| Author | Message | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1170 Registered: 6-2001 |
Craig, et al: The whole middle eastern problem started in the 1880s, when the Zionist movement started. When the eastern europeans started a progrom (sp) against the jews in the 1870, Jewish people decided that maybe they could assimulate, and needed their own homeland. At that time, some of the jewish people decided (I'm sure that someone before them had the same thoughts, but this was the semi offical start). From that point one, Jewish people started buying land in the Middle East. Because property was usually owned by absentee landlords, they could do that, and those people who lived on the land could be forced to move. That caused friction with the people living there at that time. This process continued on until the 1920, with Jewish people acquiring more and more land. For a while that process was relatively peaceful, but about the 20s it become adversarial, and people started dying. When the Nazis came into power in Germany in the 30s, the process accelerated, and it became more and more violent. War broke out, and the population in the middle east supported the axis powers. We all know that they lost. After the war, the issue of a jewish homeland came before the UN, and Israeli, after much debate, argument, etc. was formed. Immediately after the peace keepers withdrew, in 1946, the Arab nations attacked the new jewish state. Both sides did terrible things to each other, and civilians on the wrong side of the border, drivng jews from arab controlled areas, and arabs from jewish controlled areas. An armistist was done in the late 40s. There was constant friction upon the common borders, and constant, but not great military action. In 1956, Nasser decided to Nationalize the Suez canal, and the French, allied with the Israelis attacked Egypt. The US, and other nations, got them to withdraw from that land. In 1967, Egypt requested removal of UN peacekeepers on the border of Egypt and Israel, and placed about 5000 troups in the Siani. Israel then attacked Egypt, starting first with an attack on the Egyptian airfields, effectively putting the Egyptian airforce out of business. that war ultimately set the present boundaries (except for what was returned in the peace agreement with Egypt) of Israel. In 1973 the Egyptians attacked Israel, on Yom Kipur (sp) and almost won the war in the 1st 2 days, overruning positons in the Siani, causing substantial gains. The Eyptians were using newly developed Surface to Air missles (SAM) against the Israelis and those new missles were effective. Until the US resupplied the Israelis about 1 week into the combat, the Israels were losing the war on the ground because they couldn't supply air cover for their troops. After we supplied counter measures to the Israelis, they were able then to have air cover and the ground war quickly turned around. That war resulted almost no change on the gound, but it ultimately lead to a peace agreement with Egypt, whose president Sadat was assignated by entering into the agreement. Egypt and Israel are still at peace today, some 20 years after having entered into that agreement. In 1982, because various Palestinan organization were using Lebanon as a base, the Israelis took what they called a "buffer zone". That produced a war which ultimately ended with the Israelis withdrawing from approximately 99.99% of the land they took. There is still a dispute over approximately 50 acres of land there. In the 90s, the Israelis and the Palestinans starting talking about peace, and ultimately, a peace plan was signed by the parties, the Oslo Agreement. The Israeli prime minister at that time was ultimate assignated over that agreement. Conservatives took over the Israeli government, and 4 years of warfare ensued. As you can see the Middle Eastern problem is not one that just occurred. Given the history of the Jews, they absolutely must have a place to go when things get tough for them. History has taught us that we can't trust people in countries that are not jewish to treat us properly. The country that we need must able be able to survive, come what may. The problem with all of this are the indigent people in the land that Israel occupies. For the most part, they were innocent victums in a fight that originated in Europe. What no one seems willing to admit is that the Palestinan people got screwed in this deal, and we, the entire human race need to make things right for them. If we do not, there will be continous wars, continious grief. These are just my thoughts on the issues. The facts were drawn from my memory of the various books I have read, but I think those thoughts are mostly accurate. Art | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 85 Registered: 9-2002 |
Martin is right, there was no Arab problem befor the State of Israel, no problem at all for Arabs, but for Jews living in Arab counties, thats a different story | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 849 Registered: 12-2001 |
So, what's your solution to racial tension in the United States, Martin? Send 'em all back to Africa? Geez, i mean once you say there shouldn't be a state of israel, at all, i guess you've solved the problem. But, after WWII, some nations thought that the Final Solution was not such a good idea (although the French do a good imitation of anti-semites when they get the chance). I don't want to turn this into an Arab v. Jew thing, cause you probably know where i come out on that one. I will say this, though: i support the right of the jews to exist there, just as much as the Palestinians. I do not subscribe to the view that neither has a right to survive. Does that sound too rational? And, if you had to choose sides, why choose the Palestinians over the Israelis? Cause they are the underdogs? Cause the jews have less entitlement to the land than the Arabs? Remember why Israel occupied the West Bank, etc. to begin with. I'm mystified by your blaming Israel as the cause of our problems. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4181 Registered: 5-2001 |
Let me give you one example form several years back why I think it is related: First, let me say that there was no Arab, Islam problem before the Country Israel was declared. Since then you have ongoing conflict. There were Billions of $$$ lend to the US government by Saudi Arabia. They were eventually paid back to Saudi Arabia but since in Islam you can not charge money for lending money (same as Christians are still not allowed to) Saudi Arabia refused the interest payments from the US and told the US we can keep them. We turn around and send the money to guess who.... ISRAEL! as far as I remember in form of tanks and other military equipment them wanted. very smart move! and you wonder why ther eis people that hate Americans? They really do not hate us, they hate our two faced politics! | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4180 Registered: 5-2001 |
Whart, it is great that we can accept each other over different opinions. That is what freedom is all about. Realizing there are differences and different opinion and different methods how to solve probelms and come to solutions. I have studies religions and followings for quite some time which leads me to my opinion that all religion is a bunch of crap used to control masses. (lets not start another topic) Islam is not a violent religion, neither is christianity. However we manage to kill over exact those issues because of some "humane" that interprets the written text from 2000+ years ago. If GWB is such a true Christian, he should do as Jesus had done. Hold his other cheek up. (not that I think that is a great idea in the first place, just practice what you preach) | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4179 Registered: 5-2001 |
I still believe that my idea is great: Give them both a nuke, teach them both (Israel and Palestine) how to use it and the world will be a happy place! | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Junior Member Username: Randall Post Number: 230 Registered: 1-2003 |
Iraq was contained. They were contained for 12 years. They wern't expanding or attacking anyone. Saddam also challenged the CIA to look for WMD, why not take him up on the offer? Why not wait until there is solid proof? Why couldn't our intel guys work with the UN inspection team and guide them where to go? If Bush just wanted Saddam and his sons gone, why not have special ops guys take care of them? A lot of the people questioning this war are doing so because of lack of solid proof, if our government knew, why not show proof to the world and get a lot more backing? | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 372 Registered: 11-2002 |
Really, what's your solution Randall besides running off to Singapore. Of course it came from another post you bone head! I said it came from another F-chaters mom, can't you read! And yes it was intended to be sarcastic. Boy we have a bright croud here don't we! This is getting old! | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Junior Member Username: Randall Post Number: 227 Registered: 1-2003 |
First, people do offer solutions, you just don't like them. Second, that had already been posted on another topic recently.... Third, although that is written sarcatically, some of them are excellent ideas. | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 371 Registered: 11-2002 |
Here's one for all you anti-war types compliments of another F-chaters mom. Since most just want to complain but offer no solutions. DA PLAN ! ......Another person's opinion on war. >I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of one PLAN >for peace."Books, not Bombs" won't work. The head mullahs won't let >anyone read them If they do, they poke their eyes out. >Here's the plan: >1) The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their >affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini and the rest of >them good old boys'. We will never "interfere" again. >2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with >Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We >would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in >the fence. >3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and >leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder >will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where >they are. France would welcome them, no doubt . >4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days >unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be >allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself, don't hide >here.=A0 Asylum would not ever be available to anyone. We don't need any >more cab drivers. >5) No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they >don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby. >6) The US will make a strong effort to become self sufficient energy >wise.=A0 This will include developing non polluting sources of energy >but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. >The caribou will have to cope for a while. >7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for >their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else. >8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we >will not "interfere". They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, >rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides' most of what we give them >is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very >little, if any anyway. >9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an island some place. We don't need the >spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, it would make a good >homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens. >10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one >can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. Now, ain't that a winner of a plan. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 848 Registered: 12-2001 |
Martin: i totally disagree that 9/11 happened because we did not respect the beliefs of the Muslims, extreme or otherwise. Based on my understanding of the brand of Islam these radical elements subscribe to, anybody that does not satisfy their harsh reading of the religion is infidel, and must die. So, a little or even alot of understanding would go absolutely nowhere. Moreover, there are many in Saudi Arabia that subscribe to these views; i'll bet the American lovers there are in the extreme minority (counting those who pay us lip service,but give money to have us killed). As to the US stake in Israel being the cause of this, believe what you will. Some actually believe that the Israelis brought down the Towers to induce a war against their Arab enemies. Take Israel out of the equation and we've still got problems, unless you're prepared to convert to the Wahhabi branch of Islam.Is that the next step? | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4176 Registered: 5-2001 |
Ross, I could not agree with you more on the ignorance. Yes it is in all sides. This is what I am trying to do here is make you all a little edgy and create controversy so that you all sit back and look deeper into the issues. Ignorance is how you keep the masses happy. Bush and Arafat and Saddam know how to do it. There is much MUCH more beind this war that the liberation of the Iraqi people. If there would not be certain circumstances we would not give a rats a*s about Iraq and its people and their oppression. Look for the money trail and you find true motivation! Look for the lobbyists in Washington and you will find true motivation. Religion and Money are the single cause for all wars. Since you can not justify a war by saying: were in it for the money, you have to find an alternative justification and that always has been religion and its abnormal forms of interpretation. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4175 Registered: 5-2001 |
Whart, the Israel conflict, although it appears to be unrelated, is very much related. This is the main reason why "americans" are hated by some extreme muslims. And lets put it out there, it is not the arabs, neither all muslims that do, it is a small percentage that does and due to their extreme views and unconventional methods they have a medium to make the world notice their opinions. The reason 9/11 happened is that the US did not respect muslim tradition. Something we are very good at. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 170 Registered: 2-2003 |
Just a note Randall. Singapore also have their variation of the Internal Securities Act (the President is consulted, as Singapore is a Republic). It has it because Singapore used to be part of Malaysia for 2 years, and was created with nearly the same British-style government erected. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4174 Registered: 5-2001 |
"once these young people have been brain washed to believe the greatest honor is to die for thier cause the only way to stop them is to kill of them, thats basicly what we did in WW2, the alies kept killing until there wasnt anybody left to fight" Craig, since more than 50% of Americns said they are against the war in Iraq, one must assume that the current regime in the US is doing the same. You must assume that more than 50% of the troops in the GUlf are not believing this is a just war and yet they are "brain washed" to fight the war. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Junior Member Username: Randall Post Number: 224 Registered: 1-2003 |
"If you want a more draconian type of country, I suggest you look up Singapore. They have even more stricter laws than ours, and yet Americans still flock to it like bees to honey" I'm one of those Americans. If I can figure a way to live there comfortably, I'll be gone. By far the most impressive country I have ever been too. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 159 Registered: 2-2003 |
"currently, you have the muslim world choosing to defend saddam against the usa." Actually Ross, most of the Muslim countries objected to the way that the US has chosen war as the way to remove Saddam, we all know war only causes more suffering to the already suffering Iraqis. I believe most agrees that Saddam needs to either go or be neutralized. That is the real reason. It's the method, not the objective. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 157 Registered: 2-2003 |
"Martin, I am against the creation of the Department of Homeland security. IMO it is a waist of our tax dollars and runs the risk of infringing on our freedom." Too late for that now, huh? It's been passed already, and in fact, Tom Ridge is there already starting his job. Say 'bye-bye' to your supposedly unlimited freedom. "MFZ, thanks for making my argument for me. Here is another quote "The Prime Minister and the King have to be consulted first before someone can be arrested under this act". Once again your freedom is in someone elses hands. I guess all the King has to do is just decide he does not like you and your history!" See, I put it in simple words and you still can't understand. Consulted means that it's the police, after making their necessary investigation, only then reports the suspect to the King and Prime Minister, and not the other way around (the King or Prime Minister can't simply order someone to be caught under the act). The system has it's flaws, but then, there's no perfect system in this world where you can have unlimited freedom to the point where anarchy reigns supreme. If you want a more draconian type of country, I suggest you look up Singapore. They have even more stricter laws than ours, and yet Americans still flock to it like bees to honey (well, up until that SARS scare came up recently). Also, remember Michael Fay? The American who was caned because he painted graffiti onto cars in Singapore? "Like it or not our system works, it may not be perfect but it is still the best that the human race has devised so far!" Ours work just as well, but you just won't admit the fact that another country other than yours can have a decent system that works just as well without it being a direct copycat of your system. | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 913 Registered: 3-2002 |
martin, you make a good point about ignorance, and although our country's sometimes limited knowledge of the rest of the world does cause me some ocassional embarassment. however, lets not forget that the other side is equally, if not more ignorant of us, the west in general, and our objectives. currently, you have the muslim world choosing to defend saddam against the usa. this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. they even recognize that he is a bloodthirsty dictator, but since he is muslim (sort of), they would prefer he wins and continues his oppressive regime, instead of the west winning and them getting on with a normal life. why is that? complete ignorance of our real intentions. media misdirection doesn't help. and their own governments propagating that story line to divert the focus from their own home issues. right after 9/11, i remember seeing a story on cnn where a guy went to some of those koran nurseries where they teach only the koran, and asked some of the kids questions. kids between 9-12 for example when asked if they knew about dinosaurs, said yes, they existed because they were raised by america and used by israel to eat muslims ! and they all nodded their heads in agreement! admittedly this is a rather extreme example, but i have seen ignorance of the highest order on both sides. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 847 Registered: 12-2001 |
Martin: Leaving aside your view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a moment, i think you are wrong about America's current problems with the middle east arising from our support of Israel. In fact, most of the terrorists on 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia, believed in a radical form of Islam that has been formented there, with the patronage of the royal family, for many, many years, and their attack on the US had little to do with the plight of the Palestinians. In fact, if you look at our relations with Saudi Arabia over the years, we were originally there for the oil, not for colonization, and while oil has assumed increasing importance, and hence our presence there during the cold war was important, it had little to do with the jews, or Israel. (They seem to be able to fend pretty well for themselves, militarily, particularly if you look at who attacked whom and the outcomes in 1967 and 73). The Saudi-US relationship is in some ways a "model" for a detached economic relationship, and our military presence there did not really get the radicals stirred up until the Gulf War; if i remember, it was not just the Kuwaiti's who sought our help. So, when you look for reasons why we are a target, i think you may have boughtthe pretext offered by some of those who either dislike our support of Israel anyway, or even more insidiously, are using that as a wedge. Even the Palestinians seem to acknowledge that the US is a crucial player in reaching an accomodation there; Arafat (talk about liars) has not been real good at seeking peace, but has, like the Saudis, played both sides of the fence to maintain his power and prestige. I don't think the Middle East problems will ever be solved, but let's not confuse what has led 9/11 and its aftermath. | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 370 Registered: 11-2002 |
Martin, one more thing. I agree with you about Israel IMO we should stop all support for them. It was post WWII policy that created the mess to begin with so we should accept the mistake and reverse our position. They will never have peace as long as they are in the middle of the Arab world. Maybe we should just help them move some where else and let the Arabs have it. | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 369 Registered: 11-2002 |
Martin, I am against the creation of the Department of Homeland security. IMO it is a waist of our tax dollars and runs the risk of infringing on our freedom. MFZ, thanks for making my argument for me. Here is another quote "The Prime Minister and the King have to be consulted first before someone can be arrested under this act". Once again your freedom is in someone elses hands. I guess all the King has to do is just decide he does not like you and your history! Like it or not our system works, it may not be perfect but it is still the best that the human race has devised so far! | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 78 Registered: 9-2002 |
Martin, how much land do you suppose the arabs would be giving back to Israelies if the Arabs had won any of the numorous wars they started i find it kind of strange that the arabs dont mind coming to the states and stealing our land and taking our jobs, but let a jew go to an arab country and its war, are you aware saudi arabia does not allow jews in the country? oh, by the way, my relatives owned a town in Germany befor WW2, that was confiscated, im sure youll support me when i go there and tell the current residents that there going to have to move because i want my town back the arabs are doing exactly what hitler did in the 30's, they enductinate there young with lies and hate, this tactic is nothing new, its been done over and over throughout history, Hitler knew he could not win the minds of the older generation because they were wise from age, so he went after the children, this is exactly what the arabs are doing, why do you think the suicide bombers are always young people, unless the moderate muslims relize this and do something now, i believe were heading for WW3, just like the germans and the japanese, once these young people have been brain washed to believe the greatest honor is to die for thier cause the only way to stop them is to kill of them, thats basicly what we did in WW2, the alies kept killing until there wasnt anybody left to fight the one weakness among americans is we believe everybody in the world thinks like we do, truth justice, americans are are in for a rude awakening | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4169 Registered: 5-2001 |
ah here are my pills. . . . . . . yes, the quote is rather true! | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4168 Registered: 5-2001 |
You want to solve the problems there? Give them both a Nuke and have them destroy themselves and friggn Jerusalem as well. Make it all a wasteland and the world will be a better place. Dave, where the hell is that picture of the guy shooting that machine gun for crying out loud. I feel that way now. and where is my Prozac???? | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4167 Registered: 5-2001 |
..and before you give me the crap about the suiside bombers and terrorists, read into history and find out what was first. The suiside bomber or the tanks that rolled accross the borders. and go beyond 10 years if you will, because this whole mess is there for the past 50 years and actually stretches back 2500 years. Bunch of religious freaks! | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4166 Registered: 5-2001 |
What I am trying to say is that it is IGNORANCE to the rest of the world that has gotten us into this mess in the first place, IGNORANCE that will get us into the next mess that is already on the horizon and IGNORANCE that will always keep us in the mess for as long as we do not change our Israel politic. We are backing a country that marches into other peoples land, kills people as they will and has weapons of mass destruction while we prevent their neighbors for obtaining them (mind you with the justification that we bring them freedom). The US and its Middle East politics is the single cause why there is a great imballance in that region. We are furthering that imballance by not saying a word when Israel launches attacks at their neighbors, sends tanks into the Westbank. Where is Democracy there or justice or freedom or all the good words that the latest poll shows as good catch phrases that go with the US public this week? | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4165 Registered: 5-2001 |
Sounds like the good old days when all you had to do is call the FBI and say your neighbor is a Commy and they were arrested, some jailed for attending meetings. hm....let freedom ring! (not that I disagree that) | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4164 Registered: 5-2001 |
So Tommy, according to Charles quote: "MFZ you don't get it! Our way is right! that is all there is to it. When I say our way I mean democracy, something you don't know because you don't live in a country that has it" that means we are NOT living in a counrty either that has a democracy! | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 949 Registered: 5-2001 |
Those types should be jailed. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Junior Member Username: Randall Post Number: 203 Registered: 1-2003 |
"which basically means that you can be arrested without a warrant if you pose a national security risk." I suppose your government could label you a security risk if they felt like it. We don't do things that way here" Hate to break it to you, but you can be arrested now w/o a warrant. And it seems many of you feel that is good. It goes right back to pre-emptive strikes, but this time with citizens. I believe we jailed some people recently or attending Al Quaida training in the past. They didn't committ any crimes, just went through the training. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1371 Registered: 2-2001 |
Whether the quote is real or not, it is TRUE. Ernesto | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4160 Registered: 5-2001 |
It appears that this quote was based somewhere on the internet but nobody can provide prove that this really happend. First off the reference to the World Economic Conference at which this should have happened does not list Powell as a speaker, neither the Bishop. All of the links cite the same text and the same scenario, which means that this all comes from one source. Now giving that powell is the only person in the Bush administration I give some credit for brains, he actualy could have said that and certainly will think that way. Power to him, because he is right in what he is saying (or is alledged to have said). At the end of the day is it a story made up on the internet that has no merit as of yet. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 908 Registered: 7-2002 |
No problem. I never said he did or didn't say it. I just found a couple of links that referenced it. | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 534 Registered: 3-2001 |
dave and Jim, based on link provided (snopes.com) I accept that the statement in it's very "simplistic*" form came from general Powell so I offer my apologizes to both of you. *note the statement from your link provided: "The spirit of the quote cited above is true, although the context in which it was delivered has been greatly simplified." | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 906 Registered: 7-2002 |
I was joking. I thought it was funny a site called vicki's nylons had colin powell quotes! Tillman that is the site I found the urban legend ref to, but it was dead link. | ||
| Tillman Strahan (Tillman)
Member Username: Tillman Post Number: 490 Registered: 11-2001 |
Paul, Please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/powell.php or more preciesly, http://www.weforum.org/site/homepublic.nsf/Content/Remarks+from+Colin+Powell,+US+Secretary+of+State | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 533 Registered: 3-2001 |
Are you serious? your link is Vicki's Nylons as a legitimate source, next it's going to be Barbara's Bra's or Mary's Panties. A legitimate source is any news organazation or magazine which can state it as a direct quote which means they witnessed it. I consider myself a patriot but not a blind deaf and dumb one. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 904 Registered: 7-2002 |
what about this site? this has to be legit? http://vickisnylons.com/ | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 532 Registered: 3-2001 |
Dave, Lighten up? Your post that started this thread was BS! | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 531 Registered: 3-2001 |
Just what I thought, No Validity to the Quote. What next? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 959 Registered: 1-2002 |
Paul, lighten up & validate it yourself if you don't believe it. I haven't the time... | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 903 Registered: 7-2002 |
Call Colin Powell and ask him. Any source other than that can be discredited I would imagine. | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 530 Registered: 3-2001 |
A VALID SOURCE PLEASE, sorry didn't think i had to make clear that I wanted a legitimate source. This thread was started with a quote that offers to source or proof of validity. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 901 Registered: 7-2002 |
You all said you could find no reference to it so I searched. I did. I didn't tout the validity of it. I also found a site that had it listed as urban legend, but the site was dead so couldn't find anything. | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 528 Registered: 3-2001 |
Dave, Jim. Got to be kidding me you source for the quote is a postal employee chat site, you quote is a undocumeted and hysterical. I would recomend you do your next research at Janitors.com at least we will know right from the start that it's garbage :-) | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 527 Registered: 3-2001 |
Jim, Seems like the can was half empty! | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4156 Registered: 5-2001 |
Dave, Jim, I can not find any time line when Powell should have said that nor location where. Do you guys have any news, I am asking in a friendly way, just to see where and when this is coming. Since you quote Powell you can also quote him saying that it is wrong to go into Iraq and that many lifes will be lost if we did. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4155 Registered: 5-2001 |
Charles: "Internal Securities Act, which basically means that you can be arrested without a warrant if you pose a national security risk." I suppose your government could label you a security risk if they felt like it. We don't do things that way here because we know that sort of thing eventually leads to oppression. Even though you don't like it the fact is it is time for the entire world to get a clue and become democratic. " sounds much like what GWB has proposed for the new Homeland Security Act if you ask me! Besides they do arrest people without warrants at this time already. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 145 Registered: 2-2003 |
Charles Barton statement is probably one of the most ignorant statements ever made. Did you check up your facts before you wrote it? Can you even find Malaysia if you were given a map? That Internal Securities Act was enacted back in the days the communists were running around trying to take over my country (circa 1960s-1970s). It was kept because we found out that it does have some use post communist era. Some say it should've been removed, but it's still there. FYI, usually only certain type of criminals are charged under this act, terrorist or terrorist suspects obviously fall under them. You have to be very dangerous to be charged under this act, it's not like the police goes around and arrest people just because the act exists. The Prime Minister and the King have to be consulted first before someone can be arrested under this act. One of my University's professors (from the Geoinformatic faculty, not mine) was detained under this act because he apparently was part of one of the Asian Al-Qaeda cells. The local press made quite a fuss about it too. Do you know that the Patriot Act or was it the Homeland Securities Act recently passed by the US Congress has certain provisions that closely resembles Malaysia's own Internal Securities Act? There are many forms of democracy you know, none of them are perfect. We have a King, a position not inherited but actually rotated around the 9 or so 'Sultans' of each state every 5 years. Just last year the present King died during his reign, but instead of having his son rise to the throne, the Sultan's Council decided on the next successor, the Sultan who was next in line during the rotation process. And if you think the King is the policymaker, you are wrong again, We have a Prime Minister, who is the one making policy. So in effect, the King is a largely ceremonious role, much like the British system (except they have a Queen, and her heir will rise to the throne once she dies). We have elections every 4-5 years, and though there are somewhat unfair contests (like there's a truly fair election in this world, even your last US elections was a fiasco), generally the elected government would usually get 65-70% of the majority votes and control 2/3 of the parliament. The opposition side is pretty strong too, and right now, two states are controlled by the opposition party. So next time before you type down your ramblings on the message window, make sure you know all the facts. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 900 Registered: 7-2002 |
since we have derailed the topic...  | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 143 Registered: 2-2003 |
"firstly, the fact that blix did not find evidence to support powell's contention doesn't mean powell is wrong. it could just mean they haven't found it yet; something blix allowed could be possible. " Yes, that is indeed a possible explanation as well. So why can't the US be patient and wait until the inspectors do find that elusive proof of true non-compliance before launching the war? Now that the war has started, any discovery will be met with even more skepticism by the previously unconvinced side as you'd never know truly if the evidence was authentic or planted. That's why I always read all three sides of the story before passing judgment. The pro-side, the anti-side and of course the neutral side. Another lie presented as truth would be Powell's claim that Iraq is still running a nuclear program, an accusation proven false by the IAEA. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 956 Registered: 1-2002 |
Thanks, Jim--you beat me to it!! | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 897 Registered: 7-2002 |
found this on my first search and first link. http://www.postalemployeenetwork.com/ go to bottom of page. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4152 Registered: 5-2001 |
I am looking for that statement as well. Just does not sound like something Powell would say. I'd be happy with an internet link BTW. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 894 Registered: 7-2002 |
they also built them at the same time using two different contractors to increase the speed and also if one contractor went broke they could still finish them. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 893 Registered: 7-2002 |
Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. Featured in the Sean Connery movie Entrapment. I saw them in person..very cool.  | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 907 Registered: 3-2002 |
tallest buildings in the world. pretty cool looking too. they are connected around the 50th floor with a walkway, which is pretty eery to stand on. covered in stainless steel panels. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 945 Registered: 5-2001 |
I have never even heard of the Petronas Twin Towers. What are they? | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 526 Registered: 3-2001 |
Dave, Please provide me with the supporting docs regarding this statement by Powell that you posted as I can find no reference to it anywhere. Paul "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return." | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 954 Registered: 1-2002 |
Oh, and one other thing, Randall: we are usually, by far, the largest employer in the area of our bases, and when we leave those bases, the local economy usually tanks (recent example: Vieques in Puerto Rico--the base-related payromm was $200 million+++; now that hole is torn in all the lives of those poor working folks because a few whiners didn't like our base there. Bottom line: we are a HUGE positive influence wherever we go, and that's a FACT. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 953 Registered: 1-2002 |
Randall, you are not correct. We are usually INVITED to keep a military presence in these countries, and are usually OFFERED the land for bases, for which we pay RENT. No reasonable person would see that as the US demanding land, for which we don't pay!! I'd appreciate sticking to the FACTS here if you are trying to disprove Mr. Powell's eloquent statement. And so far you have not. | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 358 Registered: 11-2002 |
MFZ you don't get it! Our way is right! that is all there is to it. When I say our way I mean democracy, something you don't know because you don't live in a country that has it. Here is a quote from your post "As for the Don, trust me, if the terrorists wanted to blow up the Petronas Twin Towers, they would have done so already. The reason why it still stands is probably because Malaysia have been actively policing the country, arresting several members of Islamic groups that has close links with the local Al-Qaeda terrorist cell under the Internal Securities Act, which basically means that you can be arrested without a warrant if you pose a national security risk." I suppose your government could label you a security risk if they felt like it. We don't do things that way here because we know that sort of thing eventually leads to oppression. Even though you don't like it the fact is it is time for the entire world to get a clue and become democratic. Since your country and countries like yours don't have the balls to force the issue, it is up to us to take on this responsibility. All we want is world free from Dictators and oppressive governments so that the rest of the world can enjoy the same freedoms we do. If the rest of the world would get with the program and help us out we could see this happen a lot sooner! | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 142 Registered: 2-2003 |
Unfortunately, as you probably found out, most middle eastern countries and other countries where there's a majority of Muslims, their leaders tend to be more hard-headed and more stubborn than most of the people that I've seen even on this board. I am sure that we had advocated a moderate stand on Islam, but not everyone, particularly the middle east countries such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar or Iran for example are ready to brace it, or that they are too stubborn to see that our way works just as well as theirs. I think the problem lies with the fact that they consider us sort of newbies (about 700 years of Islam, previously we're mostly animistic and Hindus), while they were already deep-rooted in Islam for 1400 years or right from the beginning. "secondly, your statement regarding saddam not suffering the consequences of sanctions, although true, totally contradicts what you said in another thread when you stated that saddam was not guilty of skimming the oil-for-food money for his own projects. which statement will you stand by? " You mustn't confuse the skimming and the fact that Saddam doesn't feel the brunt of the sanctions. While I doubt that he could skim off a large portion of those oil-for-money revenues due to the fact that the UN Security Council monitors it, he could still live quite well off as what he would consider luxury now would be called barely decent by the American standards. An example would be that he probably doesn't have excess money to spend on cars/expensive food/other luxuries, but he can still live quite decently (enough food, fuel for the cars, clean water, electricity) while the civilians, who were living quite decently before the sanctions, now will have to do with food rationings, fuel shortages, periodic electricity cuts, unclean water, not enough money to rebuild destroyed houses etc. People will normally make sure leaders and the 'elders' will live comfortably at the expense of their own comforts due to respect or how they were raised, I think this is true everywhere. | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 903 Registered: 3-2002 |
mfz, most of your last response was correct. i can't help pointing out 2 things to you though. firstly, the fact that blix did not find evidence to support powell's contention doesn't mean powell is wrong. it could just mean they haven't found it yet; something blix allowed could be possible. secondly, your statement regarding saddam not suffering the consequences of sanctions, although true, totally contradicts what you said in another thread when you stated that saddam was not guilty of skimming the oil-for-food money for his own projects. which statement will you stand by? to repeat what i have said to you in another thread. it is because malaysia is an example of a properly run secular muslim country, that you can and should help out the rest of us when it comes to calling people like the taliban to account. malaysia, indonesia, and pakistan, have an obligation as the largest group of democratic secular islamic countries to try and influence those islamic countries who use your religion to oppress or breed violence. we can't do it in the west since we will be accused of religious bias. i realize that in real politik terms this may seem difficult because some of these oppressive islamic states employ many citizens from these 3 countries; but don't forget they also mistreat them in the extreme. most americans can take criticism, although we will argue and defend our beliefs vehemently (and sometimes even coherently). but if you critique us and also throw your weight behind some positive actions for progress, it changes our whole attitude and receptivity to your suggestions. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 141 Registered: 2-2003 |
"We should stay until a new government is set up. Is that a bad idea too?" Not a totally bad idea, but sometimes you guys do make a habit of overstaying your welcome. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 140 Registered: 2-2003 |
I am not online 24/7, so you can't expect me to answer all your questions immediately, as I still need to eat, sleep, study, go to work and other things that are important to do in life besides surfing the net. "I challenge you to disprove ONE THING Mr. Powell has said in the quote I posted here. I DARE YOU!" Of course I can't, as the comment was made mostly in a sarcastic tone to what I myself admit was a dumb question. I didn't say that he is a liar all the time, but he lied when it did matter the most. When I say that Colin Powelll has presented lies as facts, I was referring to Colin Powell's Presentation of Evidence Before U.N. Security Council On February 5, 2003. One example would be: "Powell had shown satellite photos of alleged movement of mobile biological weapons laboratories and highlighted concerns about Iraqi officers moving equipment before UN inspectors got to the sites. However, as the Guardian reported (February 5, 2003), "Hans Blix said there was no evidence of mobile biological weapons laboratories or of Iraq trying to foil inspectors by moving equipment before his teams arrived." As for the sanctions, what many of you fail to realize is that Saddam is barely affected by the sanctions, it's the lowly Iraqi civilians who are most affected by them. In fact, some analysts say that those very sanctions may have helped to bolster/strengthen his position with his people. As for the Don, trust me, if the terrorists wanted to blow up the Petronas Twin Towers, they would have done so already. The reason why it still stands is probably because Malaysia have been actively policing the country, arresting several members of Islamic groups that has close links with the local Al-Qaeda terrorist cell under the Internal Securities Act, which basically means that you can be arrested without a warrant if you pose a national security risk. We have actively sought out to destroy elements of Islamic extremism in our own country, and we never asked for any other countries help in doing so (help here means participation of foreign military forces in our country's soil). We still share information with everyone who requested it, in fact, I believe last year we even let the American FBI agents into Malaysia to interrogate several of the suspects detained because of their links to Islamic extremist groups. Now don't tell me that that isn't a form of cooperation. Despite Malaysia having a majority of Muslims as their population, we still have a gambling casino, a Carlsberg beer brewery and we don't force every women to wear those Afghanistan-style clothes or force men to keep their beards long. You won't find all this news in the front pages of the American newspapers because Malaysia is a small, insignificant country and the American government also has issues with some of Malaysia's stand in international politics. Hopefully something like 9/11 will never happen here, but I'm pretty sure that if it does happen, we won't actively seek your help in it. This is not arrogance, but it's what our leader has said in his 2003 New Year address. If we want help, we'll probably ask our neighbours first, if you guys (Americans and American government) want to help, it's probably because of your kind hearts and generosity and not because we had actively asked you for help. I don't hate the American people (well, at least not all of them), but I do have issues with the current American goverment's policies and actions. If you guys can learn to separate between these two different entities, then come back so we could enjoy a friendly discussion and not all this stupid "you're with us or against us" patriotic jingoism. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 938 Registered: 5-2001 |
We should stay until a new government is set up. Is that a bad idea too? | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Junior Member Username: Randall Post Number: 194 Registered: 1-2003 |
Dave "I challenge you to disprove ONE THING Mr. Powell has said in the quote I posted here. I DARE YOU" I'll give it a try...., "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return." We have stayed to occupy until a new government is set up, and the we ASK FOR BASES THERE, thus taking more land. | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 525 Registered: 3-2001 |
"unwinnable urban guerrilla war." President George Bushs words 11 years ago, hope your right Ernesto but as you say "different world" doesn't change urban guerrilla warfare. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1370 Registered: 2-2001 |
New day, new risks and consequences of inaction, different world. Environments change in 11 years. Ernesto | ||
| Paul Sloan (Sloan83qv)
Member Username: Sloan83qv Post Number: 524 Registered: 3-2001 |
Here's another Quote from Mr. Powell and our former President Bush. New day new story? "As one savvy official observed, occupying Baghdad comes at an 'unpardonable expense in terms of money, lives lost and ruined regional relationships.' Another expert put it this way: 'We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero . . . assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinnable urban guerrilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability.' Those comments may overemphasize the risks, but they are from top-notch analysts whose judgments I respect. The first comment was made by Colin Powell in a Foreign Affairs essay in 1992; the second is in 'A World Transformed,' a 1998 book by the first President Bush." -- Nicholas Kristof, The New York Times | ||
| "The Don" (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 3312 Registered: 8-2002 |
MFZ, Remember your comments when the US has to defend you and your country from the nut cases. It is only a matter of time before a bomb goes off there and you and your country will be looking east for our help. I am sure you will be singing a different tune. And believe me, we will all remind you. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 950 Registered: 1-2002 |
Exactly, Don.  | ||
| "The Don" (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 3309 Registered: 8-2002 |
MFZ Let's see how you feel when some nut job crashes a plane into the patronas towers. If you hate America so much, Stop participating on a American Chat board. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 947 Registered: 1-2002 |
Ah, MFZ, just as I expected: you have no response to my challenge. You are nothing but an America-hating mouth that roared, am I right? Yet I suspect you'd be the first to whine about "Where was America to protect us??" when Malaysia gets attacked. Gee, I just love hanging hypocrites by their own petards... | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 926 Registered: 5-2001 |
Martin - I agree with you fully and completely. It's not our job to police the world and we shouldn't. I also agree that what we see and hear out of Washington isn't the WHOLE truth and NOTHING BUT the truth. I do not know all the details. BUT, just because Washington isn't telling the whole story, I do not believe what we are NOT told is necessarly bad. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 899 Registered: 3-2002 |
guys, from having crossed verbal swords with mfz for the last few weeks i can tell you that he will not address any question that you pose to him that might actually oblige him to concede a point - so forget trying to get him to do it. he persists in equating any wrongdoing by the usa with whatever iraqi atrocities you may point out. for his sake i hope he never finds himself facing anybody like the republican guard - he might be so disappointed it would kill him before they do. see the 'peace lover' thread, and lets see if he responds to my challenge. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 890 Registered: 7-2002 |
My office mate was in Basic Training with one of the current POW's. He is a veteran of the Gulf War and had to kill 5 men. I had no idea until we were talking one day. He is a quiet guy, but is getting fed up with the current Iraq tactics. From a military standpoint he wishes we would just roll over these mf'ers civilians and all as we can't tell them apart...so they are all potential foes until proven otherwise. Make the human shields and dirty tricks ineffective and they will stop using them. Tough hump to get over with all the damn media coverage and public/politicle backlash. I fear Baghdad as it could very well be a Black Hawk Down scenario. So in that case we need to clean house. Break a few eggs to make the omlette! My point is this is war and it ain't pretty. F$uck Saddam and his chickenshit regime. He is a f$ucker and must go. I am tired of you fucksticks defending him and his ways. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 945 Registered: 1-2002 |
MFZ, so have France, Germany, Russia,....shall I go on? I challenge you to disprove ONE THING Mr. Powell has said in the quote I posted here. I DARE YOU! | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 925 Registered: 5-2001 |
MFZ - Powell is not what I am asking you about. What does your comment about Powell have to do with my questions to you about Iraq's problem with Saddam? You have stated it yourself. Saddam has himself to blame for the conditions in Iraq. HE invaded Kuwait, thus, in your own words starting the horrible conditions that those people have to endure. The sanctions are a result of HIS ACTIONS. There is NO WAY you can tell us things gone bad there are my country's fault. Period. You have said it yourself so give us a break. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4126 Registered: 5-2001 |
MFZ, the sanctions were absolutely necessary. This was the only way to contain this mad man and contain his money so he can not go balistic again! Unfortunately we never did support and explore the options of funding opposition in Iraq so the regime would be removed by their own people. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 137 Registered: 2-2003 |
I don't know if you've been watching the news or not, but what I've seen, I'm a bit surprised that 12 years of sanctions and all haven't reduced Baghdad into gross neglect. There's still proper roads, there's vehicles moving about, there's a TV station, there's food sold in the markets. Sure, it may not be as great as the US or other first world countries such as Britain or France, but when you compare Iraq with Afghanistan, two countries recently invaded by the US, the difference is like night and day. As for my comments, I consider the moment Saddam invading Kuwait as the point where the Iraqis basically lost their pretty decent lives. Since then, the Iraqis have been living under sanctions, so what they may be used to may not be there again unless the sanctions are lifted. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 135 Registered: 2-2003 |
Mr Powell has also been known to present lies as facts, jus so you know. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 924 Registered: 5-2001 |
I want to make sure I understand your point "Yes, if I recall correctly, Iraq was a decent place to live before Saddam went nuts and decided to invade Kuwait." So Iraq was a decent place to live BEFORE Saddam f_cked it up? You are telling us that the problems developed before the US ever stepped foot into Iraq. | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Advanced Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 3316 Registered: 2-2001 |
"Iraq... still looks to be a decent place to live in" Whatever you're smoking, I'd like to get some. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 133 Registered: 2-2003 |
Well, I edited my earlier post to answer the questions, but still left out one answer. "MOST IMPORTANTLY: HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT SADDAM AS A LEADER OF HIS PEOPLE/COUNTRY? WOULD IRAQ BE MUCH, MUCH BETTER OFF IF WE WOULD JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE?" I think he has been too harsh in his dealings with traitors and turncoats and ethnic tribes that he simply hates. I have never been to Iraq, so I can't say that I can approve or disapprove of how he leads the country. Iraq, despite the 12 years of sanctions, from the TV pics before and during the war right now, still looks to be a decent place to live in, there's cars and other vehicles moving about, there's electricity, phones, TV stations etc. Maybe it's not all rosy once you get to the inside, but I think the era where Saddam can do anything as well as he pleases is long gone, so if he were to be left alone, he probably would've died quietly. This is my opinion. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4123 Registered: 5-2001 |
Tommy, MFZ, you guys are splitting hair. Who cares who is blocking supplies, food, money etc. Also it is not our duty to free people all over the world. If it were why do we do business with China. These guys are killing their people just like the Iraqis do. Get over it, just keep your brain frequences open that not all that comes out of Washington (or any other country) is the truth and is as clear as they want you to believe it is. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 943 Registered: 1-2002 |
Whatever, y'all. Mr. Powell's words still mean more than anything the quiche-eaters and hand-wringers could ever come up with in 100 years. 'Nuff said. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4122 Registered: 5-2001 |
And not that you think I do not believe that Saddam is a bad person. He is horrible and can probably be put in the same room with Hitler and Stalin and such. No doubt the world will be a better place without him. It is the way you do it that is wrong. George has not learned from his fathers mistakes. The Arab world will not look good on us freeing them from a tyrant. It could have been much easier with paying the right people the right money. Would have cost us less and be a clean deal. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 923 Registered: 5-2001 |
How about you finish answering my post and I won't jump the gun anymore. You have a few more questions in it. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 132 Registered: 2-2003 |
"MFZ - Was there any need to deliver any humanitarian goods to Iraq before the Gulf War? Did the US go in and screw up a woderful place of happiness?" Yes, if I recall correctly, Iraq was a decent place to live before Saddam went nuts and decided to invade Kuwait. He is afterall, a secular leader. I have never seen pics of women who are forced to wear those Afghanistan-style clothings in Baghdad, all of the people there wore western style clothing mostly. Even Saddam himself wore a suit and tie in his TV appearances before the war broke out. "Could Saddam not fund the repair of the oil fields with the money he has had to live the (real)good life since the gulf war? You and I both know he has money." As I've wrote it before, and I quote, "Also, all of the Iraqi assets have been frozen ever since they invaded Kuwait, so really, the only source of income that they had was the UN-managed and so-called 'oil-for-food' program, as well as several thousand dollars that they get from supplying Jordan with oil.". In fact, it was on the news just recently that the US plan to seize these international frozen assets to supposedly fund the reconstruction of Iraq. Try to read my previous posts first before jumping the gun, OK? | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 4121 Registered: 5-2001 |
Guys just open your eyes adn think! Why are we not doing anything in North Korea? They have the nuclear capability, they have sold weapons before and they will because that is all that North Korea produces and trades. Weapons. Why do we not march in there and stop them after they officially said we will restart our nuc program and thrown out the investigators. They have nuc capability in 6 months., ticking since 2 months, so they will have the bomb in 4 months! Why do we invade a country that is suspected to have the bomb and or chemical weapons but there is no real prove, when we could use our resourses and go after they guys that we know will have it soon and will sell it to whoever pays. The US will become a puppet to North Korea in June, when they will dangle the bomb over our heads and say pay us or else we will sell! We have just entered into the worst future of the entire human race and GWB and his ego is responsible for it. Well, let me clarify that, I do not give him credit that he actually made these decissions, he himself is just a puppet that is pushed by "advisors to the president" He is way to dumb to make these decissions himself! Since you can all ••••• and moan as much as you want, it will not do anything. ...and fact is, what was started a week ago needs to be finsihed now, no chance of pulling back before the job is done. So lets just pray that this is going to be easy and with the least loss of life on BOTH sides! Bless the men and women that are on the front lines, for they will risk their lifes because an idiot made a dumb decission! | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 922 Registered: 5-2001 |
MFZ - Was there any need to deliver any humanitarian goods to Iraq before the Gulf War? Did the US go in and screw up a woderful place of happiness? Could Saddam not fund the repair of the oil fields with the money he has had to live the (real)good life since the gulf war? You and I both know he has money. MOST IMPORTANTLY: HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT SADDAM AS A LEADER OF HIS PEOPLE/COUNTRY? WOULD IRAQ BE MUCH, MUCH BETTER OFF IF WE WOULD JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE? | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 131 Registered: 2-2003 |
Looking back at the report, I find this line to be the answer to whether Iraq was lying, "...They claim that Iraq was including in its numbers every contract submitted, which UN officials had not approved or were still pending. These included contracts not yet processed by UN officials, those where information was missing and those drawn up improperly by a supplier and not yet resubmitted before reaching the security council's sanctions committee." And also, "...The UN reports the figure as $5 billion. Iraq includes other material that is not blocked but just delayed, and so reports a figure of $8 billion." seems to asnwer the question of whether the Iraqis inflated the numbers or not. | ||
| Pat Pasqualini (Enzo)
Member Username: Enzo Post Number: 326 Registered: 2-2002 |
MFZ That article says "Baghdad routinely puts out higher figures for the blocked contracts, and this week reported $8bn worth of supplies, which it blamed equally on the US and Britain. UN officials say the figures are inaccurate." So they are lying to world and the UN says that they are. Why would you beleive in anything they would say? They are constantly proved to be lying. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 127 Registered: 2-2003 |
It's there on the webpage,if you bother to look at it. There's authors (with no cool internet nick names even), dates, publications, references to actual books, etc. For example, if you go here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,653608,00.html you can read about the "Washington blocks $5bn supplies to Iraq" - Reuters, as reported in The Guardian, February 21, 2002. The UN reports the figure as $5 billion. Iraq includes other material that is not blocked but just delayed, and so reports a figure of $8 billion." story. It's still online. I do agree on your assessment that only time will tell which side made the right choice. Stil, I think we do have the time to change the decision of the policymakers. If the US does become a sort of a hermit, I doubt that they'd las as long as any other country. Every country on this world depends on each other for trade, resources, labor, etc, it's simply impossible to survive without outside contact in the long run. Why do you think China wants to be part of the WTO? | ||
| Pat Pasqualini (Enzo)
Member Username: Enzo Post Number: 324 Registered: 2-2002 |
Go John Go!! | ||
| John J Stecher (Jjstecher)
Member Username: Jjstecher Post Number: 401 Registered: 1-2002 |
MFZ - also I agree with Ernesto there is no proof behind posting a website as being fact. I can whip one up here real fast as well, litter it with my beliefs and publish it under a fancy domain name. Does that make it fact. If you really want to support your facts please present authors, publication dates, as well as reference material. I bet some where on the internet I can find a site that says its perfectly ok to have sex with a goat and sheep at the same time and you will go to heaven for doing it, does that make it true? | ||
| John J Stecher (Jjstecher)
Member Username: Jjstecher Post Number: 400 Registered: 1-2002 |
MFZ I think that while you make a lot of great cases with proofs from internet and other sources, there are also just as many proofs and reasons for going to war as against it. I personally dont have the time to research the internet and thousands of pieces of information out there to provide the proofs on this board for them. I really dont see how in the hell you have time to do it either and make enough money to pay bills and survive. Our leaders and military planners have researched the same facts you have and probably know a lot more about the situation than you could ever hope to know, we do not just rush into some combat situation and put thousands of our own men and women in harms way for the hell of it. There are proofs behind what we are doing just as you and the anti-war people have proofs behind your protests and beliefs. The bottom line is hindsight is 20/20 where as the future is the great unknown. We all know that America and other countries have made stupid decisions in the past, but have also made a lot of good decisions. This is one of those turning points again, will this decision lead to a good ending or a bad one, no one knows and only time will tell. Also just a hypothetical question for you, what if the US just back off of all of its relations with other countries? We pulled the billions in aid and trade that we give to many countries around the world and just kept it all for ourselves, do you think then the world would be a big happy place since we wouldnt be bothering anyone anymore? Just trying to get away from the my belief is better than your debate. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1367 Registered: 2-2001 |
I dont understand how posting links to a website is proof of anything. Ernesto | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 941 Registered: 1-2002 |
MFZ, you can keep putting lipstick on the pig. But it is still a pig. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 125 Registered: 2-2003 |
"Become more violent silencing his opposition internally as we'll as start looking at neighboring countries for a little annexation." From history, supposedly the reason Saddam invaded Kuwait is because he said that Kuwait originally was part of Iraq, but was taken away from them by the British. I forgot the links to this story, so don't take it as gospel just yet. As for executing his opposition, this was also done DURING the time the US were allies with Iraq, the US knew it happened, but chose not to do anything about it, as the opposition in question were leaning towards communist Russia at that time. Who knows? If Iraq never invaded Kuwait, then the US would probably be it's biggest oil trading partner right now just as the Saudi Arabians are nowadays. | ||
| John J Stecher (Jjstecher)
Member Username: Jjstecher Post Number: 399 Registered: 1-2002 |
So MFZ you are saying that if Saddam had nice oil facilities he would have treated his people better and all the middle east would have lived in harmony? Yes the US did fund Iraq and at the time it did help him improve his oil facilities and other revenue generating areas of the Iraqi economy with the hopes that it would benefit not only our economy but also the worlds, however what did Saddam do to thank us all for our help? Become more violent silencing his opposition internally as we'll as start looking at neighboring countries for a little annexation. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 122 Registered: 2-2003 |
Forgot the links: http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/MiddleEast/TerrorInUSA/faq/Iraq.asp http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/WarOnTerror/45qaIraq.asp | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 121 Registered: 2-2003 |
OK, you want proof, here they are, proof that the sanctions are the main cause of the derelict state of the oil fields: "The UN's humanitarian programme in Iraq has been hampered by a record $5.3bn (�3.7bn) worth of blocked supplies, mainly by the US, it was revealed yesterday. The contracts include some $4.6bn worth of humanitarian supplies and $703m for OIL INDUSTRY EQUIPMENT, the UN office of the Iraq programme said in its weekly report. - from "Washington blocks $5bn supplies to Iraq" - Reuters" "...the sanctions regime in Iraq blocks far more than military supplies. In July 2002, $5.4 billion worth of goods were being held up, almost always at the insistence of the United States or Britain, covering such supplies as water purification systems, sewage pipes, medicines, hospital equipment, electricity and communications infrastructure, and OIL FIELD EQUIPMENT." Also, all of the Iraqi assets have been frozen ever since they invaded Kuwait, so really, the only source of income that they had was the UN-managed and so-called 'oil-for-food' program, as well as several thousand dollars that they get from supplying Jordan with oil. As for funding Iraq, the US is guilty of doing that too, back in 1980s. So really, there's no such thing as being innocent. The truth is not as black and white as you think it is. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1366 Registered: 2-2001 |
I guess the hundreds of millions of $ worth of palaces and bunkers Saddam has, as well as the billions he has in offshore accounts, come from the sale of crops and goods. Saddam uses oil money to fund all his crap, including military, weapons, terrorism and suicide bombers. Re France and Germany, the fact that they have oil contracts NOW with a terrorist regime is the problem! They are in essence FUNDING Iraq, and now we have to face the problemthey are worsening. That is why those two countries dont want to go to war and disrupt their status quo - so they can keep getting cheap oil and continue selling their goods to Iraq. Ernesto PS. Its incredible how people and countries continue to believe, protect and do business with Iraq, who has invaded (or at least tried to) its neighbors during the past 15 years. | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 896 Registered: 3-2002 |
mfz, how naive can you get: 'You know, the main reason those oil fields in Iraq are that pathetic and looking neglected in nature is because of the UN-imposed sanctions, not because of Saddam skimming off money from the oil-for-food program to feed his own stomach.' you honestly believe saddam has not skimmed money off the country's oil income for his own pleasure, bank accounts, paying republican guards, etc etc. i've got a bridge to sell you...... | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 119 Registered: 2-2003 |
"I don't care if the US stood up and said "Yes we want your oil reserves and contracts". I guarantee you that if we did that the Iraqi fields would be upgraded to current standards and a large portion of the money would go directly to Iraq and its people. Right now Saddam eats lobster while his people live like peasants and in fear." You know, the main reason those oil fields in Iraq are that pathetic and looking neglected in nature is because of the UN-imposed sanctions, not because of Saddam skimming off money from the oil-for-food program to feed his own stomach. I have read reports where the US and their allies themselves has blocked the sale of equipment and parts to repair the oil-mining equipment because of 'fear of the Iraqis using it for making WMDs'. I'll gladly post the link here, if anyone wants to read it. As for the oil contracts, France and Russia do have contracts on oil in Iraq RIGHT NOW, and NOT when the war is OVER. The reason that they are worried is because the US might use their probable victory in the war to nullify those contracts and give them to favored companies such as Halliburton, KBR etc. etc. | ||
| Rodney Haas (Icars)
Junior Member Username: Icars Post Number: 226 Registered: 3-2002 |
My understanding is a corporation that is a partnership between the Russians and French already have most of the drilling rights. A grat contract all signed and sealed by Saddam. OOOPS seems like he is not around to honor that contact. They will have to dig him up and sue him... | ||
| Phil Bryson (Phildo)
Junior Member Username: Phildo Post Number: 104 Registered: 8-2002 |
As I understand it, the French and Russians have most of the oil contracts already wrapped up. Dave - thanks for sharing that quote. | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 894 Registered: 3-2002 |
overwhelming your foe sounds like a pretty good plan to me | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1365 Registered: 2-2001 |
MFZ, that is a pretty ignorant comment. Ernesto | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 878 Registered: 7-2002 |
I don't care if the US stood up and said "Yes we want your oil reserves and contracts". I guarantee you that if we did that the Iraqi fields would be upgraded to current standards and a large portion of the money would go directly to Iraq and its people. Right now Saddam eats lobster while his people live like peasants and in fear. Get it in your heads...we don't WANT their oil..we WANT a stable gov't which leads to a stable world market for oil or donkey whips. | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 115 Registered: 2-2003 |
Classic Colin Powell tactic (overwhelming your foe). Still, the question is stupid, that I can agree on. Then again, we all know that the US doesn't want the land, they just want the oil-drilling rights and the contracts to rebuild said land. | ||
| TomD (Tifosi)
Advanced Member Username: Tifosi Post Number: 3091 Registered: 9-2001 |
yeah that is a great quote - the other thing people forget when they talk about colonialization is all previous "empires" never had an exit plan like we always do | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 876 Registered: 7-2002 |
I never heard that, but that is great. Did he have that response in his pocket already or was that off the cuff? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 940 Registered: 1-2002 |
When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush. He answered this STUPID question by saying that, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return." It became very quiet in the room. |