned from an agrarian society into an industrial workforce. Similar semblances of social injustice arose as people transitioned from their rural culture to one defined by urban textile manufacturing and heavy industry. Limited opportunities only amplifies dependence on industrial development. In current day India, Computer Science Engineers and Research Analysts work for a fraction of the pay their western counterparts earn, leading to an eventual free-marked based socio-economic reversal. Globalism is a double edged sword as consumer culture and earnings are 'checked' with the aspirations of a growing international workforce. To brand American Imperialism on this economic interdependence is a sure sign of narrow-mindedness.




I believe that that the only reason the US went into Iraq was for the oil and for the foot hold in the middle east

To think that Saddam's reign in Iraq was inconsequencial would be a foolish assertion. A 'foothold' was also established in Djibuti, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Just as the United States my benefit from direct Iraqi oil sales, it is also the Iraqi people that will benefit with increased production and fiscal independence without France or Russia acting as middlemen and Saddam syphoning enormous sums for weapons procurements and lavish palace building. The aforementioned economic interdependence applies to Iraq as wall the rest of the oil producing Middle Eastern nations who would find themselves as third world nations without the wealth offered through their oil resources.




American imperialism had been happening since 1945

An equally uneducated assertion. American Imperialism can be implied with the Spanish-American War and colonial gains through aquisitions in Guam, the Philipines, Cost Rica and Cuba. To claim that the prevailing ecomomic powerhouse the United States became with stimulus of the Second World War resulted in American Imperialism only reafirms your underachieving xenophobic trepidations.




What did the US get out of Iraq: 600 oil wells and 3 oil refineries, huge contruction contracts(mostly US) Australia and the UK were pushed out of any contracts even though they undertook in the war. The US wants to push Aus out of its wheat trade with Iraq as well.

The US doesn't own Iraq, it's peoples or it's resources but it has secured acces to those oil concessions. The Iraqis stand to reap the greater benefit from unimpeded oil sales to the west until the interdependency is broken through developing alternate energy technologies or global prospecting. The US is aslo financing those reconstruction contracts in the interm.




TV manipulates people into thinking they want things, food, cars, whatever. People are made to think that of you don't have the latest gear you are uncool, effecting their pysche and such, models who are supposed to look good make us have to fit into a template on how to look...ALL US inventions to sell their products.

People are responsible for their own actions and values. To blame the US as influencing consumer culture merely exhonerates an individual's responsibility to exercise fiscal and social discretion.




Hell what kind of a country has 11,000 firearm related deaths each year when the closest country behined it has like 700 max? A country where its a right to own a firearm, where movies and TV make it ok to shoot someone.

Relative statistics compared with a populus of 300 million people. The mass media certainly doesn't dictate personal values and responsibility. An individual chooses to be influenced or finds himself subject to indoctrination by the propaganda of the socialized state.

Well Mortimer...the "parrot" speak again.

[Mortimer]

you guys you need to think:
WHY is this happening?
why are people bombing us?
why are people trying to get into our country?

the answer is NOT because they hate freedom..thats for sure

[JiJoMacLE45]

Seiyuuki is exactly right, Mortimer. So what you've taken four AQ out of play. 9,996 more are waiting in line to die for their cause, and that cause happens to be killing us. That's right, us. You me, anyone who does not see eye to eye with their radical beliefs. You cannot rationalize with these people. You can only do one thing and that's expedite their journey to the promised land.

[Mortimer]

Seiyuuki is exactly right, Mortimer. So what you've taken four AQ out of play. 9,996 more are waiting in line to die for their cause, and that cause happens to be killing us. That's right, us. You me, anyone who does not see eye to eye with their radical beliefs. You cannot rationalize with these people. You can only do one thing and that's expedite their journey to the promised land.

Yes but WHY? why the fck are they bombing us?

i think the reason why is becasue they are sick of western countries ****ting on them...sick of living in poverty while rich americans and europeans and australians are driving mercedes benz running out of things to do so they make shows like punk'd, big brother etc....

[JiJoMacLE45]

Sure we need to answer those questions, but in the meantime we can not just sit on our hands and wait for them to make the next move. All of the idealogical thought is great in theory, but we live in a realistic world where there are people out there who want to kill us b/c we are us. And sorry to say it, but we ain't changing who us is.

[Mortimer]

Sure we need to answer those questions, but in the meantime we can not just sit on our hands and wait for them to make the next move. All of the idealogical thought is great in theory, but we live in a realistic world where there are people out there who want to kill us b/c we are us. And sorry to say it, but we ain't changing who us is.

i agree, but war is not the way

[Seiyuuki]

Or more like:

"I agree, but anything the US does is not the way."

[JiJoMacLE45]

So is it our job to straighten out the messes other countries make for themselves? Are we supposed to be the baby-sitters for the world b/c people from different ethnic or religious backgrounds can not get along? I was under the impression that was the job of the UN. Bang up job their doing too.

[Mortimer]

Or more like:

"I agree, but anything the US does is not the way."

its a bit more complicated then that....

[JiJoMacLE45]

War is not the way you say. Well tell that to the 90% of the world that uses violence to get their point across, nearly all of Africa, Asia, the middle east, parts of Europe. Great in theory, but it does not fly in the real world. In the real world, the guy with the guns has the microphone. Shouldn't be like that, but it is. It's not us changing the world, it's us adapting to the world around us. We tried the peace and love, let's be friends approach. It got us 3,000 graves.

[Mortimer]

So is it our job to straighten out the messes other countries make for themselves? Are we supposed to be the baby-sitters for the world b/c people from different ethnic or religious backgrounds can not get along? I was under the impression that was the job of the UN. Bang up job their doing too.


A start would be to relieve foreign debt of 3rd world countries....
The UN is very limited in its power as is international law, the problem is that if you give the UN more power you interfere with state sovereignty....where do you draw the line?

[Mortimer]

We tried the peace and love, let's be friends approach. It got us 3,000 graves.

when?......

[Mortimer]

and the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ, supported Saddam Hussein in the 70's and 80's....etc etc...

[Ratamacue]

Morty, have you ever gone and done something with good intention and fvcked it up? Did you go back and try to fix it? Or did you just leave it be?

[JiJoMacLE45]

I can recall a recent eight year stretch where our commander and chiefs idea of getting tough on terrorism was lobbing a few cruise missiles into an empty tent in northern Afghanistan and saying we will get the people who did this, while the Khobar Towers had it's front sheered off, two US embassies were leveled, the USS Cole had a hole blasted in its side, and the 9/11 attacks were being planned. The 'war' in Kosovo was fought from 20,000 feet, far too many mass graves after it should have been. We aborted the invasion of Haiti just hours before kickoff, we did nothing in Rwanda, we pulled our men out of Somalia before they had a chance to accompish anything substansive. Want me to keep going?

[JiJoMacLE45]

We were bankrolling Osama and Saddam b/c at the time they were part of the bigger picture. That bigger picture being the Soviets. When was the last time you met a Soviet? Now, like Ratamacue said, we cleaning up our messes.

[Mortimer]

yeah and doing it the wrong way...you think by killing all those AQ opratives you'll get rid of terrorism? you think by invading arab countries the arabs will embrace you? do you think that pissing off arabs is going to get them to like you..or do you think by bombing them into submission and beaking their will to live will stop their hatred towards you?

.........that's what the israelis are doing and is it working?

the only thing that is going to come out of this is more arabs who hate America, and more arabs who want to kill Americans......as well as people like me getting pissed off by Americas antics....funny but i'm not the ony one who shares this belief.....

The only way to get rid of terrorism is to pull out of the middle east unconditionally...absurd as it may sound the arabs want nothing less. thats the whole reason this mess started....because Osama was pissed that America sent troops into SA.....no much else..he even admitted not having a grudge agaisnst them before that

[96B]

Mortimer, your line of thinking is very similar to most of the liberals. You only target the specific individuals responsible. Well what good does that do if the ones that did it are vaporized amongst the rubble of the WTC? The whole point of the War on Terror is to PREVENT future attacks and not just bring justice to the ones who were responsible for the current attack. We can argue back and forth about if Clinton did anything in response to the attacks or not, but he did NOTHING about preventing future attacks that is for certain. Adding to JiJo's statements, GWB's resolve is a hundred times that of Clinton and instead of simply bombing them, he sent in our best and brightest to "smoke" out the terrorists from their caves and eliminate their source. Also, Bush was in office just under one year when the attacks happened, but he has since done more to protect and defend this country than in the whole eight years Clinton was in office.

Like I said before, while Clinton was kissing everybodys ass, all of this was being planned behind our backs. Thanks to Clinton he also gaves us the reputation of pulling out when we take losses such as what happened with Somalia. Speaking of that he denied TF Ranger of Spectre gunships and armored support which ultimately hindered their capabilities to effectively fight off the enemy and after the tragedy pulled all units out of the area but that is all another story. Liberals today are not good wartime leaders at all because they micro manage the military rather than letting the experts handle the task. The military respects Bush so much more than they did Clinton as well. People say, well he made the economy strong, well he was in office at the right time during an economic boom and the natural recession was already happening before he got out and had been long predicted but still some point the finger at Dubya, not to mention the effects 9-11 had on our nation.

I also ask that if America is such a bad "imperialist" nation and it is bad because everything is Americanized, why are so many wanting to live here? Although there are many beautiful places to visit on earth, no other place is better to live than America.

The fundamentalist hate America because we are the leader of the pack of the "infidels". They hate everyone that is not like them, Jews, Christians etc. Pulling out of the Middle East will only show them that we will do exactly as they want if they push us far enough, and they will still hate us.

[Mortimer]

"get our government to pull its big **** out of the sand of someone else's desert put it back in its pants and quit the hypocritical chants of freedom forever "

-Arni Defranco - Self Evident

[Mortimer]

Mortimer, your line of thinking is very similar to most of the liberals. You only target the specific individuals responsible. Well what good does that do if the ones that did it are vaporized amongst the rubble of the WTC? The whole point of the War on Terror is to PREVENT future attacks and not just bring justice to the ones who were responsible for the current attack. We can argue back and forth about if Clinton did anything in response to the attacks or not, but he did NOTHING about preventing future attacks that is for certain. Adding to JiJo's statements, GWB's resolve is a hundred times that of Clinton and instead of simply bombing them, he sent in our best and brightest to "smoke" out the terrorists from their caves and eliminate their source. Also, Bush was in office just under one year when the attacks happened, but he has since done more to protect and defend this country than in the whole eight years Clinton was in office.

Like I said before, while Clinton was kissing everybodys ass, all of this was being planned behind our backs. Thanks to Clinton he also gaves us the reputation of pulling out when we take losses such as what happened with Somalia. Speaking of that he denied TF Ranger of Spectre gunships and armored support which ultimately hindered their capabilities to effectively fight off the enemy and after the tragedy pulled all units out of the area but that is all another story. Liberals today are not good wartime leaders at all because they micro manage the military rather than letting the experts handle the task. The military respects Bush so much more than they did Clinton as well. People say, well he made the economy strong, well he was in office at the right time during an economic boom and the natural recession was already happening before he got out and had been long predicted but still some point the finger at Dubya, not to mention the effects 9-11 had on our nation.

I also ask that if America is such a bad "imperialist" nation and it is bad because everything is Americanized, why are so many wanting to live here? Although there are many beautiful places to visit on earth, no other place is better to live than America.

The fundamentalist hate America because we are the leader of the pack of the "infidels". They hate everyone that is not like them, Jews, Christians etc. Pulling out of the Middle East will only show them that we will do exactly as they want if they push us far enough, and they will still hate us.

I never said people didn't like American culture...there are aspects of it that i like as well.

Does it bother you that GWB has taken the biggest budget surpluse ever and turned it into the biggest budget deficit ever?

Does it bother you that 3million americans lost their job since GWB came to power?

does it bother you that you have to PAY to go to the doctor while i have been to te doctor 5 times this year and not paid a cent?

how long will it take to get rid of terror? we won't be around thats for sure

[Seiyuuki]

Does it bother you that GWB has taken the biggest budget surpluse ever and turned it into the biggest budget deficit ever?

See, the surplus and deficit thing is a whole different argument. The verdict is still out on which one is the necessary evil. In perfect financial world, there would be a balance budget without a surplus or a deficit. With a surplus, some department is getting screw or the money is not spent where it is suppose to be spent. A deficit is the government spending more than it have. With a surplus, I was somehow screw into giving more money to the government than they really need. With a deficit, I will somehow get screw into giving more money. Either way, I am somehow screw into giving more money to the government.


Does it bother you that 3million americans lost their job since GWB came to power?

GWB coming into power did not suddenly make 3 million Americans lose their jobs. The fall of the airline industries, pulling down the aerospace industries along with it (this I know for a fact because my uncle, a Boeing's machinist, got the pink-slip); the strike by port workers along the West Coast for more than a week (not sure if that happen on the East Coast) which cost the country about a billion a day in lost revenue; the decline of the stock market post 9-11...There are many many factors that come into play.


does it bother you that you have to PAY to go to the doctor while i have been to te doctor 5 times this year and not paid a cent?

You got me beat, I only been to the doctor 2 times this year, though I did finally get four wisdom teeth yank and I didn't have to paid a cent too.

[JiJoMacLE45]

Sorry about the absence, Miss Isabel just deposited the remnants of a tree on my POV.

Mortimor, it seems to me everytime the Palestinians and the Israelis stop fighting for a minute and a half, some Palestinian goes and blows himself up onboard a bus and they go back to fighting. If you were in Israel, what would you do? You're back against the ocean, a billion Arabs surrounding you who want you dead. Everyday it seems innocent civilians are being murdered via terrorist attacks. Israel offers up a chunk of land so big that it will reduce the size of their country by nearly half and the Palestinians say it is not good enough.

If terrorists were blowing themselves up on buses and in nightclubs in Sydney, do you think your government would just sit back and do nothing?

If you are reactive in a war on terrorism, you are going to lose and lose big. You have to act before they do or else you're the one burying your friends.

It was the US(& others) who came to the side of the muslims in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, now in Iraq.
How do you suppose the economies in countries like Bahrain and Qatar stay afloat? Ask some of the people who have been there. Talk to Beowulf, talk to Deterium, they served in Afghanistan and Iraq, ask them about the things that this country has done for the people in those nations. Something tells me no matter what we do, we are going to be hated out of principle, not for our actions, whatever they may be.

If we sit back and allow it happen, we only invite more attacks.

[txajas]

The alternative was clear: not go into Iraq. Jeez, is that so hard to comprehend? Again there is no question that Hussein was an evil ****, and the problem is that there are tons of evil ****s out there. What made him so different, besides the fact that he was such an evil **** sitting on top of a lot of oil?

If the prioirty was to get rid of Saddam, as it seems that is now the official excuse, then I am all for it... but you can do it much cheaper... send a bunch for pimping marine snipers and they can take care of business in 24 hours. And voila Saddam is no more, however spending 100+ billion dollars, send US personnel on harms way and have a lot of them killed, plus thousands of Iraquis dead... while Saddam is still at large, is only one thing: a **** up.

Now, the actions that the US carried are significant because for the first time, this country has attacked a country in a pre-entive way, and it turns out that the reasons for the attack are now bogus: Weapons of Mass Destruction. This is significant, and some of you do not seem to be able to comprehend, and just rub it off as "well the world is better off w/o Saddam" And that is a simplistic way of putting things and try to get off the actual issue. The fact that this country, the US of A, went ahead invaded another sovereign country and killed thousands for a reason that now is becoming more and more voided. That is the main problem I have with this war.

What I find more alarming is how people can now turn off their brains and utter things like "the WMDs are in Syria", so let me get this straight. You have a crazy **** like Saddam... that had very little regard for human life, his country is invaded and the Americans made it clear that the next bunker buster bomb had his name on it. And what does Saddam do? He hids the WMDs in Syria? I mean come on, if you are a crazy **** like Saddam what better time to unleash those weapons that before you sign your swan song. And this is the kind of thinking that just boggles my mind... so we are dealing with a loco murderer, who has WMDs that he wants to unleash on our asses, right? And what does he do when they come knocking for his ass: he hids them..... and I am sure this somehow makes sense to some of you.

[Mortimer]

yeah..and when it all comes down to it....where the **** are Saddam and Osama?

huh?

[Seiyuuki]

If the prioirty was to get rid of Saddam, as it seems that is now the official excuse, then I am all for it... but you can do it much cheaper... send a bunch for pimping marine snipers and they can take care of business in 24 hours. And voila Saddam is no more, however spending 100+ billion dollars, send US personnel on harms way and have a lot of them killed, plus thousands of Iraquis dead... while Saddam is still at large, is only one thing: a f*** up.

If you are going to object to the war and offer a solution...at least offer a SMART solution.

Yeah, real smart idea, take out Saddam and leave a power vacuum. With two sons vying for power, we're so sure they are going to share it peacefully...Even by a miracle, all three of them are successfully assassinated, that still leave the many more power-hungry Generals in the country. I'm sure throwing the country into a civil war is the last thing anybody want.

Assassination, that's an interesting subject. Every discussion involving American "Imperialism," it is brought up. Big bad USA mettling in some other countries' affairs, assassinating people here and there, shame on them. Now, when ask what is the alternative, you scream, "ASSASSINATION".


Now, the actions that the US carried are significant because for the first time, this country has attacked a country in a pre-entive way, and it turns out that the reasons for the attack are now bogus: Weapons of Mass Destruction. This is significant, and some of you do not seem to be able to comprehend, and just rub it off as "well the world is better off w/o Saddam" And that is a simplistic way of putting things and try to get off the actual issue. The fact that this country, the US of A, went ahead invaded another sovereign country and killed thousands for a reason that now is becoming more and more voided. That is the main problem I have with this war.

WMD are one of the REASONS


yeah..and when it all comes down to it....where the f*** are Saddam and Osama?

huh?

yeah..and when it all comes down to it....can Australia or Spain do any better in finding those two?

huh?

[Mortimer]

pfft thats a lame response and you know it

[steel bonnet]

Well this has been interesting hasn`t it.

l personally think it was the right call,the Liberation of Iraq.

As for reasons,well as people have TRIED to stress this time & time again,It`s not just WMDs that were the reasons.

As for the attacks on the US 9-11. l think a lot of countries would have actually dealt with it,in a very similar manner.If they had been the intended Target.

Though l`m guessing Mortimer is a Liberal(Left wing) kind of guy?
If that is the case,sorry all you other guys but with Left Wing thinkers,you CAN NEVER DO ANYTHING Right & they`ll NEVER LISTERN TO YOU.As there the one`s who are ALL RIGHT.

For instance,he said have an investigation if he were in the Oval office. So let`s stick our thumbs up our arses & wait for them do do it again. No Somebody Hits you,you hit them Back,TWICE as HARD.
Where Terrorism is concerned,there`s No talking ONLY ACTION & l do believe a MILITARY Court is the right place for the trials (After all there`s british Terrorists involved in this & they too should be dealt with in the same way & NO Political/Lawers dealings. A Terrorist is a Terrorist no matter there origin of Nation.
They harm Innocent people who cannot defend themselve,they pay the highest price for being COWARDS. After all you don`t see many Terrorists trying it on in Full combat. As they know to dress live civillians hampers Most Western World military policies (moreso if the Parasidic Press are around,lookig for there scoop).
There not HUMAN Beings for taking those sort of actions against Civillians & therefore don`t deserve any thoughts to being treat like human beings.

As for the Americanisation of the World,l didn`t think Democracy was called that. After all the Aussies have screamed long enough about Britain being there oppressors. Now it`s the Americans oppressing you??
Ahh l know it`s the EVERYONE elses Fault,though NOT mine syndrome.

Germany & France didn`t want the war,for......
A,fear of incrimination eveidence against them,once the war was over. (ie Support,training,Deals done in the shadows,etc).
B,That this would cause problems for the European take over by these two Nations,trying to get a more larger & aggressive stance towards the US (Corp,Industry,Financial,etc).

It was mentioned that the Middleeast aims there intentions at the US,due to there involvements in there region.
Well forgive me if l`m wrong,how come there`s not of that at Russia,they interferred in that region a lot & also "BACKED" several Nations too.
If ANY Nations deserves all the Flak from the MidEast,well that should fall on France & Britain. We`re the main force for carving up that whole area.

If it was truely down to the US taking over the MidEast,why then do so many Arabs live within the Western World & NOT There Own OPPRESSIVE NATIONS. Some have seen the light & realised there being kept back several centuries. These Arab nations fear this & thus made the US there Main enemy. So the Western world must bow down to there way of thinking,think NOT.

l personally think GWB has done the right thing & just hope he doesn`t bow down to pressure in the War on Terrorism.Though for it to work,Less Politics & more to the Military.

Ja
Steel Bonnet

[Saranof]

I mean, the people here who still think that the US invaded Iraq out of the kindness of thier hearts...
Since when has the us given A F**K about thw rest of the world? When they have economical intrests in the region, thats when!
And what does Iraq have? :roll:

[Seiyuuki]

I mean, the people here who still think that the US invaded Iraq out of the kindness of thier hearts...
Since when has the us given A F**K about thw rest of the world? When they have economical intrests in the region, thats when!
And what does Iraq have? :roll:

Since when has any government, any politicians given A **** about the rest of the world? When they have economical interests in the region, thats when!

The whole world is cynical.

[ibstolidude]

Regardless of your beliefs about the war...


and the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ, supported Saddam Hussein in the 70's and 80's....etc etc...

Only an uneducated bafoon would argue that "the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ" - history does not support that statement


and what the hell does your free health care have to do with GWB??
I guess your posts are not anti Bush or anti war but anti-america, you start out posting about the war and GWB then you end up on rants about unemployment, healthcare and other dribble.

The healthcare (and wellfare for that matter) in the US are a by product of the competetive free market that the country has developed...compare our GDP pc and thank you very much but I'd rather have my extra $10,000 dollars and choose my own health care plan...and keep a little less money headed the governments way.. - thanks all the same
But certainly I agree with you, if we had free health care we would not have war in Iraq????????????????????????????????????

BUt ofcourse this system created a 5.2% unemployment rate last years compared to what 4% for yours? I'll take my chances thanks the same.

[Deuterium]

and the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ, supported Saddam Hussein in the 70's and 80's....etc etc...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh yeah you're in the Know Mortimer, SO tell me what team were you on when you were training these guys, Red-52, Green 61? Or were you one of the Trojan teams???? Oh I'm sorry you don't know **** about that because you got all your facts from Google and lefty pubs and were not there when these events happened!!!


Mortimer lives in a dream world and has received all his facts from the X-Files. I can guarantee you that he has never done any real military operations, nor participated in any operations outside of his livingroom and computer, playing PS2 doesn't count. Luckily the world isn't made up of Mortimers, if it was we would all still be living in caves eating our own feces.
Mortimer, put down the mouse and do something with your life. Experience the real world. Experience the real facts of life. Go to a third world country for a year and see if you have the same opinions. I also expect that the first time Mortimer sees a ****** we will never here from him again!!!

[Trigger]

txajas wrote:

Besides personal insults, I guess you have nothing inteligent to say to counter his points
I realize I'm late returning to this discussion, but if Teddy Kennedy is going to offer up such humongous pieces of utter stupidity, then I'm simply going to reply with extreme sarcasm. He deserves nothing less. :fork:

[ibstolidude]

I mean, the people here who still think that the US invaded Iraq out of the kindness of thier hearts...
Since when has the us given A F**K about thw rest of the world? When they have economical intrests in the region, thats when!
And what does Iraq have? :roll:

What idiot would invade a country that holds NO strategic interest?

[Seiyuuki]

Besides personal insults, I guess you have nothing inteligent to say to counter his points

Let think real hard about his (Kennedy) point:


BOSTON - The case for going to war against Iraq (news - web sites) was a fraud "made up in Texas" to give Republicans a political boost, Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) said Thursday.


"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

[warchild1/27scout]

if you want to talk about wasting money and kennedy in the same discussion i got two freakin words. "THE BIG DIG". if you are reasonably intellegent the name ted kennedy will not be said again within a mile of the words fiscal responsibility or lies or a miserable failure. how do people even look at that horrendous murderous pig without doubling over and puking out thier ****in guts and just telling him to shut his gin drinkin pie hole. i thought i'd throw some real facts in this mellee. okay everybody on three lets all yell out "intellectual honesty"!

[He219]

mortimer wrote:

i think the reason why is becasue they are sick of western countries ****ting on them...sick of living in poverty while rich americans and europeans and australians are driving mercedes benz running out of things to do so they make shows like punk'd, big brother etc....
That sounds like the classic leave me alone, but I want your standard of living. Arabs become wealthy because they market an asset; Oil. Without that asset they would be nothing - but would still find a way to criticize erosion of tribal values while simultaneously desiring the amenities of the western world.



but war is not the way
Yet you promote Palestinians fighting Israeli occupation.



A start would be to relieve foreign debt of 3rd world countries....

Why are some Third World countries in debt in the first place? Ever hear of fiscal prudence? To grant debt relief is an open invitation to the 'welfare state'.



and the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ, supported Saddam Hussein in the 70's and 80's....etc etc...
You and GazB. The CIA funded the Mujahedeen fighting Soviets in the 80's. Mullah Omar and the Taliban rose to power in '94 on an extremist interpretation of Islam. Saddam indeed was a buffer to the Iranian Islamic militancy rising to power.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20030911/thumb.sge.ecm52.110903160814.photo00.default-384x262.jpg
Enlarge (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030911/241/58o83.html)
"Two Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK) militants man a checkpoint near the Iranian border. The US military denied reports that it was allowing the MEK to mount attacks from Iraq .(AFP/File/Roberto Schmidt) "

Those guys above consider themselves to be Mujahads, or holy warriors. Does that also make them Taliban? Ohh, there are many types of Mujahad factions and certainly not all affiliated with the United States.



yeah and doing it the wrong way...you think by killing all those AQ opratives you'll get rid of terrorism? you think by invading arab countries the arabs will embrace you? do you think that pissing off arabs is going to get them to like you..or do you think by bombing them into submission and beaking their will to live will stop their hatred towards you?
.........that's what the israelis are doing and is it working?

Killing the militants is a start. The latter part of your quote is directed toward Israel, I believe. What you fail to understand is that Arabic culture respects strength and authoritarianism as part of a greater tribal community. The Mongols permanently ended the Abbasid caliphate. The same must be done with Wahhabism.




The only way to get rid of terrorism is to pull out of the middle east unconditionally...absurd as it may sound the arabs want nothing less. thats the whole reason this mess started....because Osama was pissed that America sent troops into SA.....no much else..he even admitted not having a grudge agaisnst them before that
Well, we are out of Saudi Arabia and into Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Dubai and Djibouti. Seems like things went against his thinking. As for pulling out of the Middle East, are you referring to Israel once again?




I never said people didn't like American culture...there are aspects of it that i like as well.

Does it bother you that GWB has taken the biggest budget surpluse ever and turned it into the biggest budget deficit ever?

Does it bother you that 3million americans lost their job since GWB came to power?

does it bother you that you have to PAY to go to the doctor while i have been to te doctor 5 times this year and not paid a cent?

how long will it take to get rid of terror? we won't be around thats for sure
Typical socialist attitute. There is a price for your doctor, it's called Higher Taxes and that's how Socialized Welfare works. It drains incentive by fostering attitudes of ' I have not paid a cent' and encourages people to maximize their ability to draw from the system that eventually looses it's competitive edge. Who really ends up paying?

Production in the US actually increased while jobs decreased. That means the American Production is running more Efficiently, thus stimulating the economy as a whole. A chicken in every pot will not win in a competitive marketplace without sacrafice.

The budget surplus was based on revenue projections before market corrections of the 'technology bubble'. The beauty of the free market is that paper wealth does not translate to economic security. Diversification of assets and competitive productivity determines economic stability. Wars inherently inflate deficits.




And the Saddam badman 'come back' its stupid....sure SH is evil, sure he needed to be removed. But the motives behined the USG's actions are wrong, there are plenty of places where actions need to be taken against dictators, but we don't hear about it and the US doesn't do anything about it becuase there is no political or monetary advantage for them...simple.

Example....oh this is not to mention the oil profits the US is getting out of it.


Again you are arguing the motives. You said it yourself, SH needed to be removed.




Assuming S11 was totally beyond the control of the USG it's their foriegn policies in the middle east that sparked it, their 'americanisation' of the world, their global hypocracy, their 'prancing' around the planet without giving a flying f*** for other countries, their corruption as in corporate companies playing a 'role' in government.... the US allowing corporate companies to gain a foothold in the progress of humans such as fossil fuels....

5% of the worlds population contributing to 35% of the world fossil fuel emmissions and not giving a stuff

a culture which allowes 11,000 firearms related deaths a year

a country that spends close to 300billion dollars on its military while it faces huge health and education problems at home.....

If i was president it would be a very neo socialist form of government, more focus on domestic issues not foreign.
Once again, you are referencing US support for Israel and affairs in Palestine.

Environmental ramifications of hydrocarbon emissions certainly are not fully understood in the US and post-consumer waste is a travesty. As for firearm related deaths, enforcement of existing laws is seriously crippled with erosion of penalties for the criminal by a leftist movement that champions the criminals as a product of society in lieu of the victims themselves.

We do have problems at home, perhaps we should cease our foreign contributions and become isolationist?




your not understanding what i am saying in the right context

Your context is that an elite few are consolidating resources and wealth through manipulation of others and you point the finger at Jews, right?



You must agree in general that the truth is somewhere in the middle. Saddam needed to be removed. The pretext for regieme change was established 12 years ago. Saddam clearly used the WMD issue as a legitimate threat, regardless of their actual whereabouts, to promote consolidation of wealth and resources toward himself.



yeah..and when it all comes down to it....where the f*** are Saddam and Osama?
It took what, six years to catch Eric Rudolph, but eventually we'll get 'em.


And Kennedy, he is a hypocrite, Period.

[Seiyuuki]

Is the "Big Dig" done yet?

[JiJoMacLE45]

Damn He219, and to think I thought you were only good for pictures.

[warchild1/27scout]

rackem' he! woot

[Mortimer]

while you may hide behined your intellect He219 like last time your not really convincing me of anything. and you've taken what i have said out of context.


That sounds like the classic leave me alone, but I want your standard of living. Arabs become wealthy because they market an asset; Oil. Without that asset they would be nothing - but would still find a way to criticize erosion of tribal values while simultaneously desiring the amenities of the western world.

I have family that are currently working as ex patriots in SA in Jeddah, SA is a very strict muslim country and the clerics do hold some power. However western culture is seeping through in the form of alcohol etc...
The majority of the population don't mind this it's the clerics and mutawwa who have the problem and like christian society the religion will slowly be phased out.

You have to distinguish between the arabic people and the clerics as i think many people take a very generalised view.


Yet you promote Palestinians fighting Israeli occupation.

incorrect i think they are as bad as each other and other countries(namely the UK and even Australia) need to get in there and help out. not the US because they are biased towards the israelis.


Why are some Third World countries in debt in the first place? Ever hear of fiscal prudence? To grant debt relief is an open invitation to the 'welfare state'.

Thats a very generalised view and borders on the edge of arrogance....You can honestly, cross your heart tell me the western world played no part in keeping the developing world where it is? and that they hold no responsibility in helping them out of debt?

so while the western world provides 'aid' to these countries...thats not welfare? its welfare with an obligation they will never furfil...and thats exactly what the developed world wants, there are not enough resources for the whole world to have the standard of living we experience today.

No i am specifically saying the Taliban.

The Taliban were the creation of Pakistan military and intelligence establishment, with the active support of the CIA. They were recruited from students in the Islamic schools (madrassas) in Pakistan, and financed, armed and trained by the Pakistan intelligence services - the ISI. Mullah Omar emerged as the main leader of the Taliban with the help of the ISI in 1994 and, in very short period, with Pakistani aid, the Taliban took control of the major cities of Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden played a key role in the war of the Islamic counter-revolutionaries against the against the Stalinist regime in Kabul, and he received the enthusiastic support of America's CIA. The ex-CIA director William Casey commented on this support for bin Laden in his writings. But many a dog has turned around and bitten his master. After the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan, bin Laden turned his attention to America instead, organising the bombing of US embassies in East Africa.


Well, we are out of Saudi Arabia and into Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Dubai and Djibouti. Seems like things went against his thinking. As for pulling out of the Middle East, are you referring to Israel once again?

yes and its only makign things worse, think about it from an Arabs point of view....what would you do if a jihad started and came to your doorstep? what would you do if islamic religion was forced upon you or aspcets of it filtered into your culture? tell me? and i think that is the questions all Americans should ask themselves.

no israel is another matter.


US economy
i won't pretend to be an expert on the US economy, my statements were based on statistics that i had seen. As for health my point was that the US spends to much on its..'extroverted' foreign policy in the form of military and wars etc...in australia for the next couple of years at least we have free health care and i was just comparing the fact that Australia and the US are very similar but because of government policy have a few differences.

yes its a socialist attitude, i know i'd prefer my free healthcare then spending that money on guns or anothe persons country. honestly i thin the US should go back to its isolationalist government policy of the pre 1940's. while that raises questions about ww2 i don't think the US was under any 'obligation' to become the worlds police force. which is when this all basically started.


Again you are arguing the motives. You said it yourself, SH needed to be removed.
yes i've always argued the motives, yes SH needed to be removed, NO the US didn't go about it the right way.


We do have problems at home, perhaps we should cease our foreign contributions and become isolationist?

bingo, and you know what? if that happened i think arabs vs the west thing would go away.


regardless of their actual whereabouts
well you see the thing is....the USG said iraq had them....went to great lengths to produce 'evidence' that they existed, did not allow UN inspectors to finish their jobs...iraq DIDN't use WMD's on US troops...they fired scuds....but no chem warheads???? people have put to much faith into the USG and are willing to forget about it.


It took what, six years to catch Eric Rudolph, but eventually we'll get 'em.

your telling me a crack CIA team couldn't have done the job sooner? that there were no insiders at all who could have given the whereabouts of SH or OBL?? that the US had to invade soveriegn nations to do this? that the US has no 'agenda' in the matter?


I appreciate your contribution HE219, thank you.

[Mortimer]

and the CIA basically founded the Taliban and AQ, supported Saddam Hussein in the 70's and 80's....etc etc...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh yeah you're in the Know Mortimer, SO tell me what team were you on when you were training these guys, Red-52, Green 61? Or were you one of the Trojan teams???? Oh I'm sorry you don't know **** about that because you got all your facts from Google and lefty pubs and were not there when these events happened!!!


Mortimer lives in a dream world and has received all his facts from the X-Files. I can guarantee you that he has never done any real military operations, nor participated in any operations outside of his livingroom and computer, playing PS2 doesn't count. Luckily the world isn't made up of Mortimers, if it was we would all still be living in caves eating our own feces.
Mortimer, put down the mouse and do something with your life. Experience the real world. Experience the real facts of life. Go to a third world country for a year and see if you have the same opinions. I also expect that the first time Mortimer sees a ****** we will never here from him again!!!

personal insults aside, which is all you can muster...i DO have military experience....two years infact...do you? no i havn't been on operations but thats because the ADF doesn't usually have many military commitments outside its shores...however i see myself deployed within 24months.....

where did you get all your information from? people have to get it from somewhere.....

[JiJoMacLE45]

Mortimer, judging from your last statement about a 'crack CIA team' you obviously are out of touch. Things are a bit more complicated than COL Troutman retrieving SSG Rambo from a Thai missionary, giving him a picture of bin Laden or Hussein, and saying "Kill".

[JiJoMacLE45]

Morty, Deuterium is probably the last guy you want to go challenging creds with. He's been there, done that, and got the t-shirt if you catch my drift.

[Mortimer]

what about the moussad? they managed to assinate a number of people in different countries after black september.

thats just one example....

as for Deuterium forgive me for dissmissing someone who can only make personal attacks about my maturity, knowing people who also have been there done that i'd expect a bit more maturity from him.

[Deuterium]

your telling me a crack CIA team couldn't have done the job sooner? that there were no insiders at all who could have given the whereabouts of SH or OBL?? that the US had to invade soveriegn nations to do this? that the US has no 'agenda' in the matter?


Read into it what you will. BTW thanks to your socialist upbringing you can't tell or spell the difference between your and you're!!! Give me a market economy any day over a wait in line, oh I'm sorry the government doesn't feel that you need that treatment, medical system. Of course, I am an American. This all makes sense to me. You should save us all from your diatribes because YOU JUST DON"T GET IT!!!! We are Americans and we make no apologies. Go beat your fists on some other wall. Why the hell don't you go to some liberal website and spout your rhetoric there? I wouldn't think of going to greenpeace.org and try to convince them to change their ill informed, know-it-all, condescending, better-than-thou attitudes. Why do you waste our time on a website devoted to Military Pictures?????

[JiJoMacLE45]

Your comparing single people, who did their parts, then faded into the shadows against leaders of state and large, multi-faceted multi-national organizations.

[Mortimer]

well it started when people started this posts?

oh yeah lets have a forum where people post stuff and everyone just agrees not matter what they think.....i didn't start this thread....i disagreed with what people were saying and had a discussion with a number of people...forgive me for having my own beliefs.

and if you knew me by now you should know i don't give a **** about my grammer or spelling, it'd be better if i did, and nitpicking at it just shows "you're" stalling on a valid argument.

[Mortimer]

Your comparing single people, who did their parts, then faded into the shadows against leaders of state and large, multi-faceted multi-national organizations.

I fail to see how these two circumstances are different from this aspect

terrorists killed israelis
terrorists killed Americans

The mossuad went after and eliminated those responsible.

The USG invaded two sovereign countries, killed thousands of people and still havn't charged more then 2 people directly for the S11 attacks.

The USG have killed easily 10,000 people since S11.......10,000 children, old people, women.....sure 3000 americans died but is this justified?

[JiJoMacLE45]

Okay, I'll simplify it. It would be a tad bit easier for you garden variety crack wet boys to get to me and kill me than say a head of state. I do not have a phalanx of well trained bodyguards, I do not live in a highly secure compound or an underground bunker. The terrorists involved in the Munich massacre did their part and then faded back into their civie life working at restaurants, business, living a 'normal' life. Saddam Hussein's life is a constant field trip. He's never in the same place twice, he has body doubles, few around him know where or what he is going to do.

[Seiyuuki]

what about the moussad? they managed to assinate a number of people in different countries after black september.

thats just one example....

as for Deuterium forgive me for dissmissing someone who can only make personal attacks about my maturity, knowing people who also have been there done that i'd expect a bit more maturity from him.

Sure...and Israel is just a perfect peaceful utopia today with no terrorist attack what so ever.



Hmmm...personal attacks and maturity, I remember something about that:


And budanski you Texas hick, yobbo, white trash piece of **** cowboy you just proved my point lol living in the same state as GWB i bet you'd cop it in the ass from him and his dad.


lol how does a vietnamese get by living in a hick state such as texas?


sorry i got your age wrong but you shouldn't have said anything becuase now your a 40 yo dumbass

Thanks for making me think i give americans to much credit, you just proved my generalisations of Texans as well.

And don't worry my self esteem is fine, tell me do you like being a fish salesman... ?
but i know your answer is yes, how could your typical "American" attitude let you admit to me you didn't?


yeah lol i wish i was a Texan/American......... soooo baadd that way i can be really arrogant and think that i am soo damn good while f*** over the rest of the world!

Yeah and then i can make stupid posts like Merik and usa320 and Vance! you guys are sooo smart i envy you.

And then i can go to Texas and let GWB f*** me in the ass like Budanksi and seiyuuki the sexy parrot!


Well 9/11! that was a bit of a surprise... but what a stroke of luck...sure 2500 people died but hey if its good for the economy its good for the US of A(after a sharp slide mind you but that was predictable). lets go and consolidate our resources...but now we have an excuse..Operation Enduring Freedom the BIGGEST con of all time.




oh yeah lets have a forum where people post stuff and everyone just agrees not matter what they think.....i didn't start this thread....i disagreed with what people were saying and had a discussion with a number of people...forgive me for having my own beliefs.

You mean the "retarded" are allow to have their own beliefs?


ditto, glad to see some people who aren't retarded around.


no, but if you think the Iraq war was legitimate, you are willing to forget bush lied to you, you endorse Bush and his henchman, you think the war on terror is legit etc etc THEN i think your retarded...sorry for being so arrogant....

[JiJoMacLE45]

I agree w/ you there, the death of innocent people is horrible, but it happens.

If you want to eliminate terrorism, which is what we're trying to do here, you do not just take out one person, you are talking about taking out entire infrastructures and sometimes those infrastructures are governments, sometimes they are interconnected cells of everyday people across the world. If you eliminate one terrorist from one cell, you've done nothing more than eliminate one terrorist from one cell. Even if you kill or capture Osama bin Laden, you do not eliminate Al-Qaeda. Terrorist organizations are like business, just b/c you can the CEO, doesn't mean the company folds. If there is a single Al-Qaeda terrorist remaining than the threat of an attack is still there. Not only are you fighting a person, you are fighting an ideal.

We could retract ourselves in an isolationist cell and we are still going to be seen as the great satan. It's been said before, we are in a catch-22. If we do not act, we are seen as cruel and heartless for being unwilling to get involved. If we do step in then we are stepping over our boundaries and playing the part of the world's policeman.

So you have to ask the question, do you merely sit back and let the contempt and the hate festor and build, or do you get proactive and go after those enemies before they are able to get to you. These radicals are always going to hate us. No amount of appeasement on our parts is going to change that. That is what you left wingers need to understand. You are just as much as target as I am because you were born who you were. Not because of any act you've committed.

[Mortimer]

so in the six years it will supposedly take to capture SH and OBL they way the US is going about it now, a covert operation could not have done the same job at a fraction of the cost?

its been two years now since S11, OBL has been wanted for at least 6, SH for about 12 the US hasn't had any opportunities in that time?.....the USG with all its technology, weaponry and expertise couldn've have done anything yet? i find it hard to believe.

[Mortimer]

well Seiyuuki thats ancient history but if i remember correctly it was Budanski that started that flame war with his one page flame on how much of a piece of **** i was.....after that i made those comments...in hindsight i should not have lowered myself to the same level, but that was a pretty big flame and it offended me a great deal....

and wow, i contradicted myself...people do it all the time....i must be a hypocryte.

[Deuterium]

its been two years now since S11, OBL has been wanted for at least 6, SH for about 12 the US hasn't had any opportunities in that time?.....the USG with all its technology, weaponry and expertise couldn've have done anything yet? i find it hard to believe.


Mortimer, all kidding and personal swipes aside. What Special Ops unit have you been in? What operations have you been on? What do you know about the attempts to hunt down and kill saddam or OBL? From what basis are you asking the question? Have you ever hunted down someone and killed them? What do have to base this all on? I'm willing to guess that you have done none of the above. I've never been to med school. It seems silly to me with all our technology that we haven't cured the simple cold. Why is that?

[Seiyuuki]

http://www.noisedesignlab.com/gag/photos/bush.jpg

No word, nothing, nada, just a single picture.



FIRST SHOT OF THE WAR


http://www.noisedesignlab.com/gag/photos/bush.jpg

lol idiots
GWB and Budanski btw

Yeah...those words are just full on non-confrontational...And the rest is...like you said, "ancient history."

Of course it's perfectly fine for you to preach your own line of "knowing people who also have been there done that i'd expect a bit more maturity from him" and you can excuse your own "maturity" as "ancient history."

I guess it's perfectly fine to criticize others' viewpoint even when one own viewpoint is inconsistent and contradictory.

[Mortimer]

its been two years now since S11, OBL has been wanted for at least 6, SH for about 12 the US hasn't had any opportunities in that time?.....the USG with all its technology, weaponry and expertise couldn've have done anything yet? i find it hard to believe.


Mortimer, all kidding and personal swipes aside. What Special Ops unit have you been in? What operations have you been on? What do you know about the attempts to hunt down and kill saddam or OBL? From what basis are you asking the question? Have you ever hunted down someone and killed them? What do have to base this all on? I'm willing to guess that you have done none of the above. I've never been to med school. It seems silly to me with all our technology that we haven't cured the simple cold. Why is that?

no special ops training.... sorry

my basis is common sense...and examples.....my common sense tells me it would not be immpossible to assinate SH or OBL esp with the aid of the USG.

ANOTHER example...remember about 12months ago the CIA assasniated a top AQ official in the Yemen desert with a hellfire?

god...want me to tell you guys how to do it?

send in teams of about 2-3 men into afghanistan, they use intel and local knowledge to find a rough area where OBL would be...they patrol that place until they see him, he has to come out sometime....

if there's one thing i know and thats OP's i have sat in those things for untold amounts of time waiting for nothing.....

it can be done

Seiyuuki you can't tell me you've never called someone an idiot out of nowhere...

[Seiyuuki]

my basis is common sense...and examples.....my common sense tells me it would not be immpossible to assinate SH or OBL esp with the aid of the USG.


If you are going to object to the war and offer a solution...at least offer a SMART solution.

Yeah, real smart idea, take out Saddam and leave a power vacuum. With two sons vying for power, we're so sure they are going to share it peacefully...Even by a miracle, all three of them are successfully assassinated, that still leave the many more power-hungry Generals in the country. I'm sure throwing the country into a civil war is the last thing anybody want.

Assassination, that's an interesting subject. Every discussion involving American "Imperialism," it is brought up. Big bad USA mettling in some other countries' affairs, assassinating people here and there, shame on them. Now, when ask what is the alternative, you scream, "ASSASSINATION".

Yeah, assassinating OBL will not make him a martyr and will not further inflame those Islamics' extremists and 100% prevent further future terrorist attack.

[Deuterium]

Mortimer,

So in your little paranoid world what does all this mean then since Saddam and UBL are still alive (although I contend the wacky-shack got Saddam)? That the US is not currently trying to kill them? That the US is incompetent? Do you believe the story about bombing Saddam on the first night or is that bull****? Come on, I can't wait for the correct explanation!!! You must have a theory.

[Mortimer]

my basis is common sense...and examples.....my common sense tells me it would not be immpossible to assinate SH or OBL esp with the aid of the USG.


If you are going to object to the war and offer a solution...at least offer a SMART solution.

Yeah, real smart idea, take out Saddam and leave a power vacuum. With two sons vying for power, we're so sure they are going to share it peacefully...Even by a miracle, all three of them are successfully assassinated, that still leave the many more power-hungry Generals in the country. I'm sure throwing the country into a civil war is the last thing anybody want.

Assassination, that's an interesting subject. Every discussion involving American "Imperialism," it is brought up. Big bad USA mettling in some other countries' affairs, assassinating people here and there, shame on them. Now, when ask what is the alternative, you scream, "ASSASSINATION".

Yeah, assassinating OBL will not make him a martyr and will not further inflame those Islamics' extremists and 100% prevent further future terrorist attack.

ok i've got a better idea
lets kill every ****ing muslim in the entire world, EVERY single one...put them into death camps , slowly rid the world of their filth........

thats the only way short of unconditionally pulling out of the middle east that will solve this problem.

[Mortimer]

ok guy let me get back to my reply to HE219


think about it from an Arabs point of view....what would you do if a jihad started and came to your doorstep? what would you do if islamic religion was forced upon you or aspcets of it filtered into your culture? tell me? and i think that is the questions all Americans should ask themselves.


you would do the EXACT same things the arabs are doing...

[Seiyuuki]

ok i've got a better idea
lets kill every f*** muslim in the entire world, EVERY single one...put them into death camps , slowly rid the world of their filth........

thats the only way short of unconditionally pulling out of the middle east that will solve this problem.

Your second idea isn't any better than your first.

[Deuterium]

ok i've got a better idea
lets kill every f*** muslim in the entire world, EVERY single one...put them into death camps , slowly rid the world of their filth........

thats the only way short of unconditionally pulling out of the middle east that will solve this problem.


And that friends is the difference between an American and a non-American. We believe in freedom and liberty to all, we even go to foreign countries and die for others to be free. All this while guys like Mortimer preach genocide and Monday morning quarter-back the issue from the comfort of his living room.

[ibstolidude]

Deuterium - I know you're a big boy, but having read this dribble before.....FYI

- often around here arguing with some - it's like one of my compatriot's favorite sayings
kinda like "punching myself in the face."
either way,
you spend a whole lot of energy,
you'll pass out before you get any good results
you just walk away sore and frustrated,
and it is about the same waste of time.

so swing away,
atleast someone still has the energy to argue against the secret squirrel, black helicopter, GWB had JFK assasignated, your right is your wrong and your left is right, bde (twice removed on my mother's side, well actually I never actually was in, but I knew a guy, well I met him in bar once, well he as I recall did weigh about 425; BUT he had cammo pants on & I saw BHD twice.)

when the beer wears off and the stupid comments still linger, try a little "chock block PT", put your head under the tire and have a buddy let the weight of the vehicle rest nicely, suddenly it takes the retarded out that so many people here try and put in your head.

and good luck w/ the execution of "Operation Mortimer Knows Best" - the 3 man assasignation of OBL.
Hey, Beowulf, Jesus if only we had thought of asking the Jawas where he was in the first place everyone could have been home early or never had to go.. damn why didn't you 5th group guys think about asking the locals, then the rest of us could have stayed home :roll: ???
Mortimer, with your help maybe we can get SWC to revamp all SOF doctrine...after all what do those guys know they are just the experts w/ the experience..

punch,
punch,
ahh... all better

[Deuterium]

ibstolidude,

Thanks for the wake-up call. I needed that. You are so right brotha.

[mocking_loudly]

Christ you guys can be a bunch of fairy puffs. :lol:

Morty always has some interesting if not controversial points and Deuterium has some logic that I agree with despite his flag waving antics.

Now it's a bloody sunny day and the beach is looking fine......what am I doing here?.

[Mortimer]

ok guy let me get back to my reply to HE219


think about it from an Arabs point of view....what would you do if a jihad started and came to your doorstep? what would you do if islamic religion was forced upon you or aspcets of it filtered into your culture? tell me? and i think that is the questions all Americans should ask themselves.


you would do the EXACT same things the arabs are doing...

hello?

[ibstolidude]

if you would be so kind, please just pay me back next time...

I far too often fall into it..
it makes one want to chew their own fist when someone posts "the it really was/is", especially when they 'just' know..after all they have some websites to back them up...

and noone would ever post something that was less factual based and more opinion based to support their agenda..

you can beat somedudes with a board and put'em in traction, w/their clav sticking out, their wrist at a 90d to their hand, their teeth in your shoe and the'll be telling the EMT on the way to ER how they got the better of you.

..ofcourse I'd take my licks and just ambush 'em a couple of nights later when they are pissing at the urinal, but I am an underhanded jerk.


--like the line from an older western comedy, "Support you Local Sheriff" -
Jack Elam - "you hit him from behind."
James Garner - " yeaah, just as hard as I could."

[He219]

mortimer wrote:

I have family that are currently working as ex patriots in SA in Jeddah, SA is a very strict muslim country and the clerics do hold some power. However western culture is seeping through in the form of alcohol etc...
I have been to Jeddah. The problem is not western culture 'seeping' into Saudi Arabia, but the rise of militant Wahhabism (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism). That is the goal of terrorists like OBL and his al-Qa'ida organization whose ultimate goal is to establish a Wahhabi Caliphate across the entire Islamic world by working with allied Islamic extremist groups to overthrow regimes it deems non-Wahhabi Islamist. It sees western governments, particularly the US Government, as interfering in the affairs of Islamic nations in the interests of western corporations and Jews.


You can honestly, cross your heart tell me the western world played no part in keeping the developing world where it is? and that they hold no responsibility in helping them out of debt?

Hardly a justification to explain why they do not have a standard of living as we do. And where does your obligation to the developing world relate with the following statement?

honestly i thin the US should go back to its isolationalist government policy of the pre 1940's
;)


I'm glad you corrected you statement in that the CIA funded the Mujahads and not the Taliban, who were funded by the ISI. OBL on the otherhand was never a Taliban, but allied himself with it's Deobandi form of Islam through Mullah Omar's ulema and suppression of ijtihad.



yes and its only makign things worse, think about it from an Arabs point of view....what would you do if a jihad started and came to your doorstep? what would you do if islamic religion was forced upon you or aspcets of it filtered into your culture? tell me? and i think that is the questions all Americans should ask themselves.

Was that a clever attempt at subsituting western culture for islamic religion in your text? We are not exercizing Jihad, but are taking the extremist's terror war to their own doorstep. 'Filtering aspects' into another culture can only be done by others adopting elements of yours. Christianity or Judaism is not being force upon them as the Isamists wish to portray, but it is the erosion of tribal culture that they despise by their own people's embracing of Western ways.


yes its a socialist attitude, i know i'd prefer my free healthcare then spending that money on guns or anothe persons country
Again, do you REALLY believe your healthcare is FREE? Who do you think pays for your doctor? You certainly won't think it's American foreign aid, UNICEF or the WMF. Nothing comes from nothing.



honestly i thin the US should go back to its isolationalist government policy of the pre 1940's....bingo, and you know what? if that happened i think arabs vs the west thing would go away.
How so?

no israel is another matter.
;)


did not allow UN inspectors to finish their jobs...iraq DIDN't use WMD's on US troops...they fired scuds....but no chem warheads????
Saddam kicked the Inspectors out, remember? It was the immediate threat of invasion that prompted him to allow Inspectors in at all. The UN was never allowed to finish their job, that was Saddam's intent. What (http://www.iraqwatch.org/perspectives/csis-mideast-wmd-2001.pdf) are we to believe the Al-Samoud 2 missile was intended to carry beyond the 150km UN limit, a costly and extravagant deception?



your telling me a crack CIA team couldn't have done the job sooner? that there were no insiders at all who could have given the whereabouts of SH or OBL?? that the US had to invade soveriegn nations to do this? that the US has no 'agenda' in the matter?

Imagine, Eric Rudolph was hunted by two governments for over six years in the United States. Where were all those US insiders who could have given Rudolph's whereabouts? Saddam and OBL have been prepared to ensure their self-preservation, at least for now....


so in the six years it will supposedly take to capture SH and OBL they way the US is going about it now, a covert operation could not have done the same job at a fraction of the cost?
Not with the Taliban in power in Afghanistan....


the USG with all its technology, weaponry and expertise couldn've have done anything yet? i find it hard to believe.
I hear President Clinton's Tomahawk strike missed OBL by minutes.


my common sense tells me it would not be immpossible to assinate SH or OBL esp with the aid of the USG.

Nothing is impossible, but leaving the mechanism of the terrorist structure in place with the Taliban makes your suggestion impractical.


if there's one thing i know and thats OP's i have sat in those things for untold amounts of time waiting for nothing.....
When, during your two-year stint? ;)

[Zach R.]

I've gotta movie that's coming on in a few minutes, so i don't have time to discuss politics.
Mortimer, you suck. :fork: :bash:

[Zach R.]

I think he ran away.

[GazB]

And that friends is the difference between an American and a non-American. We believe in freedom and liberty to all, we even go to foreign countries and die for others to be free.


:lol:
And where pray tell are the legions of American dead on the shores of Guantanamo Bay with wire cutters to free those caged there?
I mean of course the US jumped into WWII with both feet and lead from the front... two years after its allies declared war.
But no, the US was there to save the poor people of Europe... or did they just join when Hitler declared war on the US after the Japanese attacked American soil and America declared war on Japan?

[Mortimer]

And that friends is the difference between an American and a non-American. We believe in freedom and liberty to all, we even go to foreign countries and die for others to be free.


:lol:
And where pray tell are the legions of American dead on the shores of Guantanamo Bay with wire cutters to free those caged there?
I mean of course the US jumped into WWII with both feet and lead from the front... two years after its allies declared war.
But no, the US was there to save the poor people of Europe... or did they just join when Hitler declared war on the US after the Japanese attacked American soil and America declared war on Japan?

but ...no ...how can that be true?!! americans are freedom fighters, heros of the world...not cop-outs :lol:

[Ratamacue]

The United States public at the time was isolationist. The government wanted to get involved, just think of all the aid given to Russia, the UK, and China.

And just remember, had the US not entered the war, Europe was fecked.

[Seiyuuki]

And just remember, had the US not entered the war, Europe was fecked.

So would Australia and New Zealand.

Maybe the Yanks shouldn't have wasted their merchant fleet and all those tonnage of supplies shipped to Great Britain in the years preclude to US entry into the war.

[JiJoMacLE45]

The same people who say would should be isolationists now are complaining when we made an attempt at isolation. MAKE UP YOUR F*CKING MIND! You can't have it both ways! Or does it only work when it is conveniant for you to bash US foreign policy?

[He219]

GazB Wrote:

But no, the US was there to save the poor people of Europe... or did they just join when Hitler declared war on the US after the Japanese attacked American soil and America declared war on Japan?

The United States was exercizing an isolationalist posture when developing events in Europe eventually dragged the United States back into war in the first place. Some revisionist historians even believe FDR made every effort to engage the United States into war on the Allies' behalf. Interestingly enough, it was Joseph P. Kennedy that disagreed with Roosevelt's determination to involve the USA in the Second World War.

Yet it was the Central Powers (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Powers) that took advantage of escalating events that started in Sarajevo on June 28th, 1914, to consolidate their nationalistic ambitions. The United States entered the Great War on the Allies' behalf and eventually brokered a ceasefire through an Armistice (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwone/mirror07_02.shtml) on November 11th, 1918, based on Germany's acceptance of Wilson's Fourteen Points Peace (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWarmistice.htm) proposal.

However, Lloyd George of Britain and even more so France, under Clemenceau, demanded harsh reparations and terms for a surrender that sought to extract economic gain from the war, inturn deliniating the primary quest for war in the first place. Germany was in no position to counter, given the collapse of it's government through domestic instability, and was forced to sign the Treaty of Versaille, arguably considered to be the start of hostilities for WWII. Meanwhile, the United States returned to it's isolationist posture from before the war.

[A$$MAN]

And that friends is the difference between an American and a non-American. We believe in freedom and liberty to all, we even go to foreign countries and die for others to be free.


:lol:
And where pray tell are the legions of American dead on the shores of Guantanamo Bay with wire cutters to free those caged there?
I mean of course the US jumped into WWII with both feet and lead from the front... two years after its allies declared war.
But no, the US was there to save the poor people of Europe... or did they just join when Hitler declared war on the US after the Japanese attacked American soil and America declared war on Japan?

To quote someone on this board, "MORE ON".

I've read your line of thinking gaz. So, on one hand you denounce the US as an empire, such as the IRAQI FREEDOM, and then do a Slick Willy ,WAFFLE, and then denounce us when we were isolationist nation. Hitler was appeased by all of EUROPE, just as Saddam was appeased by Old Europe.
Also, Hitler was a EUROPEAN problem. And it was the leading EUROPEANS, the French and British, attempting to solve this issue.
(There's so much history here you should atleast attempt to do some research.)
Read about FDR and the Lend Lease Act and another Kennedy--JFK's Why England Slept
that should put you up to speed with the rest of the world. And you never know, it might be on a pop quiz someday.

[army cadet_ngcsu]

Kennedy is a piece of ****

[spier]

To quote someone on this board, "MORE ON".

I've read your line of thinking gaz. So, on one hand you denounce the US as an empire, such as the IRAQI FREEDOM, and then do a Slick Willy ,WAFFLE, and then denounce us when we were isolationist nation. Hitler was appeased by all of EUROPE, just as Saddam was appeased by Old Europe.
Also, Hitler was a EUROPEAN problem. And it was the leading EUROPEANS, the French and British, attempting to solve this issue.
(There's so much history here you should atleast attempt to do some research.)
Read about FDR and the Lend Lease Act and another Kennedy--JFK's Why England Slept
that should put you up to speed with the rest of the world. And you never know, it might be on a pop quiz someday."isolationist " every time I hear that about America it cracks me up. Read a ****ing book!

[A$$MAN]

Why don't you fuc*ing elaborate that sentence. Can't quite understand. What's so hard about understanding before the Second World War the US was a rabid ISOLATIONIST nation. Hence the bitter oppositition to the draft during FDR early terms. Particularly to avoid Hitler's war machine--Why don't you read a ****in* book.

"MORE ON" (I love that quote, who was that?)