Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 76

Thread: Attacking Iraq

  1. #51
    uncivilized savage BadKarma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Hall of the Mountain King
    Posts
    432
    Originally posted by Nights
    Who's to say the next president.. hell, even the current one.. won't decide to start dropping bombs.. or sending out troops (death = death).. for his own interest.
    The people, through our elected Congress.
    If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace...
    Thomas Paine


    If you're in a fair fight, your tactics SUCK!

  2. #52
    uncivilized savage BadKarma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Hall of the Mountain King
    Posts
    432
    Originally posted by Nights
    You think the fact citizens are armed mean a damn thing? You know what small percentage of german population was actually Nazi under Hitler? The whole world war 2 thing could have been easily taken down from the inside out, but people, normal regular people, are not exactly the type to make a stand. Their sheep. How many times in your own history have bad decisions been made yet nobody stood up because it didn't really affect them, or because they were afraid to.

    The fact that people are sheep is what has made the U.S. a superpower. The dog stepped up to the plate and tried to set things in order. Now he is critizised for it. "you were too mean to the wolf" Maybe that's why I lean towards isolationalism?
    If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace...
    Thomas Paine


    If you're in a fair fight, your tactics SUCK!

  3. #53
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    I do not want to say the USA is of cruel nature as a superpower more that the existance of superpowers is cruel.

    If you think pinochet did so much for chile why is he portrayed as one of the greatest war criminals of all time? I hate this kind of hypocrisy.

    but the details on Iraq and Chile are just the details on iraq and chile. there are so many countries in which the usa installed a power that suited them first, and then the people of that country.

    I agree with capitalism but not with injustice in its name.

    Do you think the average Iraqi will benefit from the USA attacking Iraq now?

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    677
    "If you think pinochet did so much for chile why is he portrayed as one of the greatest war criminals of all time? I hate this kind of hypocrisy."

    That Pinochet did much for Chile's economy is accepted by most people who have studied Chilean history. It cannot be denied.


    Yes, he did terrible things. But given the time period *human rights wasn't the thing back then*, circumstances (HUGE crime rate, chaotic clashes between political parties and the govt., previous socialists had no control), and the result... the emergence of Chile as a prosperous nation in South America, I would say Chile would have been worse off had we supported the socialists/commies.

    Certain people suffered under Pinochet's rule, but his economic policies proved to be quite beneficial for future Chileans.

    On the other hand, even more people suffered under the chaos of Allende and there was NO economic development.

    "but the details on Iraq and Chile are just the details on iraq and chile. there are so many countries in which the usa installed a power that suited them first, and then the people of that country."

    The US govt. keeps American interests first. thats just reality and every govt. does the same. The US did most of its govt. disposing in the Cold war era.... that was necessary to stem Soviet influence. And the fact remains that had these countries gone under Soviet influence, and adopted Communist style governing systems.... they would have ****ed up VERY badly. The US interventions generally led to a better outcome (while furthering interests) for the future of X nation than if the Soviets had intervened.

    the fact is Most US allies are well off to this day.... but the soviet allies are another story.

    If your argument is "the US has ****ed up in its foreign policy in the past", i would agree with you.

    However that doesn't seem to be what you are arguing.

    "Do you think the average Iraqi will benefit from the USA attacking Iraq now?"

    Yes. I do. In the long run. Hell maybe even in the short term.

  5. #55
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Most "made" US allies, from what i understand have a flourishing very small upper class and a huge poor working class today.

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    677
    Your understanding is incorrect.

    however, for the sake of debate..i'll ignore that.

    lets say they would have sided with the USSR and allowed them to extend their influence on them...
    lets say they would have implemented socialist/communist policies.

    they would be in a far worse position.
    thats what matters.

  7. #57
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    That's really the crux of this argument isn't it?

    Reinier, I don't think you're old enough to remember what it was like to have the Soviet Union breathing down your neck. Even I only remember bits an pieces of it from growing up in the '80s, and I was too young to truly appreciate it.

    People here in their later 20's and older would have an even different perspective.

    You forget we were actively trying to interdict a VERY aggressive enemy that would have very easily taken over the world if we hadn't done all those nasty things.

    Its really easy to sit in your comfortable Holland and criticize from 30 years in the future, I'll imagine.
    Vin Diesel has a fever.. and the only prescription is more cowbell.

    Budiak: That girl I maced
    Budiak: macked
    Budiak: heh maced
    Budiak: I wish

    ShmrckPmp5: a good thing people can't fire guns through the computer...your ass would have been shot years ago

    Y2A 47: youre smooth as hell
    Y2A 47: thats why you get outta tickets, and into panties

    galileo: you're a fucking beast and I hate you
    galileo: hate

    assgrabbers are never subtile, they will grabb ass whereever they go,public or not, I know the type, because I am one. - Rock

  8. #58
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691
    Bush just likes to kill brown people. It's probably that simple.

  9. #59
    Totally, dude!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    1,085
    Originally posted by Saturday Fever
    Bush just likes to kill brown people. It's probably that simple.
    Right.................

  10. #60
    MulletII - AKA Ninja Boner Gyno Rhino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    FFFA Headquarters
    Posts
    11,468
    Reiner, you really should rethink alot of the stuff you've posted in this thread.

    Don't reply to this.. Just look back at what you have said and honestly THINK about it. Put yourself in all the possible positions.
    Founding Member and CEO of the FFFA

    "All that matters is beauty on the inside! Outside beauty doesn't matter!"
    ~This is something ugly people say to feel better about themselves...

    "Strength and size don't matter! It's not fair to judge training knowledge based on strength and size!"
    ~This is something wussy people say to feel better about themselves...

    Pearls of Wisdom...


    Resident Ninja Demon (with a pet Radioactive Sloth) and SchlonkeyMaster of WBB!

    Rock is my 'Big Viking Brother', and not in a homo-esque way.

    And no COLON jokes, bastards!

  11. #61
    uncivilized savage BadKarma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Hall of the Mountain King
    Posts
    432
    Originally posted by Saturday Fever
    Bush just likes to kill brown people. It's probably that simple.
    *puts on kevlar vest and waits for the knock on the door*
    If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace...
    Thomas Paine


    If you're in a fair fight, your tactics SUCK!

  12. #62
    Back at it
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,803
    Originally posted by Reinier
    Most "made" US allies, from what i understand have a flourishing very small upper class and a huge poor working class today.
    LOL... our 'poor working class' still has cable TV, microwaves, and clean drinking water for the most part. To me, that doesn't sound like that bad of a deal. Besides, if you want to move up in life in the USA there is opportunity. Being in a lower class just means the opportunity might not be as readily available, but it's still there and it's an insult to families like mine who went from poverty to living a very successful life.

    There are so many comments you've made that are completely invalid and I'm not going to bother responding to them.

  13. #63
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Originally posted by GIS


    LOL... our 'poor working class' still has cable TV, microwaves, and clean drinking water for the most part. To me, that doesn't sound like that bad of a deal. Besides, if you want to move up in life in the USA there is opportunity. Being in a lower class just means the opportunity might not be as readily available, but it's still there and it's an insult to families like mine who went from poverty to living a very successful life.

    There are so many comments you've made that are completely invalid and I'm not going to bother responding to them.
    Your telling me the average citizen in algeria (or whatever you call the country) libya, zaire, argentina, chile or saudi arabia has access to clean drinking water, tv, a micro?

    Total wild bs.

  14. #64
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Originally posted by PowerManDL
    That's really the crux of this argument isn't it?

    Reinier, I don't think you're old enough to remember what it was like to have the Soviet Union breathing down your neck. Even I only remember bits an pieces of it from growing up in the '80s, and I was too young to truly appreciate it.

    People here in their later 20's and older would have an even different perspective.

    You forget we were actively trying to interdict a VERY aggressive enemy that would have very easily taken over the world if we hadn't done all those nasty things.

    Its really easy to sit in your comfortable Holland and criticize from 30 years in the future, I'll imagine.
    The colonisation of countries by manipulation of their upper class and government, for the sake of the economy, or military sake, whatever you want, took place before the cold war and is taking place after it.

  15. #65
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Originally posted by Gyno Rhino
    Reiner, you really should rethink alot of the stuff you've posted in this thread.

    Don't reply to this.. Just look back at what you have said and honestly THINK about it. Put yourself in all the possible positions.
    This thread GOT me thinking. it got me thinking about politics more than ever before. My father was out and i couldn`t discuss it with him and i wanted to. hes back now btw.

    this thread has made me think about all the angles and made me realise that altho they are smart and make good points, people with opinions/views like my fathers and willem oltmans are not the end all totally right and dont know a lot of things.

    I do still want to reply to statements that were made towards me that i do not agree with.

    I also hope that you try to do the same and take a hyper critical, "paranoid", conspiracy weary look on the world today and you will see how much freaking sense everything makes from that angle.

    I do realise that even IF its all true and the american government and economical powers take mass advantage of poor workers abroad and the natural resources of their land, even then this is not the fault of Joe american.

    on the side, I dont know if this is known by people in the USA or not, but in the easter speech this year the Pope sayd
    "I call upon the people of the world to prevent a possible war against Iraq"
    and this was not shown on US television. I know only a small part gets shown in the first place, but I still found it odd when i heard it. I also know that there are strong rumours of corruption even in the vatican and that most people these days think religious leaders shouldn`t touch politics, but its such an outspoken statement that Id say it deserves broadcast.
    I`m an atheist btw.



    ps. my name is Reinier
    Last edited by Reinier; 01-09-2003 at 11:03 AM.

  16. #66
    Back at it
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,803
    Originally posted by Reinier


    Your telling me the average citizen in algeria (or whatever you call the country) libya, zaire, argentina, chile or saudi arabia has access to clean drinking water, tv, a micro?

    Total wild bs.
    I simply misread your post and was refering to the US lower class.

    Do you expect that when we make an alliance it automatically results in wealth? We pump billions and trillions of dollars into economies of other countries not to mention endless organizations that raise money and devote time in not only allied nations, but enemy nations. Look at post war Germany! How many trillions of dollars did the US and the allies pump into their economy to get it running again? Heck, after it was all said and done we even wrote off the debt. At the time I'm sure people criticized us for doing it, and you would have screamed that we were trying to manipulate them for our own benefit. But now they have one of if not the highest personal incomes int he world, a democracy, and a stable social structure. The same scenario applies to post-war Japan.

    It sounds to me like you're yet another world citizen who takes for granted what the US does. Granted we've made our mistakes in the past but our foreign policy now takes a proactive and not reactive approach to the world, and if it means never turning our backs on what nuthead leaders like Hussein do so be it. But you know what? Should enemy forces ever invade or bomb Holland guess who's military will most likely lead retaliation to help the country out.

    Ironically, you're still welcome in the United States even though you just wasted too much time bashing the United States. Anybody a plane ticket into the US and a VISA could come here, work, and eventually become a citizen. I have several friends who came here as refugees with a mere suitcase in their hands but became millionairs through hard work. You think Mr. Hussein allows that? The response in Afghanistan and now Iraq is to try and keep our freedom. After 9-11 I hated how everybody said 'protecting our freedom" because I didn't understand what it meant. But now that it's harder for people to enter the country and security is upped our freedom is being slightly taken away. Are we supposed to just take a reactive approach in doing anything?

    Some people call us arrogent, but I call it pride. We are comprised of people from every country in the world, so to sit here and criticize us is to criticize yourself.
    Last edited by GIS; 01-09-2003 at 12:04 PM.

  17. #67
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Once again- i do not criticize american people. i criticize human nature in what happens when they get enough power.

    I know Holland and europe entirely has benefit in the US
    Last edited by Reinier; 01-09-2003 at 12:41 PM.

  18. #68
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Originally posted by Reinier
    The colonisation of countries by manipulation of their upper class and government, for the sake of the economy, or military sake, whatever you want, took place before the cold war and is taking place after it.
    Not by *us* it wasn't. You can blame that on Great Britain.

    The US was largely isolationist until WW2. Afterwards, it was either act or watch the Soviets take over.

    Would you rather be living in a Communist world?
    Vin Diesel has a fever.. and the only prescription is more cowbell.

    Budiak: That girl I maced
    Budiak: macked
    Budiak: heh maced
    Budiak: I wish

    ShmrckPmp5: a good thing people can't fire guns through the computer...your ass would have been shot years ago

    Y2A 47: youre smooth as hell
    Y2A 47: thats why you get outta tickets, and into panties

    galileo: you're a fucking beast and I hate you
    galileo: hate

    assgrabbers are never subtile, they will grabb ass whereever they go,public or not, I know the type, because I am one. - Rock

  19. #69
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    other than that most of these countries were usa`d during the cold war, im still not sure if its all, why are they still in this position?

  20. #70
    Powerlifting Stoner pastdoubt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    458
    originally posted at another forum (I forgot which one, all I did was copy it and put it into a text document, it's an interesting read)

    I am quite shocked at just how quickly people have forgotten about those poor bastards that jumped hand in hand from the top floors of the World Trade Center.

    //No we have not . I for one would like to see some proof that the big bad Arabs we responsible for 911. The FBI presented a list of hijackers right after 911, later 4 of the people on the list were found ALIVE. So why don't you tell us who was actually on those planes? IMO once just one person from the list was found alive the whole list loses creditability. Meanwhile you'll go on and tell us how powerful and great the US is. When we point out how many times off course aircraft has been intercepted BEFORE 911
    you have no answer WHY 4 planes could fly around for so long after we knew they were hijacked. So let us suppose the military did it's job like 100's of times before. Maybe just maybe the WTC would still be standing. Or perhaps you believe there was a good reason why our Jets stood down on 911????? Save the surprise explanation for the dumb asses you hang with because the 911 attacks were discussed and planned for 20 years ago. Surprise my ass just watch the video of Bush's non response when he was told in that classroom we were under attack.
    Have you ever heard of TREASON, that video proves BUSH KNEW.//

    That for me was the definitive moment at which I said I would gladly go to war with anyone who posed a threat to me and my familys liberty and safety and Iraq pose that threat.

    ?? Thats exactly what it was supposed to do. It worked before in Pearl Harbor and we all know American's don't learn **** from history.On October 7, 1940, Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum of the Office of Naval Intelligence submitted a memo to Navy Captains Walter Anderson and Dudley Knox (whose endorsement is included in the following scans). Captains Anderson and Knox were two of President Roosevelt's most trusted military advisors. The memo, scanned below, detailed an 8 step plan to provoke Japan into attacking the United States. President Roosevelt, over the course of 1941, implemented all 8 of the recommendations contained in the McCollum memo.
    This memo, which proves that the government of the United States desired to lure Japan into an attack, was declassified in 1994. It took fifty years for the truth about Pearl Harbor to be revealed. Will we have to wait that long for the truth of 9-11 to come out?


    Do you think for one minute Saddam has just sat back and accepted what happened in the last Gulf war, I bet my bottom dollar he is funding and fuelling anti-american terrorist organisations around the world, I wouldn't be surprised if he had prior knowledge of 9/11 and I'd also wager that he is a main player in the terrorist attacks that are being plotted against America right now. He knows that theres no way he can successfully win an all out war with America so cloak and dagger tactics are much more effective.


    // I invite you read what a REAL american Patriot wrote. Ron Paul is a true american patriot and he has some questions so come on answer them for us since you are so knowledgable on Iraq.
    Congressman Ron Paul
    U.S. House of Representatives
    September 10, 2002

    QUESTIONS THAT WON'T BE ASKED ABOUT IRAQ

    Soon we hope to have hearings on the pending war with Iraq. I am concerned there are some questions that won’t be asked- and maybe will not even be allowed to be asked. Here are some questions I would like answered by those who are urging us to start this war.

    1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?

    2. Is it not also true that we are willing to bomb Iraq now because we know it cannot retaliate- which just confirms that there is no real threat?

    3. Is it not true that those who argue that even with inspections we cannot be sure that Hussein might be hiding weapons, at the same time imply that we can be more sure that weapons exist in the absence of inspections?

    4. Is it not true that the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency was able to complete its yearly verification mission to Iraq just this year with Iraqi cooperation?

    5. Is it not true that the intelligence community has been unable to develop a case tying Iraq to global terrorism at all, much less the attacks on the United States last year? Does anyone remember that 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and that none came from Iraq?

    6. Was former CIA counter-terrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro wrong when he recently said there is no confirmed evidence of Iraq’s links to terrorism?

    7. Is it not true that the CIA has concluded there is no evidence that a Prague meeting between 9/11 hijacker Atta and Iraqi intelligence took place?

    8. Is it not true that northern Iraq, where the administration claimed al-Qaeda were hiding out, is in the control of our "allies," the Kurds?

    9. Is it not true that the vast majority of al-Qaeda leaders who escaped appear to have safely made their way to Pakistan, another of our so-called allies?

    10. Has anyone noticed that Afghanistan is rapidly sinking into total chaos, with bombings and assassinations becoming daily occurrences; and that according to a recent UN report the al-Qaeda "is, by all accounts, alive and well and poised to strike again, how, when, and where it chooses"?

    11. Why are we taking precious military and intelligence resources away from tracking down those who did attack the United States- and who may again attack the United States- and using them to invade countries that have not attacked the United States?

    12. Would an attack on Iraq not just confirm the Arab world's worst suspicions about the US, and isn't this what bin Laden wanted?

    13. How can Hussein be compared to Hitler when he has no navy or air force, and now has an army 1/5 the size of twelve years ago, which even then proved totally inept at defending the country?

    14. Is it not true that the constitutional power to declare war is exclusively that of the Congress? Should presidents, contrary to the Constitution, allow Congress to concur only when pressured by public opinion? Are presidents permitted to rely on the UN for permission to go to war?

    15. Are you aware of a Pentagon report studying charges that thousands of Kurds in one village were gassed by the Iraqis, which found no conclusive evidence that Iraq was responsible, that Iran occupied the very city involved, and that evidence indicated the type of gas used was more likely controlled by Iran not Iraq?

    16. Is it not true that anywhere between 100,000 and 300,000 US soldiers have suffered from Persian Gulf War syndrome from the first Gulf War, and that thousands may have died?

    17. Are we prepared for possibly thousands of American casualties in a war against a country that does not have the capacity to attack the United States?

    18. Are we willing to bear the economic burden of a 100 billion dollar war against Iraq, with oil prices expected to skyrocket and further rattle an already shaky American economy? How about an estimated 30 years occupation of Iraq that some have deemed necessary to "build democracy" there?

    19. Iraq’s alleged violations of UN resolutions are given as reason to initiate an attack, yet is it not true that hundreds of UN Resolutions have been ignored by various countries without penalty?

    20. Did former President Bush not cite the UN Resolution of 1990 as the reason he could not march into Baghdad, while supporters of a new attack assert that it is the very reason we can march into Baghdad?

    21. Is it not true that, contrary to current claims, the no-fly zones were set up by Britain and the United States without specific approval from the United Nations?

    22. If we claim membership in the international community and conform to its rules only when it pleases us, does this not serve to undermine our position, directing animosity toward us by both friend and foe?

    23. How can our declared goal of bringing democracy to Iraq be believable when we prop up dictators throughout the Middle East and support military tyrants like Musharaf in Pakistan, who overthrew a democratically-elected president?

    24. Are you familiar with the 1994 Senate Hearings that revealed the U.S. knowingly supplied chemical and biological materials to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war and as late as 1992- including after the alleged Iraqi gas attack on a Kurdish village?

    25. Did we not assist Saddam Hussein’s rise to power by supporting and encouraging his invasion of Iran? Is it honest to criticize Saddam now for his invasion of Iran, which at the time we actively supported?

    26. Is it not true that preventive war is synonymous with an act of aggression, and has never been considered a moral or legitimate US policy?

    27. Why do the oil company executives strongly support this war if oil is not the real reason we plan to take over Iraq?

    28. Why is it that those who never wore a uniform and are confident that they won’t have to personally fight this war are more anxious for this war than our generals?

    29. What is the moral argument for attacking a nation that has not initiated aggression against us, and could not if it wanted?

    30. Where does the Constitution grant us permission to wage war for any reason other than self-defense?

    31. Is it not true that a war against Iraq rejects the sentiments of the time-honored Treaty of Westphalia, nearly 400 years ago, that countries should never go into another for the purpose of regime change?

    32. Is it not true that the more civilized a society is, the less likely disagreements will be settled by war?

    33. Is it not true that since World War II Congress has not declared war and- not coincidentally- we have not since then had a clear-cut victory?

    34. Is it not true that Pakistan, especially through its intelligence services, was an active supporter and key organizer of the Taliban?

    35. Why don't those who want war bring a formal declaration of war resolution to the floor of Congress?

    Can't wait to see your answers. Try to refrain from parroting the lies of Bush jr. and his merry men of zionism.//


    All these people who are on here now bitching about how they don't want to fight a war that has nothing to do with them, or because they have nothing to gain, those are the exact same people that would have been bitching if Bush had sat back and did nothing after the events of 9/11


    //Hello did you see the NON reaction of Bush when he was told his country was under attack? In 1999 we were able to respond to aircraft which was off course in a matter on MINUTES as reported by CNN. 2 years later In the almost 2 HOURS hijacked planes flew around we did not respond. WHY?????


    Baha: What I meant by the people who had gone before us was; Each and every single American who died on 9/11 and each and every single American who died fighting for their country every day before since the beginning of American history.

    Don't think Im some sort of blind patriot gun-nut who just wants to see a war for the sake of it. If America doesn't crush all her enemys now they will come back to rape her again, and again, and again.


    //When I read rantings from someone without a freakin clue I just scratch my head. Do ALL american's have to serve? NO just look at the current administration and how they all managed to weasel out of there duty as you call it. You scorn those who won't serve while you advocate following those who did not serve when called.
    You advocate fighting a war on terror when everyday the TV commericals are telling America that we here at Overgrow are terrorist or at least supporters of terror because of our love of a Harmless plant.

    If you believe suddenly after 11 years Saddam is some big threat I say fine. Saddam offered a solution which is fair and equitable for all.//


    On Oct. 3, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan offered that President Bush and Vice President Cheney should each take one weapon and take on both Saddam Hussein and himself in a duel on neutral territory, with Kofi Annan as referee. We believe that our courageous, tough talking president is fit for the challenge.

    Mr. Bush should take them on if he is half as bold as any of the soldiers he is willing to send in by the thousands. He has made it clear that this is a personal issue and that he means business the Cowboy Way. WE support HIS Resolve! It takes a lot of courage to face a man who uses a shotgun to liven up his speeches. We FULLY SUPPORT Our President in this personal challenge.

    Such courage is not unusual in our history of great leaders. A U.S. president, Vice President as well as other statesmen in the days of the cowboys and founding fathers would not suffer indignity by refusing or dismissing a challenge to a man-to-man duel. Such genuine, personal accountability in leadership is what makes this country great.

    Examples of Dignified Company that Mr. Bush would join
    Senator Broderick, 1859 VS Chief Justice David Terry
    <http://www.senate.gov/learning/min_3e.html>
    Alexander Hamilton, 1804 VS Vice President Burr
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/f...escription.html <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/fi...scription.html>
    Andrew Jackson, 1806 VS Charles Dickinson
    <http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/aj7/about/bio/duel.htm>


    //Finally lets get those who supplied Saddam with these weapons we are supposed to be so worried about.//


    The Corporations That Supplied Iraq's Weapons Program

    >>> Even before Iraq released its weapons-program dossier on 7 December 2002, it was said that the report would name the corporations that supplied Iraq with the equipment and other material it needed to develop biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. Soon after the report was released, those suspicions were confirmed. Sources who had seen the report said that it identified suppliers from the US, UK, Germany, France, China, and elsewhere.

    Now, that part of the report has been leaked. The leftist German daily newspaper Die Tageszeitung received portions of the original, uncensored 12,000-page dossier. (The names of the corporations have been blacked out of the version of the report given to the ten non-permanent members of the Security Council.) The paper has printed the list, presented below.


    [read more about the leak at the Independent (London) Financial Times, the Guardian (London), and the Associated Press (the only US news outlet to touch the story, albeit in an unrevealing article)]


    Key

    A = nuclear weapon program
    B = biological weapon program
    C = chemical weapon program
    R = rocket program
    K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, and building of military plants



    USA

    1. Honeywell (R, K)

    2. Spectra Physics (K)

    3. Semetex (R)

    4. TI Coating (A, K)

    5. Unisys (A, K)

    6. Sperry Corp. (R, K)

    7. Tektronix (R, A)

    8. Rockwell (K)

    9. Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)

    10. Finnigan-MAT-US (A)

    11. Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K)

    12. Dupont (A)

    13. Eastman Kodak (R)

    14. American Type Culture Collection (B)

    15. Alcolac International (C)

    16. Consarc (A)

    17. Carl Zeiss - U.S (K)

    18. Cerberus (LTD) (A)

    19. Electronic Associates (R)

    20. International Computer Systems (A, R, K)

    21. Bechtel (K)

    22. EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R)

    23. Canberra Industries Inc. (A)

    24. Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

    "In addition to these 24 companies home-based in the USA are 50 subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business with Iraq from within the US. Also designated as suppliers for Iraq's arms programs (A, B, C & R) are the US Ministries of Defense, Energy, Trade and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories."



    China

    1. China Wanbao Engineering Company (A, C, K)

    2. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (K)

    3. China State Missile Company (R)



    France

    1. Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique (A)

    2. Sciaky (A)

    3. Thomson CSF (A, K)

    4. Aerospatiale and Matra Espace (R)

    5. Cerbag (A)

    6. Protec SA (C)

    7. Thales Group (A)

    8. Societé Général pour les Techniques Nouvelles (A)



    Great Britain

    1. Euromac Ltd-Uk (A)

    2. C. Plath-Nuclear (A)

    3. Endshire Export Marketing (A)

    4. International Computer Systems (A, R, K)

    5. MEED International (A, C)

    6. Walter Somers Ltd. (R)

    7. International Computer Limited (A, K)

    8. Matrix Churchill Corp. (A)

    9. Ali Ashour Daghir (A)

    10. International Military Services (R) (part of the UK Ministry of Defence)

    11. Sheffield Forgemasters (R)

    12. Technology Development Group (R)

    13. International Signal and Control (R)

    14. Terex Corporation (R)

    15. Inwako (A)

    16. TMG Engineering (K)

    17. XYY Options, Inc (A)



    USSR/Russia

    1. Soviet State Missile Co. (R)

    2. Niikhism (R)

    3. Mars Rotor (R)

    4. Livinvest (R)

    5. Russia Aviatin Trading House (K)

    6. Amsar Trading (K)



    Japan

    1. Fanuc (A)

    2. Hammamatsu Photonics KK (A)

    3. NEC (A)

    4. Osaka (A)

    5. Waida (A)



    The Netherlands

    1.Melchemie B.V. (C)

    2. KBS Holland B.V. (C)

    3. Delft Instruments N.V. (K)



    Belgium

    1. Boehler Edelstahl (A)

    2. NU Kraft Mercantile Corporation (C)

    3. OIP Instrubel (K)

    4. Phillips Petroleum (C)

    5. Poudries Réunies Belge SA (R)

    6. Sebatra (A)

    7. Space Research Corp. (R)



    Spain

    1. Donabat (R)

    2. Treblam (C)

    3. Zayer (A)



    Sweden

    1. ABB (A)

    2. Saab-Scania (R)


    Source: Die Tageszeitung, No. 6934, 19 Dec 2002, page 3. See the original in German.

    Note: The 80 German companies named in the dossier were not included in this list.



    FINALLY a little lite reading for the seriously Misinformed. Turn off CNN stop being a donny rumsfielf parrot and ****in read you ignorant war on drugs supporter.

    World events since the attacks of September 11, 2001 have not only been predicted, but also planned, orchestrated and - as their architects would like to believe - controlled. The current Central Asian war is not a response to terrorism, nor is it a reaction to Islamic fundamentalism. It is in fact, in the words of one of the most powerful men on the planet, the beginning of a final conflict before total world domination by the United States leads to the dissolution of all national governments. This, says Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and former Carter National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, will lead to nation states being incorporated into a new world order, controlled solely by economic interests as dictated by banks, corporations and ruling elites concerned with the maintenance (by manipulation and war) of their power. As a means of intimidation for the unenlightened reader who happens upon this frightening plan - the plan of the CFR - Brzezinski offers the alternative of a world in chaos unless the U.S. controls the planet by whatever means are necessary and likely to succeed.

    This position is corroborated by Dr. Johannes B. Koeppl, Ph.D. a former German defense ministry official and advisor to former NATO Secretary General Manfred Werner. On November 6, he told FTW, "The interests behind the Bush Administration, such as the CFR, The Trilateral Commission - founded by Brzezinski for David Rockefeller - and the Bilderberger Group, have prepared for and are now moving to implement open world dictatorship within the next five years. They are not fighting against terrorists. They are fighting against citizens."

    Brzezinski's own words - laid against the current official line that the United States is waging a war to end terrorism - are self-incriminating. In an ongoing series of articles, FTW has consistently established that the U.S. government had foreknowledge of the World Trade Center attacks and chose not to stop them because it needed to secure public approval for a war that is now in progress. It is a war, as described by Vice President Dick Cheney, "that may not end in our lifetimes." What that means is that it will not end until all armed groups, anywhere in the world, which possess the political, economic or military ability to resist the imposition of this dictatorship, have been destroyed.

    These are the "terrorists" the U.S. now fights in Afghanistan and plans to soon fight all over the globe.

    Before exposing Brzezinski (and those he represents) with his own words, or hearing more from Dr. Koeppl, it is worthwhile to take a look at Brzezinski's background.

    According to his resume Brzezinski, holding a 1953 Ph.D. from Harvard, lists the following achievements:

    Counselor, Center for Strategic and International Studies

    Professor of American Foreign Policy, Johns Hopkins University

    National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (1977-81)

    Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission

    International advisor of several major US/Global corporations

    Associate of Henry Kissinger

    Under Ronald Reagan - member of NSC-Defense Department Commission on Integrated Long-Term Strategy

    Under Ronald Reagan - member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board

    Past member, Board of Directors, The Council on Foreign Relations

    1988 - Co-chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force.

    Brzezinski is also a past attendee and presenter at several conferences of the Bilderberger group - a non-partisan affiliation of the wealthiest and most powerful families and corporations on the planet.

    The Grand Chessboard

    Brzezinski sets the tone for his strategy by describing Russia and China as the two most important countries - almost but not quite superpowers - whose interests that might threaten the U.S. in Central Asia. Of the two, Brzezinski considers Russia to be the more serious threat. Both nations border Central Asia. In a lesser context he describes the Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Iran and Kazakhstan as essential "lesser" nations that must be managed by the U.S. as buffers or counterweights to Russian and Chinese moves to control the oil, gas and minerals of the Central Asian Republics (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan).

    He also notes, quite clearly (p. 53) that any nation that might become predominant in Central Asia would directly threaten the current U.S. control of oil resources in the Persian Gulf. In reading the book it becomes clear why the U.S. had a direct motive for the looting of some $300 billion in Russian assets during the 1990s, destabilizing Russia's currency (1998) and ensuring that a weakened Russia would have to look westwardæ to Europe for economic and political survival, rather than southward to Central Asia. A dependent Russia would lack the military, economic and political clout to exert influence in the region and this weakening of Russia would explain why Russian President Vladimir Putin has been such a willing ally of U.S. efforts to date. (See FTW Vol. IV, No. 1 - March 31, 2001)

    An examination of selected quotes from "The Grand Chessboard," in the context of current events reveals the darker agenda behind military operations that were planned long before September 11th, 2001.

    "ƒThe last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian power has emerged not only as a key arbiter of Eurasian power relations but also as the world's paramount power. The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global powerƒ (p. xiii)

    "ƒ But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book. (p. xiv)

    "The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. (pp 24-5)

    "For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasiaƒ Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia - and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained. (p.30)

    "America's withdrawal from the world or because of the sudden emergence of a successful rival - would produce massive international instability. It would prompt global anarchy." (p. 30)

    "In that context, how America ïmanages' Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe's largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)

    It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)

    "Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;ƒ second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the aboveƒ"æ (p. 40)

    "ƒTo put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)

    "Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power." (p.55)

    æ"Uzbekistan, nationally the most vital and the most populous of the central Asian states, represents the major obstacle to any renewed Russian control over the region. Its independence is critical to the survival of the other Central Asian states, and it is the least vulnerable to Russian pressures." (p. 121)

    Referring to an area he calls the "Eurasian Balkans" and a 1997 map in which he has circled the exact location of the current conflict - describing it as the central region of pending conflict for world dominance - Brzezinski writes: "Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold." (p.124) [Emphasis added]

    MY NOTE
    The World War II.....started in the Yugoslavia. Hitler depended on Romania for his oil & gas supplies....If Romania (Hitler Blackmailed) had not cooperated, there would have been no war. World War II consumed the lives of 61 million people with the highest casualties in the Soviet Union. (Ukraine)

    "The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

    "Uzbekistan is, in fact, the prime candidate for regional leadership in Central Asia." (p.130)

    MY NOTE: Putin assembled his cabinet in lieu of Bush's request to build an air base and an increase in forces. Putin relinquished due to the World Terrorism Threat and his political ambitions to maintain former Soviet provinces.

    "Once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan's truly vast natural gas reserves augur a prosperous future for the country's people. (p.132)

    "In fact, an Islamic revival - already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia - is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian - and hence infidel - control." (p. 133).

    "For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan - and to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan - and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea."æ (p.139)

    MY NOTE: Pakistan and Iran poltical leaders met in Pakistan the week of December 20, 2002 to heal long lasting political disagreements and to join together on a pipeline deal through Iran and other trade agreements. This allegence must have the Bush administration very concerned. This news was on BBC Friday, 12/20/02

    "Turkmenistanƒ has been actively exploring the construction of a new pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Seaƒ" (p.145)

    "It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it." (p148)

    "China's growing economic presence in the region and its political stake in the area's independence are also congruent with America's interests." (p.149)

    "America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence, what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy."æ (p.194)

    "Without sustained and directed American involvement, before long the forces of global disorder could come to dominate the world scene. And the possibility of such a fragmentation is inherent in the geopolitical tensions not only of today's Eurasia but of the world more generally." (p.194)

    "With warning signs on the horizon across Europe and Asia, any successful American policy must focus on Eurasia as a whole and be guided by a Geostrategic design." (p.197)

    "That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacyƒ" (p. 198)

    "The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role." (p. 198)

    "In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)

    "Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."æ (p. 211) [Emphasis added]

    The Horror - And Comments From Someone Who Worked With Brzezinski

    Brzezinski's book is sublimely arrogant. While singing the praises of the IMF and the World Bank, which have economically terrorized nations on every continent, and while totally ignoring the worldwide terrorist actions of the U.S. government that have led to genocide; cluster bombings of civilian populations from Kosovo, to Laos, to Iraq, to Afghanistan; the development and battlefield use of both biological and chemical agents such as Sarin gas; and the financial rape of entire cultures, it would leave the reader believing that such actions are for the good of mankind.

    While seconded from the German defense ministry to NATO in the late 1970s, Dr. Johannes Koeppl traveled to Washington on more than one occasion. He also met with Brzezinski in the White House on more than one occasion. His other Washington contacts included Steve Larabee from the CFR, John J. McCloy, former CIA Director, economist Milton Friedman, and officials from Carter's Office of Management and Budget. He is the first person I have ever interviewed who has made a direct presentation at a Bilderberger conference and he has also made numerous presentations to sub-groups of the Trilateral Commission. That was before he spoke out against them.

    His fall was rapid after he realized that Brzezinski was part of a group intending to impose a world dictatorship. "In 1983/4 I warned of a take-over of world governments being orchestrated by these people. There was an obvious plan to subvert true democracies and selected leaders were not being chosen based upon character but upon their loyalty to an economic system run by the elites and dedicated to preserving their power.

    "All we have now are pseudo-democracies."

    Koeppl recalls meeting U.S. Congressman Larry McDonald in Nuremburg in the early 80s. McDonald, who was then contemplating a run for the Presidency, was a severe critic of these elites. He was killed in the Russian shootdown of Korean Air flight 007 in 1985. Koeppl believes that it might have been an assassination. Over the years many writers have made these allegations about 007 and the fact that someone with Koeppl's credentials believes that an entire plane full of passengers would be destroyed to eliminate one man offers a chilling opinion of the value placed on human life by the powers that be.

    In 1983, Koeppl warned, through Op-Ed pieces published in NEWSWEEK and elsewhere, that Brzezinski and the CFR were part of an effort to impose a global dictatorship. His fall from grace was swift. "It was a criminal society that I was dealing with. It was not possible to publish anymore in the so-called respected publications. My 30 year career in politics ended.

    "The people of the western world have been trained to be good consumers; to focus on money, sports cars, beauty, consumer goods. They have not been trained to look for character in people. Therefore what we need is education for politicians, a form of training that instills in them a higher sense of ethics than service to money. There is no training now for world leaders. This is a shame because of the responsibility that leaders hold to benefit all mankind rather than to blindly pursue destructive paths.

    "We also need education for citizens to be more efficient in their democracies, in addition to education for politicians that will create a new network of elites based upon character and social intelligence."

    Koeppl, who wrote his 1989 doctoral thesis on NATO management, also authored a 1989 book - largely ignored because of its controversial revelations - entitled "The Most Important Secrets in the World." He maintains a German language web site at www.antaris.com <http://www.antaris.com> and he can be reached by email at jbk@antaris.com <mailto:jbk@antaris.com>.

    As to the present conflict Koeppl expressed the gravest concerns, "This is more than a war against terrorism. This is a war against the citizens of all countries. The current elites are creating so much fear that people don't know how to respond. But they must remember. This is a move to implement a world dictatorship within the next five years. There may not be another chance."
    No Information Provided

    ( ))))=Sworn Protector Of All Things Stoned=(((( )

    It's ladies night at the bar, but she smokes a man's cigar. I guess she's dyin'. Oh well.
    -------------------------------------------

  21. #71
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    that will have to wait. i have a deadline coming lol

  22. #72
    Totally, dude!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    1,085
    "This is a move to implement a world dictatorship within the next five years. There may not be another chance."

    That's pretty funny.

  23. #73
    Overtrainer.
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    766
    Chaos Theory would dictate that either NWO or World Destruction is inevitbale.

    It wont happen in the next 5 years though, 3 billion people in this world still don't know what a telephone is, wake up.

    The next 400 years will see the world begin to lean in one direction or the other.

    The period we are going through now is not of great significance, however, "when China wakes the world will tremble!" - Napoleon Bonparte.

    An alliance between Japan and Germany would have seemed inconcievable pre WWII, is an alliance between China and the Islam states that inconcievable in the next 400 years?

    War is a given though as it is impossible to "enlighten" people if they aren't linked up to the American TV brainwashing machine.

  24. #74
    WBBs motivational Speaker Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Between a girls ties!
    Posts
    4,593
    Pastdoubt, I have never learned so much in my life...hot damn
    A big thanks to all my friends in the USA, I am deeply grateful for your hospitality and kindness.

  25. #75
    Back at it
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,803
    1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?

    2. Is it not also true that we are willing to bomb Iraq now because we know it cannot retaliate- which just confirms that there is no real threat?
    C'mon. I read most of the article and while there are several consipracy points that raise a few eyebrows, quite a bit of what was said is fluff.

    The point of confronting Iraq is to keep Saddam from attaining such weapons in the first place. Look what happened in the Cold War... we nearly saw the distruction of damn near the world. The Soviets at the time, while aggressive, were not mentally unstable like Saddam. If he were to have access to nuclear weapons it's going to cause a LOT of problems.

    "... just confirms that there is no real threat?"

    Ron Paul is a joke. He's not a patriot. A partriot doesn't mean going off and being a war monger, but it does mean looking at the facts. Apparently Iraq has never been a threat, they have never invaded surrounding countries, and Saddam's regime has a perfect human rights record.

    The point of the inspections are to find out whether there is a threat, and while there hasn't been detection of any 'weapons of mass destruction,' there are major holes in their weapons report and the United States is increasing military presence as both a strategic bluff to show they mean business, and to have things prepared should new information arise.

    It was reported today that the US is now sharing intellegence reports with the inspectors. I'm not making an outright claim, but it is more than likely that the US knows of something hence the action it is taking.

    There are many comments in that article that was posted that I snickered at but I'm not going to bother replying to them due to time and patience restraints. Even at that, good post.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •