BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. forces acted on a tip about an Iraqi weapons supply Thursday and ended up discovering a much larger find — a hidden cache of buried surface-to-air missiles and mines.
Military officials are still tallying the cache but have retrieved at least 317 4-foot rockets and 220 anti-tank mines. Fox News had exclusive access to the military during the operation about 45 miles south of Baghdad.
Earlier Thursday, one U.S. soldier was killed and two others injured when an explosion rocked their convoy north of Baghdad (search). Elsewhere in Iraq, another bomb exploded near an oil pipeline in northern Iraq while Iraqi police thwarted a potentially devastating car bomb attack in Baghdad.
The threat of another bombing is what tipped off the U.S. military to the massive weapons find.
An Iraqi citizen told the 1st Armored Division (search) about a homemade bomb attack that was supposed to take place Thursday. After questioning the would-be attackers, American troops got information that led them to the weapons.
U.S. personnel from the 1st Armored Division along with those from 82nd Airborne (search) found the first weapons cache — some rockets, artillery rounds, mortars, blasting caps and C-4 explosives. They confiscated some of them and destroyed the rest.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows what ELSE is buried and not accounted for.
Reason: The hatred of American's has been kept from the publics minds. 9/11 put issues on the table, when they used to be under the carpet.
In order to get our security, freedom, and old way of life back -- we have to eliminate the threats around the world that we were totally unaware of until 9/11.
That's why Bush's ratings jumped so high right after 9/11. That's why his ratings were still high when he ordered the military to go after the taliban -- a short "war" which resulted in hundreds of Taliban surrendering at a time. Ultimately -- unfinished business -- as we still don't have the slippery Osama.
That created a few doubters, oh well.
Iraq. Saddam is a terrorist, and the war was justified. I'm glad Bush sacraficed his political career to de-thrown that jackoff. How could we have been sitting here doing nothing all those years? He was allowing his peopel to suffer. Starve. While he sipped tea from his silver and gold tea-cup in his million-dollar chair inside of a mansion that could feed the entire starving population of Iraq 3 meals a day for 6 months (And he had quite a few of those mansions). We shouldn't have been "friends" with him in the first place.
It's a shame that both the republican and democratic leaders in the United states all these years allowed such horrible things to happen in the world without doing enough about it. Yeah, we stepped in during WW2 -- but that's because we HAD to. There's so much misery going on in the world.
So now this administration is trying to tie all loose ends created since our Nations birth. Get rid of terrorism on the whole planet, starting with the first immediate threat (Taliban) and then take out the evil dictator who's been mocking us for all these years.
9/11 did change the world. It started right here in America where the regular citizens are no longer ignorant as to whats happening in the world. Now it is our business too. Now our president has to make the world a better place for the moral of the people in America.
Yes -- it's going to stir up trouble. No doubt. Terrorists don't want to live any other life - they're content wreaking havok on western ideals. Oh well -- it will pass.
Reason: The hatred of American's has been kept from the publics minds. 9/11 put issues on the table, when they used to be under the carpet.
In order to get our security, freedom, and old way of life back -- we have to eliminate the threats around the world that we were totally unaware of until 9/11.
That's why Bush's ratings jumped so high right after 9/11. That's why his ratings were still high when he ordered the military to go after the taliban -- a short "war" which resulted in hundreds of Taliban surrendering at a time. Ultimately -- unfinished business -- as we still don't have the slippery Osama.
That created a few doubters, oh well.
Iraq. Saddam is a terrorist, and the war was justified. I'm glad Bush sacraficed his political career to de-thrown that jackoff. How could we have been sitting here doing nothing all those years? He was allowing his peopel to suffer. Starve. While he sipped tea from his silver and gold tea-cup in his million-dollar chair inside of a mansion that could feed the entire starving population of Iraq 3 meals a day for 6 months (And he had quite a few of those mansions). We shouldn't have been "friends" with him in the first place.
It's a shame that both the republican and democratic leaders in the United states all these years allowed such horrible things to happen in the world without doing enough about it. Yeah, we stepped in during WW2 -- but that's because we HAD to. There's so much misery going on in the world.
So now this administration is trying to tie all loose ends created since our Nations birth. Get rid of terrorism on the whole planet, starting with the first immediate threat (Taliban) and then take out the evil dictator who's been mocking us for all these years.
9/11 did change the world. It started right here in America where the regular citizens are no longer ignorant as to whats happening in the world. Now it is our business too. Now our president has to make the world a better place for the moral of the people in America.
Yes -- it's going to stir up trouble. No doubt. Terrorists don't want to live any other life - they're content wreaking havok on western ideals. Oh well -- it will pass.
MHO
? There is something I STILL DON'T CATCH: Could you please explain me what is the link between Iraq and the 9/11? Did Iraq trained, financed or took part of its organization?
\Ter"ror*ism\, n. [Cf. F. terrorisme.] The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode of government by terror or intimidation.
-----------------------------
NEWSMAKERS
Saddam Hussein
President of Iraq
Huddled in an underground bunker with his country smoldering in ruins around him, Iraqi President SADDAM HUSSEIN seemed buried for good in February 1992. U.N. forces had devastated Iraq in the six-week Persian Gulf War; sewage systems and telephone lines were out, electrical grids were down, and roads were impassable. Harsh international sanctions and reparation debts hobbled recovery prospects for the oil-rich republic of Iraq. But Hussein resurfaced, unrepentant for the failed invasion of Kuwait and its enormous toll.
“You Americans, you treat the Third World in the way an Iraqi peasant treats his new bride. Three days of honeymoon, and then it’s off to the fields.”
Saddam Hussein, at a 1985 meeting with State Department officials. Los Angeles Times, Feb. 10, 1991
The man who would become known as the enemy of the Western world had beaten the odds before. Hussein grew up in Auja, a village of mud-brick huts northwest of Baghdad. His parents were poor farmers, but inspired by his uncle Khayrallah Tulfah, an Iraqi army officer and crusader for Arab unity, Hussein gravitated to politics as a teenager.
“We’re dealing with Hitler revisited.”
President George Bush on Saddam Hussein, Oct. 15, 1990. Bush retracted the statement under criticism that it belittled the Holocaust
Saddam joined the socialist Baath party when he was 19. He made his mark three years later when he participated in a 1959 assassination attempt against Iraqi Prime Minister Abudul Karim Kassim. Saddam was shot in the leg during the botched effort and fled the country for several years, first to Syria, then Egypt.
In 1968 he helped lead the revolt that finally brought the Baath party to power under Gen. Ahmed Hassan Bakr. In the process, he landed the vice president’s post, from which he built an elaborate network of secret police to root out dissidents. Eleven years later he deposed Bakr and plastered the streets with 20-foot-high portraits of himself.
Saddam’s years as a revolutionary left him keenly aware of the danger of dissent. Shortly after taking office, he purged and murdered dozens of government officials suspected of disloyalty. In the early 1980s, he used chemical weapons to crush a Kurdish rebellion in northern Iraq. Saddam’s power struggles extended well beyond his country’s borders; bent on dominating the Muslim world, he attacked neighboring countries. In 1980 he invaded Iran, launching an eight-year war that ended in stalemate.
In August 1990 he invaded the oil sheikdom of Kuwait, proclaiming it Iraq’s 19th province. He defied U.N. directives to retreat from Kuwait, provoking what he called “the mother of all battles,” the Persian Gulf War. That brief conflict decimated Saddam’s military forces, but he has managed to rebuild his republic and his power base, beginning with the secret police force.
Find weapons cache? I don't get it. Are they suppose to let the US bomb and shoot them, and them not shoot and bomb back? And you find some connection between this and WMD? Man what a reach.
I bet though that if you check the fine print on those SAM's and missiles, you'll see the words "Made in the U.S.A." We sure can make some good equipment can't we?
Actually the vast majority (up to 97%) of Saddam's weapons were supplied by France, Russia and China (possibly Germany as well—I'm not certain). No more than 1 to 2% were supplied by Great Britain and the U.S. combined. But keep scratching and clawing, oreo-ofpeace....
Originally posted by Americaaah Actually the vast majority (up to 97%) of Saddam's weapons were supplied by France, Russia and China (possibly Germany as well—I'm not certain). But keep scratching and clawing, oreo-ofpeace....
Yeah, that may be true AmeriKOOK, but the weapons being used to bomb US military in Iraq, some of it is our own equipment. Granted, it's dated equipment, but ours none the less.
Yeah, that may be true AmeriKOOK, but the weapons being used to bomb US military in Iraq, some of it is our own equipment. Granted, it's dated equipment, but ours none the less.
Who sold you this, oreo-ofpeace? And what does it have to do with anything?
Originally posted by oneofpeace History has KOOK. What's happening in Iraq are the many Al Quaeda and other terrorist orgs that's been longing to hit America.
Osama got his weapons from us.
Wrong, again, oreo. The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc. Get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching....
Wrong, again, oreo. The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc. Get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching....
You are an idiot. Obviously you don't know the history you passed through. Osama has been using equipment he got from the US during the Afghanistan war to shoot at our planes and tanks. Yes it still works.
I guess that one slipped under your biased radar. Typical for a AmeriKOOK such as yourself.
I have news for you oreo: The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc.
Get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching...
Originally posted by Americaaah I have news for you oreo: The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc.
Get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching...
Just like I said. Believe everything the government tells you. They are fighting with hidden Iraqi cache true, but they also have US stinger and RPG's from Al Quaeda. Iraqis aren't the only ones fighting in Iraq against the US as you will soon see dumba$$.
Hey since you like polls so much, check the one out on the CNN website. It seems many other Americans know something you don't. Why am I not surprised?
Just like I said. Believe everything the government tells you. They are fighting with hidden Iraqi cache true, but they also have US stinger and RPG's from Al Quaeda. Iraqis aren't the only ones fighting in Iraq against the US as you will soon see dumba$$.
For the last time, oreo: The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc. I didn't say that it was just Iraqis using them, oreo. That's your problem—YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN. Wipe the foam off the corners of your mouth, take a deep breath and then another..... And then get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching... And put that weapon down, you're going to hurt yoursel with it.......
For the last time, oreo: The weapons that are being used in Iraq against U.S. soldiers are from Iraqi army weapons caches. RPGs, mortars, various explosives, anti-tank mines etc. I didn't say that it was just Iraqis using them, oreo. That's your problem—YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN. Wipe the foam off the corners of your mouth, take a deep breath and then another..... And then get your story straight before you make an a s s of yourself. People are watching... And put that weapon down, you're going to hurt yoursel with it.......
There is no hope for you. You are a total loss AmeriAss. I guess you love living in a dream world. It's interesting to see though that when you run out of things to say, you redundanly repeat yourself.
Or maybe you're asleep.
At any rate, while the troops are being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan with OUR military equipment, I guess it proves we make the better weapons huh?
Just let me know when you want to go over and fight AmeriAss.
"Men, you are the first Negro tankers ever to fight in the American army. I would never have asked for you if you weren't good. I have nothing but the best in my army. I don't care what color you are, so long as you go up there and kill those Kraut sonsab*tches!" —George S. Patton
Saddam joined the socialist Baath party when he was 19. He made his mark three years later when he participated in a 1959 assassination attempt against Iraqi Prime Minister Abudul Karim Kassim. Saddam was shot in the leg during the botched effort and fled the country for several years, first to Syria, then Egypt.
In 1968 he helped lead the revolt that finally brought the Baath party to power under Gen. Ahmed Hassan Bakr. In the process, he landed the vice president’s post, from which he built an elaborate network of secret police to root out dissidents. Eleven years later he deposed Bakr and plastered the streets with 20-foot-high portraits of himself.
Saddam’s years as a revolutionary left him keenly aware of the danger of dissent. Shortly after taking office, he purged and murdered dozens of government officials suspected of disloyalty. In the early 1980s, he used chemical weapons to crush a Kurdish rebellion in northern Iraq. Saddam’s power struggles extended well beyond his country’s borders; bent on dominating the Muslim world, he attacked neighboring countries. In 1980 he invaded Iran, launching an eight-year war that ended in stalemate.
In August 1990 he invaded the oil sheikdom of Kuwait, proclaiming it Iraq’s 19th province. He defied U.N. directives to retreat from Kuwait, provoking what he called “the mother of all battles,” the Persian Gulf War. That brief conflict decimated Saddam’s military forces, but he has managed to rebuild his republic and his power base, beginning with the secret police force.
Originally posted by sayzak21 \Ter"ror*ism\, n. [Cf. F. terrorisme.] The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode of government by terror or intimidation.
-----------------------------
NEWSMAKERS
Saddam Hussein
President of Iraq
Huddled in an underground bunker with his country smoldering in ruins around him, Iraqi President SADDAM HUSSEIN seemed buried for good in February 1992. U.N. forces had devastated Iraq in the six-week Persian Gulf War; sewage systems and telephone lines were out, electrical grids were down, and roads were impassable. Harsh international sanctions and reparation debts hobbled recovery prospects for the oil-rich republic of Iraq. But Hussein resurfaced, unrepentant for the failed invasion of Kuwait and its enormous toll.
“You Americans, you treat the Third World in the way an Iraqi peasant treats his new bride. Three days of honeymoon, and then it’s off to the fields.”
Saddam Hussein, at a 1985 meeting with State Department officials. Los Angeles Times, Feb. 10, 1991
The man who would become known as the enemy of the Western world had beaten the odds before. Hussein grew up in Auja, a village of mud-brick huts northwest of Baghdad. His parents were poor farmers, but inspired by his uncle Khayrallah Tulfah, an Iraqi army officer and crusader for Arab unity, Hussein gravitated to politics as a teenager.
“We’re dealing with Hitler revisited.”
President George Bush on Saddam Hussein, Oct. 15, 1990. Bush retracted the statement under criticism that it belittled the Holocaust
Saddam joined the socialist Baath party when he was 19. He made his mark three years later when he participated in a 1959 assassination attempt against Iraqi Prime Minister Abudul Karim Kassim. Saddam was shot in the leg during the botched effort and fled the country for several years, first to Syria, then Egypt.
In 1968 he helped lead the revolt that finally brought the Baath party to power under Gen. Ahmed Hassan Bakr. In the process, he landed the vice president’s post, from which he built an elaborate network of secret police to root out dissidents. Eleven years later he deposed Bakr and plastered the streets with 20-foot-high portraits of himself.
Saddam’s years as a revolutionary left him keenly aware of the danger of dissent. Shortly after taking office, he purged and murdered dozens of government officials suspected of disloyalty. In the early 1980s, he used chemical weapons to crush a Kurdish rebellion in northern Iraq. Saddam’s power struggles extended well beyond his country’s borders; bent on dominating the Muslim world, he attacked neighboring countries. In 1980 he invaded Iran, launching an eight-year war that ended in stalemate.
In August 1990 he invaded the oil sheikdom of Kuwait, proclaiming it Iraq’s 19th province. He defied U.N. directives to retreat from Kuwait, provoking what he called “the mother of all battles,” the Persian Gulf War. That brief conflict decimated Saddam’s military forces, but he has managed to rebuild his republic and his power base, beginning with the secret police force.
STILL, WHERE IS THE BLOODY LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11?!?
ARE YOU GUYS ABLE TO BRING ANTY PROOFS?!??
Originally posted by Americaaah "Men, you are the first Negro tankers ever to fight in the American army. I would never have asked for you if you weren't good. I have nothing but the best in my army. I don't care what color you are, so long as you go up there and kill those Kraut sonsab*tches!" —George S. Patton
If I had any doubt before, you've removed all of it. I don't think it's wise that you post on this board without first taking your medication. You are one confused individual. I hope they can fix that before you do yourself some harm.
"STILL, WHERE IS THE BLOODY LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11?!? ARE YOU GUYS ABLE TO BRING ANTY PROOFS?!??"
What does it matter? The fact is, Saddam is a terrorist. The name of the war isn't "people assumed to be involved with 9/11" -- it's "The War On Terrorism". There are links, have been all along. I hear about them every now and then. I don't bother looking up specific information because I think it's irrelevent. Iraq's old regime is history. I'm sure this debate will pop up again when we find something totally concrete (aka smoking gun) -- until then, what's the point in beating a dead horse? Saddam is a terrorist, his dictatorship was bad for his country and the world, and that portion of the war is history. It's time for rebuilding. Time to move forward.
Originally posted by sayzak21 "STILL, WHERE IS THE BLOODY LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11?!? ARE YOU GUYS ABLE TO BRING ANTY PROOFS?!??"
What does it matter? The fact is, Saddam is a terrorist. The name of the war isn't "people assumed to be involved with 9/11" -- it's "The War On Terrorism". There are links, have been all along. I hear about them every now and then. I don't bother looking up specific information because I think it's irrelevent. Iraq's old regime is history. I'm sure this debate will pop up again when we find something totally concrete (aka smoking gun) -- until then, what's the point in beating a dead horse? Saddam is a terrorist, his dictatorship was bad for his country and the world, and that portion of the war is history. It's time for rebuilding. Time to move forward.
IT MATTERS BECAUSE THIS WHOLE BLOODY WAR IS BASED ON THIS FACT! WMD, AL QUAIDA, ETC...,DOES IT RING A BELL? I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE TO SEND SOLDIERS TO THEIR DEATH WITH LIES MATE.
I WOUDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE OF KILLING INNOCENT CIVILIANS EITHER. SADDAM IS NOT WORTH IT.
Nah, Aaaah, the US never supplied Iraq with weapons...:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Iraq's bioweapons program that President Bush wants to eradicate got its start with help from Uncle Sam two decades ago, according to government records getting new scrutiny in light of the discussion of war against Iraq.
Coogee thanks for the link. I didn't think I had to post one because I thought many here knew that we supplied Iraq with intel and info during the Iraq/Iran war. At that time Saddam was our friend and Iran was our enemy.
Anyone ever hear of Iran/Contra? We were supplying Iran with arms to fight against Iraq during this same period. Saddam never trusted the US again after that.
And did I hear someone here say that Saddam was a terrorist so we needed to go invade his country? With that line of thought, I wonder how many 87 Billions do we have to clear out the Mid Eastern region. Man we're in for a long decade.
PS. I hear the people of North Korea are just waiting for us to come liberate them from their "axes of evil". They are are buying life insurance and bomb shelters to be proactive while waiting.
Originally posted by USA1 I never knew that the US made RPGs and Kolishnikof machine guns. That's news to me.
USA1, all that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
USA1, all that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
USA1, all that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
Americaaah old buddy,
I don't know why the French can't get past this. They didn't care before, why should they care now? Oh ya, I forgot about the 60 Billion dollar contract for Total.
They need to get over it an let us fight our own battles. They couldn't and can't change it now so, they just keeppuking up the same old rhetoric
Originally posted by Americaaah USA1, all that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
By the way, where are you bloody WMD, which alone was supposed to justify this dirty little private stupid war?
At the risk hypocrisy and posting someone else's opinion, after giving Aaah a hard time about cutting n pasting Patton and Geraldo and [insert right-wing fruitcake here], I thought stuff it I will anyway. I've never heard of this bloke but he's well well well worth a read:
On Sunday, Iraqi guerrillas downed a US military transport helicopter near Baghdad airport, killing 16 and wounding 20.
Thus began the post-Tet phase of the current re-enactment of the Vietnam War. US leaders immediately echoed the old Lyndon Johnson refrains - there will be "tragic" days ahead, we are being "tested" in Iraq by foreign infiltrators, we must "stay the course," we dare not "cut and run".
This is nonsense. The US will be leaving Iraq in disgrace sooner or later. The Iraqis are behaving just like the Vietnamese - and as any patriot (American, Australian, or Chinese) would - if invaded by self-righteous, hypocritical imperialists bent on stealing their resources.
Why the British and Australians joined the Americans in this fiasco when they could so easily have stood for something other than "might makes right" remains a mystery.
The two wars that the US launched pre-emptively after the September 11 attacks were the pet projects of special interest groups that used the threat of terrorism as cover to hijack US foreign policy and implement their private agendas. These interest groups include the military-industrial complex and the professional armed forces, close US supporters of Israel's Likud Party, and neoconservative proponents of an American empire.
This latter group is composed of "chicken-hawk" war lovers (that is, soi-disant military strategists with no experience of either the armed forces or war) who seized on the national sense of bewilderment after September 11 to push the Bush administration into conflicts that were neither relevant to, nor successful in, destroying al-Qa'ida. Instead the wars accelerated the recruitment of more suicidal terrorists and promoted nuclear proliferation in countries hoping to deter similar pre-emptive attacks by the US.
Two years after September 11, America is unquestionably in greater danger of serious terrorist threats than it has ever been before.
The Afghan and Iraq wars resulted in easy US "victories", but both soon re-erupted as guerilla struggles of attrition. Experience has shown that hi-tech armed forces are inappropriate, overly blunt instruments against terrorists and guerillas. What was called for was international police co-operation to hunt down the September 11 terrorists and changes in US foreign policy to separate militant activists from their passive supporters, whose grievances need to be addressed.
The objective should have been to turn supporters into informers against the militants, thereby allowing them to be identified and captured.
Serious high-level intelligence efforts against organisations such as al-Qa'ida and intelligence sharing with other services that may have greater access or capabilities than America's are also important in this context, as are collaborative efforts to interrupt financing of terrorist activities and prevent money laundering.
Instead, the US came up with a particularly cynical and destructive strategy. It sent CIA agents to Afghanistan with millions of dollars to bribe the warlord armies that the Taliban had defeated to reopen the civil war, promising them air support in their new offensive. The warlords, with a bit of help from the US, thus overthrew the Taliban government and soon returned to their old ways of regional exploitation.
Afghanistan has descended into an anarchy comparable to that which prevailed before the rise of the ruthless but religiously motivated Taliban.
The propaganda apparatus of the Pentagon claims a stupendous US victory in Afghanistan but, in fact, leaders of the Taliban and al-Qa'ida escaped and the country has become an even more virulent breeding ground for terrorists.
The war with Iraq that followed had even less justification and subverted the system of international co-operation that the US had worked since World War II to create. Immediately following September 11, American leaders began to fabricate pretexts for an invasion of Iraq. These were then uncritically disseminated by US print and television media, leading a majority of Americans to believe that Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat to their own safety and that he had personally supported al-Qa'ida in its attacks of September 11.
The US will feel the blowback from this ill-advised and poorly prepared military adventure for decades. The war has already had the unintended consequences of seriously fracturing the Western democratic alliance; eliminating any potentiality for British leadership of the European Union; grievously weakening international law, including the Charter of the UN; and destroying the credibility of the President, Vice-President, Secretary of State, and other officials as a result of their lying to the international community and the American people.
Most important, the unsanctioned military assault on Iraq communicated to the world that the US was unwilling to seek a modus vivendi with Islamic nations and was therefore an appropriate, even necessary, target for further terrorist attacks.
Chalmers Johnson is author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire and The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (forthcoming, Verso, London).
French, as you will discover you will get responses like from AmeriKOOK when asked about WMD because they have no answer for it. That question is more than reasonable to ask but seems to make others perturbed when you ask them about it.
As you see, you get ridiculous comparisons such as "where is Saddam? Does that mean he's not there too?" How absurd a response is that? As if it takes the same space to hide a human being as it does tons of chemical and bio weapons, or tons of weapons is as mobile as a human being.
This just let you know what we here in America have to contend with when asking an intelligent question. After all, it was Bush who said those weapons were there no you. As we have seen thus far Bush said a lot of other things too that hasn't proven true. This does not matter from a bunch of people with a vigilante' mentality that wants to make the world pay for 9.11 while totally missing the culprits that committed it in the first place.
Problem is, America is in deeper trouble because of Iraq, and people here don't even realize it. I dread the day when the sobering reality hit like a ton of bricks, or in Bush's words a ton of WMD.
oneof peace,
The WMD are probably right next to the French missles being supplied to the Bath party (dated 2002). This was brought up agian in the news today. Now who's supplying whom?
Why are you so impatient? If you want to hurry up, you can volunteer to go investigate the 120 weapons sights not yet explored in Iraq.
You are the broken record here. Where are WMD, where are WMD?
Be patient, it's not hurting you but for some reason you've got your panties in a twist over this.
All that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
All that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
Originally posted by USA1 oneof peace,
The WMD are probably right next to the French missles being supplied to the Bath party (dated 2002). This was brought up agian in the news today. Now who's supplying whom?
Why are you so impatient? If you want to hurry up, you can volunteer to go investigate the 120 weapons sights not yet explored in Iraq.
You are the broken record here. Where are WMD, where are WMD?
Be patient, it's not hurting you but for some reason you've got your panties in a twist over this.
First of all, I'm male. I don't wear panties.
Secondly, what do you mean be patient? Do you see the body count in Iraq? I take it none of your family is there in Iraq so you pretty much don't care, but for the one's who families are dying, your consolation phrase of "be patient" is of on comfort to them.
How much time do you think we need to find these "tons" of chemicals and bio weapons? It's now going on 7 months since the end of the war and not so much as a drop of anything. You should be asking the same freakin question.
You talk about "French Missiles", well what about the chemical weapons we made available to Saddam? Are you aware that we gave him the formula to make those weapons from jump? We supplied him with guns too quiet as it's kept when Saddam was fighting Iran. How the hell can we point any fingers at anyone? Saddam is the Frankenstein we helped created.
Last but not least, I'm not the one constantly posting redundant messages like AmeriKOOK seems to do. The same freakin post in every thread. Repeating many times the same words that came out of Bush's mouth or administration. What I can't figure out is why aren't you and others like you asking the same questions we are, where are the weapons. You think it's that easy to hide weapons in such mass quantities as Bush said there were for this long a period?
Stop being so biased and open your eyes man. You are having the wool pulled over your eyes as many other Americans are, all hiding behind the rage of 9.11 which if you look at, Saddam had nothing to do with.
I just don't get it. Why are you and others like you asking the same question? Any reasonable person would. Are you just that accepting to take our government at it's word without so much as a shred of evidence to back it up? The war didn't end yesterday, and month or 2 ago. How much time do you suggest we wait at the expense of our soldier’s lives?
All that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD. They sound like that TV commercial from the 70s (or was it the the 80s): WHERE'S THE BEEF? Never you mind that 24 million Iraqis—let alone all of humanity—will benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering—and will continue to persevere—on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards). No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION—like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE—with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it "egg" on your faces.
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum."
Okay - you keep posting this same reply, obviously you believe it's what you want to say. Let's analyse it, shall we?
quote:
Originally posted by Americaaah All that these anti-war/anti-Bush malcontents do is echo to one another is: WHERE'S THE WMD.
And your answer is ...? Nope. Don't have one. But anyway, you say, it doesn't matter cos we've freed 24 million Iraqis from the scourge of humanity and everyone's gonna benefit from the removal of the murdering dictator and his cancerous influence.
Which isn't actually true, given that there's more and more Muslims now flooding to join Al Queda, so in actual fact those benefiting from the removal of Saddam from public life is Osama and his merry Al Queda martyrs. You could even say Saddam's influence, even in hiding, even when he isn't trying to influence anyone, is greater than it ever was. It's so ****ing stupid, the lack of foresight, the fact that Rummy and Co thought it'd be over quickly and everything would be cool.
But let's move on to the next stanza of this oft-quoted, little read piece of rationalism.
quote:
It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. fought, by all legitimate accounts, a LEGAL war. It doesn't matter to them that the U.S. is now persevering and will continue to persevere on the war on terrorists (a.k.a. hit-and-run, mass-murdering cowards).
Legal war? In this crazy world it's actually possible that something based on lies and mis-information and agendas and un-truths and scare tactics and war-mongering and horseshit, is actually legal. But moral? Hardly.
And hit-and-run mass murdering cowards? Americaah, I don't know if you know, but your Air Force rains death on people from very great heights - hardly toe-to-toe tough stuff buddy. These bombs, these ****ing "smart" bombs, have killed thousands and thousands more innocents than 9-11 did. You understand why people would think that's a bad thing? I mean, those from the countries onto which these bombs land to kill and maim and destroy and slaughter, hm?
Can you then understand why a person whose whole family has been slaughtered, I'm talking kiddies and granmas and sisters, brothers, the whole lot of them, he's the only person left standing, you can understand why a person might want to take revenge on the perpetrators of such an act?
Of course you can, such an act was perpetrated on the twin towers. You know how bad that was.
Yet your government, instead of hunting down the perpetrators, using the global goodwill of the citizens of planet earth to help - RAINED BOMBS from a great height onto people in the vicinity of something that probably, even possibly, or something, was an Al Queda training camp.
Crazy, some would say evil stuff - but let's move on...:
quote:
No, no! THEIR anti-U.S./anti-war OPINION is the only legitimate one, you see. And each and everyone of them has an OPINION like each and everyone of them has an ARSEHOLE with which they try to sh!t on the U.S. Administration. But it's rather a lengthy distance to the White House, gentlemen, especially for those of you attempting a launch from across either ocean—and that is most of you—so try for a high arc and hope that the wind is at your back. But considering the jet-stream, at least you Europeans are left with... well let's just call it egg on your faces.
This makes little sense and ... well, I dunno what it means so let's move on - this bit's better, though is still based on a big IF...:
quote:
And if buried stockpiles of WMD were found tomorrow do you think these individuals would wipe the egg of their faces and change their tune? GIMME A BREAK! Half of them would claim the WMD were planted by the U.S. and the other half would scramble for a new script to their tragic comedy titled A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Anti-U.S. Forum.
Americaaah, if they find these weapons of mass destruction there'll be no-one happier. It would re-institute my faith in humanity, faith that's taken a mighty shellacking since before this war was mooted by the hawks.
But until then fellah, you'll have to keep copping the questions like: Why's it so hard to find them? Pre-war Bush and his boys had "intelligence" that said they knew where they were. So why can't they find them?
I mean, they KNEW Saddam had them ... but they didn't know WHERE? - Doesn't that worry you? I mean, where are the ****ing things? Could they now be in the hands of Al Queda? WHERE ARE THE WMDS we went to war for pal?
Lies and more lies and so it goes on, daily death and destruction, money spent now that'll be paid for by your children, but still you and your cronies agree complicitly with Bush and his cronies and it doesn't matter a lick of difference to you that this whole war and it's horrible ramifications for global peace, that's right, horrible ramifications for the planet we're all trying to share, was based on things that do not exist.
I mean ..... WHAT IN THE ****ING HELL IS GOING ON!
Originally posted by Coogee Beach At the risk hypocrisy and posting someone else's opinion, after giving Aaah a hard time about cutting n pasting Patton and Geraldo and [insert right-wing fruitcake here], I thought stuff it I will anyway. I've never heard of this bloke but he's well well well worth a read:
On Sunday, Iraqi guerrillas downed a US military transport helicopter near Baghdad airport, killing 16 and wounding 20.
Thus began the post-Tet phase of the current re-enactment of the Vietnam War. US leaders immediately echoed the old Lyndon Johnson refrains - there will be "tragic" days ahead, we are being "tested" in Iraq by foreign infiltrators, we must "stay the course," we dare not "cut and run".
This is nonsense. The US will be leaving Iraq in disgrace sooner or later. The Iraqis are behaving just like the Vietnamese - and as any patriot (American, Australian, or Chinese) would - if invaded by self-righteous, hypocritical imperialists bent on stealing their resources.
Why the British and Australians joined the Americans in this fiasco when they could so easily have stood for something other than "might makes right" remains a mystery.
The two wars that the US launched pre-emptively after the September 11 attacks were the pet projects of special interest groups that used the threat of terrorism as cover to hijack US foreign policy and implement their private agendas. These interest groups include the military-industrial complex and the professional armed forces, close US supporters of Israel's Likud Party, and neoconservative proponents of an American empire.
This latter group is composed of "chicken-hawk" war lovers (that is, soi-disant military strategists with no experience of either the armed forces or war) who seized on the national sense of bewilderment after September 11 to push the Bush administration into conflicts that were neither relevant to, nor successful in, destroying al-Qa'ida. Instead the wars accelerated the recruitment of more suicidal terrorists and promoted nuclear proliferation in countries hoping to deter similar pre-emptive attacks by the US.
Two years after September 11, America is unquestionably in greater danger of serious terrorist threats than it has ever been before.
The Afghan and Iraq wars resulted in easy US "victories", but both soon re-erupted as guerilla struggles of attrition. Experience has shown that hi-tech armed forces are inappropriate, overly blunt instruments against terrorists and guerillas. What was called for was international police co-operation to hunt down the September 11 terrorists and changes in US foreign policy to separate militant activists from their passive supporters, whose grievances need to be addressed.
The objective should have been to turn supporters into informers against the militants, thereby allowing them to be identified and captured.
Serious high-level intelligence efforts against organisations such as al-Qa'ida and intelligence sharing with other services that may have greater access or capabilities than America's are also important in this context, as are collaborative efforts to interrupt financing of terrorist activities and prevent money laundering.
Instead, the US came up with a particularly cynical and destructive strategy. It sent CIA agents to Afghanistan with millions of dollars to bribe the warlord armies that the Taliban had defeated to reopen the civil war, promising them air support in their new offensive. The warlords, with a bit of help from the US, thus overthrew the Taliban government and soon returned to their old ways of regional exploitation.
Afghanistan has descended into an anarchy comparable to that which prevailed before the rise of the ruthless but religiously motivated Taliban.
The propaganda apparatus of the Pentagon claims a stupendous US victory in Afghanistan but, in fact, leaders of the Taliban and al-Qa'ida escaped and the country has become an even more virulent breeding ground for terrorists.
The war with Iraq that followed had even less justification and subverted the system of international co-operation that the US had worked since World War II to create. Immediately following September 11, American leaders began to fabricate pretexts for an invasion of Iraq. These were then uncritically disseminated by US print and television media, leading a majority of Americans to believe that Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat to their own safety and that he had personally supported al-Qa'ida in its attacks of September 11.
The US will feel the blowback from this ill-advised and poorly prepared military adventure for decades. The war has already had the unintended consequences of seriously fracturing the Western democratic alliance; eliminating any potentiality for British leadership of the European Union; grievously weakening international law, including the Charter of the UN; and destroying the credibility of the President, Vice-President, Secretary of State, and other officials as a result of their lying to the international community and the American people.
Most important, the unsanctioned military assault on Iraq communicated to the world that the US was unwilling to seek a modus vivendi with Islamic nations and was therefore an appropriate, even necessary, target for further terrorist attacks.
Chalmers Johnson is author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire and The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (forthcoming, Verso, London).
Recents news confirmed once again this post:
The best way to fight terrorism is threw high level intelligence cooperation (as an Aussie, you sure heard about this French guy who intended to commit attacks in Australia). I could also mention the recent press release proving that some people close to the US presidency do have financial interests in this war
.Nevertheless, I see a difference with Iraq: USA was attacked first, even if the target -Iraq- is not the good one. Us citizens won't feel guilty as they were about Vietnam, because of this point.
Mate the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, in this case, is for Dubya to keep occupying Iraq. The longer the US is there, the longer evil will triumph.
The rationale is: The longer the infidel polytheist US is occupying Iraq, the longer it's bombs-away for Osama and his merry martyrs. How long is the US willing to stay there? You reckon "as long as it takes" - y'know what I reckon? Bull-crap. Soon as the US dead list hits a thousand and the US economy goes a thousand billion into the red, it'll be up stumps, we're outta here, we don't need another Vietnam. I mean, how long can you keep bleeding blood and money? Indefinitely? Forever?
No way.
I don't disagree with your mate Edmund from the 18th century - that quote still stands up - good on you for believing in it and I mean that sincerely. My point is that the men doing the something (as opposed to the nothing) aren't particularly good men.
They're aggressive boorish megalomaniac fruitcakes, and they're as useful to peace breaking out as Osama. Indeed he's loving it, isn't he, he knew there'd be a backlash against the Muslim world, he was counting on it - he wanted holy war - I don't reckon he thought the US would INVADE Iraq by making up stuff, though, even he couldn't have envisioned that lunacy.
He's mighty happy about it though, he's getting towards the Islamic jihad holy war he's been after all these years, and not only that he doesn't have to go somewhere else to kill Americans - no no, they're coming to him!
It's a good quote - "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - indeed a great, stirring quote.
But it needs a bit tacked on: Evil can also triumph if the people doing the deeds to combat that evil aren't particularly solid themselves.
They've lied to YOU Americaaah. And YOU USA1. And you Mr Scarecrow. I mean, if you can't trust your leadership to tell you the truth, then what's the point? You may as well live in North Korea where they control the news and tell you what to think.
The best way to fight terrorism is threw high level intelligence cooperation (as an Aussie, you sure heard about this French guy who intended to commit attacks in Australia).
The best way to fight terrorism is threw high level intelligence cooperation (as an Aussie, you sure heard about this French guy who intended to commit attacks in Australia).
Well that's it isn't it - that's the way to do it - with police and international co-operation - why isn't that obvious?
Invading Iraq .... it's just so non-sensical when you're trying to beat Al Queda. The two aren't linked. One's a dictator of the 2nd largest oil producing nation in the world, the other's a billionaire ****ing lunatic.
Al Queda can be beaten, but not through INVADING IRAQ!?!
I mean, why not spend 87 billion on finding Osama and Al Queda?
Instead of bombing crap out of a place then trying to build it in your image? What, they want the 52nd state? or however many there are...
anyway.
Again. it's a sledgehammer when they need a scalpel. It's like getting stung by a wasp and taking the sledge to the bee hive.
Well that's it isn't it - that's the way to do it - with police and international co-operation - why isn't that obvious?
Invading Iraq .... it's just so non-sensical when you're trying to beat Al Queda. The two aren't linked. One's a dictator of the 2nd largest oil producing nation in the world, the other's a billionaire ****ing lunatic.
Al Queda can be beaten, but not through INVADING IRAQ!?!
I mean, why not spend 87 billion on finding Osama and Al Queda?
Instead of bombing crap out of a place then trying to build it in your image? What, they want the 52nd state? or however many there are...
anyway.
Again. it's a sledgehammer when they need a scalpel. It's like getting stung by a wasp and taking the sledge to the bee hive.
****ing idiots.
I am much more worried about the effect of this war; guys are flooding from everywhere to kill a Pom or a US soldier.
Because of Bush's administration, those guys who never had to do anything together, now found a common ground and a common cause.
In other words, they are getting organised. And I am bloody pessimistic, because their weakness was that they were not organisedand had no financial support.
I also serious doubts about the capacity of a conventional army to fight them successfully. Weapons, training and strategy were designed to fight another conventional army, such as a Russian one, not to fight guerillas...
Remember General Aidid in Somalia?
The fighters which are flooding to Iraq, and the one that this war is creating or will create are not soldiers. I mean, no hierarchy or Structure will keep them from commiting attrocities.
This war will be their boot camp.
Originally posted by Coogee Beach Mate the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, in this case, is for Dubya to keep occupying Iraq. The longer the US is there, the longer evil will triumph.
The rationale is: The longer the infidel polytheist US is occupying Iraq, the longer it's bombs-away for Osama and his merry martyrs. How long is the US willing to stay there? You reckon "as long as it takes" - y'know what I reckon? Bull-crap. Soon as the US dead list hits a thousand and the US economy goes a thousand billion into the red, it'll be up stumps, we're outta here, we don't need another Vietnam. I mean, how long can you keep bleeding blood and money? Indefinitely? Forever?
No way.
I don't disagree with your mate Edmund from the 18th century - that quote still stands up - good on you for believing in it and I mean that sincerely. My point is that the men doing the something (as opposed to the nothing) aren't particularly good men.
They're aggressive boorish megalomaniac fruitcakes, and they're as useful to peace breaking out as Osama. Indeed he's loving it, isn't he, he knew there'd be a backlash against the Muslim world, he was counting on it - he wanted holy war - I don't reckon he thought the US would INVADE Iraq by making up stuff, though, even he couldn't have envisioned that lunacy.
He's mighty happy about it though, he's getting towards the Islamic jihad holy war he's been after all these years, and not only that he doesn't have to go somewhere else to kill Americans - no no, they're coming to him!
It's a good quote - "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - indeed a great, stirring quote.
But it needs a bit tacked on: Evil can also triumph if the people doing the deeds to combat that evil aren't particularly solid themselves.
They've lied to YOU Americaaah. And YOU USA1. And you Mr Scarecrow. I mean, if you can't trust your leadership to tell you the truth, then what's the point? You may as well live in North Korea where they control the news and tell you what to think.
Getting a bit like that over there?
During the aftermath of WWII, and the reconstruction of Europe, when American GIs were being shot up by Nazi guerrillas called 'werewolves,' American newspapers kept printing: O C C U P A T I O N B O T C H E D, and garbage to that effect. ("Whatever bleeds, leads"—such is the media.) Same sh!t you foreign left-wing malcontents are spewing now. Sure, the Democrats in the U.S. are now doing it—they would like a job—even at the expense of endangering the morale of this nation and the lives of U.S. troops. So shame on them—still, they're only digging their own political graves. This nation always comes together when it has to and it will do so again when this partisanship garbage is done in November 2004.
But we don't give a rat's a s s what you pathetic, anti-U.S. foreigners think, Gooogooo. You very well KNOW that WE AIN'T GETTIN' OUT 'TIL THE TIME'S RIGHT and Iraq has a new government and trained security force and military. AND WHATEVER YOU SQUAWK AND SPEW AIN'T GONNA CHANGE ANYTHING. Your rhetoric doesn't amount to a hill of beans, my anti-American 'friend.'
So, keep farting in the wind—it seems you like the smell....
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." —Edmund Burke (1729-97)
