Pardon Me?

[Ronin]

http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/2003/07/09/Rumsfeld_Iraq030709

[Charlito Cafe]

WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those lying sons of bitches.....say one thing and three months later try to cover their ass. Christ, this administration gets worse every day.

[WithStamin]

He said that the war was not about new weapons evidence. The weapons that were already there, and progressing in amount and technology, were the threat. We knew that he wouldn't hesitate to use them because he had used them on his own people. Just as important, we knew that we weren't invulnerable to attack. 9-11 woke us up to the fact that we can be attacked and that there are still enemies out there. The coalition decided to do something about it.

[evil zach]

The bush admistrations lie is crumbling more and more each day. I'm just waiting for the day when they say "We lied outright"


Now I just want to clear some thing up. Often the argument is used that Saddam used chemical and biological wepons on his own people. Usualy this is refernece to when he gassed the kurds in 88 (The Us didn't seem to care at the time). He is so tribal, he dosn't see the kruds as his own people at all. So that argument dosn't really hold up.

[trogdor]

well he's also known for torturing political prisoners with chemical baths and such but a lot of countries do similar things anyway

[evil zach]

If you want to bring human rights records into this, the US has allied themselves with much more opressive governments. Also the US have been burrying Iraqi's in mass graves.

[BuriedAlive]

ok i need to watch the news more often

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by evil zach
If you want to bring human rights records into this, the US has allied themselves with much more opressive governments. Also the US have been burrying Iraqi's in mass graves. I don't think that the human right violations of Saddam Hussein were the main issue. The main thing was that he had weapons of mass destruction. Couple this with the fact that he killed 300,000 of his own people ruthlessly, and you get the feeling that Saddam isn't a very safe guy to have around (because it shows he won't hesitate to use those weapons).

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach


Now I just want to clear some thing up. Often the argument is used that Saddam used chemical and biological wepons on his own people. Usualy this is refernece to when he gassed the kurds in 88 (The Us didn't seem to care at the time). He is so tribal, he dosn't see the kruds as his own people at all. So that argument dosn't really hold up.

its genocide, and that arguement holds up...

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
If you want to bring human rights records into this, the US has allied themselves with much more opressive governments. Also the US have been burrying Iraqi's in mass graves.

yes, but the iraqis that the US have buried aren't innocent civilians, they were not extermintated in way that saddam exterminated his people.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by evil zach

Now I just want to clear some thing up. Often the argument is used that Saddam used chemical and biological wepons on his own people. Usualy this is refernece to when he gassed the kurds in 88 (The Us didn't seem to care at the time). He is so tribal, he dosn't see the kruds as his own people at all. So that argument dosn't really hold up. [/QUOTE

[QUOTE]Originally posted by evil zach
Also the US have been burrying Iraqi's in mass graves.

wow!! your defending saddum when he murders out of hatred adn for racist reasons, but critizes amercia when we do it to bring freedom to an oppressed country...............boy you really stick by your socialist buddies..............

also if he didn't think the kurds were his country men.....why didn't he give them there own country?

[The Nephilm]

Originally posted by WithStamin
I don't think that the human right violations of Saddam Hussein were the main issue. The main thing was that he had weapons of mass destruction. Couple this with the fact that he killed 300,000 of his own people ruthlessly, and you get the feeling that Saddam isn't a very safe guy to have around (because it shows he won't hesitate to use those weapons).

So if the issue were his WMD's coupled with his treatment of citizens, why didn't we invade China, cus god knows they have a human rights record 10x worse than Saddam.

I don't give a fuck what you say the war was about, there is absolute certainty that there were more issues involved that national security. Namely, "You tried to kill my daddy" and oil.

And as for Saddam killing 300,000 of his own people. UN sanctions that were created by the US directly led to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. And that is JUST CHILDREN. I'm not even going to try to calculate the number of total deaths that the US oppresion led to.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by The Nephilm

And as for Saddam killing 300,000 of his own people. UN sanctions that were created by the US directly led to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. And that is JUST CHILDREN. I'm not even going to try to calculate the number of total deaths that the US oppresion led to.

saddum created/caused the UN sanctions, not the US..........you know this..........

Do you really think saddum cared in any way for these children or would have helped them if the UN sanctions he caused weren't in place?

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by WithStamin
I don't think that the human right violations of Saddam Hussein were the main issue. The main thing was that he had weapons of mass destruction. Couple this with the fact that he killed 300,000 of his own people ruthlessly, and you get the feeling that Saddam isn't a very safe guy to have around (because it shows he won't hesitate to use those weapons).

But he doesn't have any WMDs. At leas I don't think so, gotta wait for all the evidence. And read my other posts about Saddam's human rights violation. (FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAMIC REPUBLIC ON IT"S WAY!!!!!!!)

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
How much extra oil have we gotten since the end of the war? Has your gas prices dropped dramatically?

Um, no because the only people benefiting will be Bush's motherfucking pirate buddies who have sole control over Iraqi reconstruction. That's what the whole war has been about all along, $$$$$$$$$$ for the aristocracy.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
That's the point, you dont know that he doesnt. I think i'd believe the U.S. intelligence saying he does have WMD's over Iraq saying they dont have WMD's. Maybe that's just me.

It still doesn't justify a war if we aren't sure he has them. Maybe if we'd allow the United Nations to tell us what they thought instead of just telling Hans Blix to cram it because we're America, we could have avoided this situation. The Administration went into this whole situation with a mindset that we are going to attack no matter what, and when the UN decided that an attack would do more harm than good, Bush got all pissy and went in anyway. And so far, there are no WMDs. If you US intelligence knew they were there, why haven't we found them yet?

[evil zach]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
wow!! your defending saddum when he murders out of hatred adn for racist reasons, but critizes amercia when we do it to bring freedom to an oppressed country...............boy you really stick by your socialist buddies..............

also if he didn't think the kurds were his country men.....why didn't he give them there own country?
Don't you even think about accusing of defendig saddam hussein again! I was't defending genocide at all. You really need to get passed the "for us or against us menatlity". It dosn't work in the real world and leads to things such as genocide. Saddam dosn't see the Kurds as his own people, and thats why he gassed them. If had been able to get passed his own tribal "for us or against us menatlity" (in realtion to the tribe he was apart of) then its not very likley that the gassings would have happend. Now I'm not accusing you or anybody else of wishing genocide upon another group, so before you accuse me of that as well, get that notion out of your head. Now on to the issue of "liberating" Iraq. Unemplyment rates as high as 60%, people denied medical treatment because their ailment was't caused by US troops, people still with out power and water, protesters being gunned down (and throwing rocks dose not just justify shooting bullets), peoples homes being serched in the middle of the night, people disapearing, and a general state of chaos. If thats what you call freedom and liberty, you must have a very, very loose definition. and Finaly, I'm not a fucking socialist.

[Ronin]

Originally posted by evil zach
Don't you even think about accusing of defendig saddam hussein again! I was't defending genocide at all. You really need to get passed the "for us or against us menatlity". It dosn't work in the real world and leads to things such as genocide. Saddam dosn't see the Kurds as his own people, and thats why he gassed them. If had been able to get passed his own tribal "for us or against us menatlity" (in realtion to the tribe he was apart of) then its not very likley that the gassings would have happend. Now I'm not accusing you or anybody else of wishing genocide upon another group, so before you accuse me of that as well, get that notion out of your head. Now on to the issue of "liberating" Iraq. Unemplyment rates as high as 60%, people denied medical treatment because their ailment was't caused by US troops, people still with out power and water, protesters being gunned down (and throwing rocks dose not just justify shooting bullets), peoples homes being serched in the middle of the night, people disapearing, and a general state of chaos. If thats what you call freedom and liberty, you must have a very, very loose definition. and Finaly, I'm not a fucking socialist.

Cram it you Socialist bastard.

[Matthew]

Originally posted by cal1082
From all the reports i've seen it was more chaos the first week or so. Now it's calmed down. I even read a report a week or so ago that there's more people are getting electricity and water now than they were when saddam was in power.

Thats all socialist talk :D

Really? Becuase in the last issue of "The American Conservative" (of all places) I read about rhe conditions in Iraq and they were less than "calmed down". The article was titled "The Mess WE Made" and I dont know HOW you could support the war effort after reading it. In fact reports have shown an INCREASE in oppsoition to US forces in Iraq.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
Here's alot of the companies who have been awareded contracts and their connections to Bush. You can determine for yourself how strong these connections are.

1. Halliburton- (2nd largest provider of oil and gas pipeline services)
CONNECTIONS: Dick Cheney--- Former CEO
Lawrence Engleburger--- Sits on the companies board of directors.

2. Kellog, Brown, and Root-
CONNECTIONS: same as Halliburton because it is owned by Halliburton

3. Bechtel Group Inc.-
CONNECTIONS: George Shultz--- was company president for 8 years before becoming Reagan's Secretary of state
CEO Riley Bechtel--- Serves on the Presidents Export Council
There's also a couple of other people who serve in diffrent sections of our gov. that once worked for Bechtel

4. MCI Worldcom-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

5. Stevedoring Services of America-
CONNECTIONS: NONE
6. ABT Associations Inc.-
CONNECTIONS: Janet Ballantyne--- one of the vice presidents of the company, and once worked for USAID.
Charles Abt--- Founder of the company who is a republican and once ran for congress.
Kerry Healy--- Consultant for ABT, and is leutanent Gov. of Mass.

7. Black and Veatch Holding Company-
CONNECTIONS: Gave 5,000 dollars to Bush's Presidental Campaign

8. Creative Associations Internations Inc.-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

9. DYNCorp/ Computer Science Corporation-
CONNECTIONS: Did work for the defense department and CIA for many years.

10. Fluor Corp.-
CONNECTIONS: Philip Carroll--- CEO of Fluor, appointed by the Defense dept. as chairman of an advisory committee to oversee production of Iraqi Oil.
Kenneth Oscar--- Vice President of Fluor. Is actually connected to the Clinton Administration

11. Internations Resource Group-
CONNECTIONS: David Joslyn--- Vice President. Worked for USAID
Matthew Mendis--- Vice President. Worked for USAID
2 others are also V.P. and worked for USAID

12. Louis Berger Group-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

13. Menlo Worldwide Forwarding-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

14. Parsons Corp.-
CONNECTIONS: Elaino Chao--- Until 2001 its Board of Directors included current U.S Secretary of Labor Elaino Chao

15. Pereni Corporation-
CONNECTIONS: Richard Blum--- owns all of the common stock of Pereni and is married to Diane Feinstein (Dem.- Cali.)

16. Reserach Triangle Inst.
CONNECTIONS: NONE

17. Skylink Air and Logistic Support USA Inc.-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

18. Washington Group Internationl-
CONNECTIONS: NONE

The majority of those do indeed have connections. None of this money is getting back to the American people, and the money is dirty because they invaded a country with no justification to get it.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
I agree it doesnt justify a war if we're not sure, but the Bush adminstration says it's sure. U.S. intelligence never said they knew where they were.
We know he had them and everybody does. Thats why they signed the resoltuion back in Nov. that told him to disarm

So.....umm..where are they now?

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
I'm sure opposition has increased, the iraqi people dont trust us and want us gone asap. It has calmed down from chaos though.

But now several of the religious group Saddam persecuted are pushing for control of the government. Sure the US will maintain control for a limited time, but it will soon collapse into an oppressive religious state run by Islamic extremists, much worse than Saddam's secular state.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
Thats what they're looking for. Dont you think if we knew where they were we would have said so before the war, and the U.N. inspectors could have just not been there?

But we attacked without being sure???? What if we don't find any? Whatever happened until innocent until proven guilty.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
Maybe, or maybe we can put a stable gov. in there.

Maybe, but the cards are stacked heavily against that prospect.

[Charlito Cafe]

Originally posted by cal1082
They said they're sure they have them.
How are they sure they have them but don't know where they are?

[yeat182]

Originally posted by The Nephilm


And as for Saddam killing 300,000 of his own people. UN sanctions that were created by the US directly led to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. And that is JUST CHILDREN. I'm not even going to try to calculate the number of total deaths that the US oppresion led to.

i know we do this everytime its brought up, but i feel i should offer a counter point...

saddam is responsible for those deaths, he took the money from the oil for food program and used it to buy weapons and improve palaces, not buy food and medicine. also he would take the food and medicine sent by the UN and other humanitarian organizations and sell it to other countries (he would sell baby formula to Jordan for example) thus making a 100% profit on it, while at the same time causing his people to sufffer. and lets not forget that it was saddams fault that sanctions were placed on Iraq in the first place.

[evil zach]

Saddam is a dick so we punish the rest of the Iraqi population?

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Charlito Cafe
(FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAMIC REPUBLIC ON IT"S WAY!!!!!!!)

there is no garauntee of that, there are muslim countries that are fundamentalists (turkey, jordan...)

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Charlito Cafe
Um, no because the only people benefiting will be Bush's motherfucking pirate buddies who have sole control over Iraqi reconstruction. That's what the whole war has been about all along, $$$$$$$$$$ for the aristocracy.

first of all, the US isn't going to recieve any money from the sale of Iraqi oil, Iraq is. the only money the FOREIGN oil companies will make is in the distribution and drilling of it, which they already do in every other oil producing country. finally, we won't get the oil any cheaper from Iraq than any other country becaue OPEC sets the price of oil for ALL oil exporting countries, its the same for everyone.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Charlito Cafe
How are they sure they have them but don't know where they are?

the whole world knew he had them at he end of the first gulf war, and he never proved he had disarmed, so there for he must either still have them, or been unwilling to prove he did not. it is illogical for him to have destroyed the weapons and refused to prove it, knowing full well the consequences of not providing proof. that leaves "he still has them" as the most logical conclusion.

[trogdor]

The sanctions against Iraq were quite uesless as Saddam obviously didnt give a fuck about his people starving. He still managed to find the money to build giant mosques in his name and build a few more presidential palaces and buy more weapons..

Although most people would LIKE to think so, the United Nations isn't exactly the most powerful group of people in the world and the United States is definately not the first to have gone started conflict without UN approval. Just because an action defies laws, it doesn't instantly guarantee that those actions were wrong.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by evil zach
Don't you even think about accusing of defendig saddam hussein again! I was't defending genocide at all. You really need to get passed the "for us or against us menatlity". It dosn't work in the real world and leads to things such as genocide. Saddam dosn't see the Kurds as his own people, and thats why he gassed them. If had been able to get passed his own tribal "for us or against us menatlity" (in realtion to the tribe he was apart of) then its not very likley that the gassings would have happend. Now I'm not accusing you or anybody else of wishing genocide upon another group, so before you accuse me of that as well, get that notion out of your head.

yet again sarcasim........goes way over your head.....but thats fine.............

and with "us or against us" mentality not working in the real world and leading to "genocide.....lets talk about your appeasement menatlity and how many deaths and Genocide's it has lead to?

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by evil zach
Saddam is a dick so we punish the rest of the Iraqi population?

oh no......we should have left him in power.......he would have gotten better with age, i'm sure of it, and when his insane sons came into power following his death, they too would probably have calm down......


and punishment? what do you think there lives were like under saddum.....days at the beach?

[evil zach]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
yet again sarcasim........goes way over your head.....but thats fine.............

and with "us or against us" mentality not working in the real world and leading to "genocide.....lets talk about your appeasement menatlity and how many deaths and Genocide's it has lead to?
Death just leads to more death.

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by evil zach
Death just leads to more death. Not really... If you kill a mass murderer, that saves lives in the long run.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by evil zach
Death just leads to more death.

and ignorance leads to opression and death.........so whats your point......one way or another problem matters/issues need to be looked at and taken care of...........