United We Stand

Post-9/11 Era Forum

For those of you who are against the war, I ask you why ? Were you the same people who joined hands after 9/11 and proclaimed to the world "United We Stand" ? Some of us still stand united. Some of us have not forgotten. So my question to you, the peace protestors, is how many more atrocious attacks against our country are you willing to stand before you stand up and say we have had enough ? One is enough for me.

Dude, before you ask a question like that why don't you read a few threads? I've given at least 20 reasons why I'm against this war and I'm not going to repeat them everytime someone new comes around.

Let me just say that this war is not about 9/11. We still stand united against terrorism. However, the country is split on the idea of invading a completely separate group of people that had nothing to do with 9/11.

You'll find people here that share your attitude though. In my opinion, you guys need to open your minds and get informed.

While the country of Iraq may certainly be completely separate from Al-Qaeda, their government is certainly not. For this I would cite Colin Powell's address to the UN of February 5, 2003. In this address he showed evidence that Abu Musab Zarqawi, a known high ranking member of Al-Qaeda, who was also partly responsible in the assassination of American diplomat Lawrence Foley, is being harbored by Iraq. Furthermore, there is evidence that Iaq has given help to al-Qaeda in bomb-making and document forgery. Clearly there is a link here, although I have my doubts about Iraq's involvement in 9/11. The bottom line is, this war is not the avenge those lost on 9/11 (although frankly, that wouldn't be a half bad idea for a war). This war is to prevent future terrorist attacks.
Remember, even if we are unable to prevent 100 terrorist attacks from occuring, what if this war would prevent 10 or 20 attacks? Wouldn't that be worth fighting for ? If not, what would be ?

I'm sorry to tell you this bud, but nobody at the UN believed Colin Powell. You know why? Because most of his facts were debunked as fabrications.

You can't use Bush, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, or any other of the Bush admin as reliable examples because they lie regularly to us. Their stories and facts are constantly changing.

They've been caught lying and presenting false evidence at the UN.

The terrorists are not coming from Iraq. The Bush administration is playing on America's ignorance of the region. The Bush admin has capitolized on the fact that most Americans don't know crap about the mid east. So they've fooled America into thinking that they're all a bunch of rag head terrorists that want to bomb America. It's actually kinda racist because if Iraq was full of white people, we wouldn't be having this war.

Anyways, Saddam and Al Queda hate each other. Bin Laden would kill Saddam if he had the chance. There are no ties. As much as the US has tried to find ties, there are none. Preventing another terrorist attack isn't worth killing for. It's not moral to kill people before they commit a crime. You can't just kill someone because they might kill somebody. According to US logic, we should just go ahead and blow up the rest of the world so that we will never get attacked.

Don't get your "facts" from politicians or other corrupt sources of information.

Ok, so according to that logic should we not have attacked either Germany or Japan? Japan attacked us one time and we acted. Germany really didn't attack us at all (unless you include shipping loses). Yet I really don't think that there is any doubt as to the merits of our involvement in WWII.

Tom Brokaw wrote a book a few years ago called "The Greatest Generation." The more I think about it, the more I agree. That generation of people decided that regardless of the sacrifice they would make the world a safer place. Our generation seems to want to do everything in its power to save every possible life even if it later means loss of life unparalelled in the history of humanity. Essentailly, you can't see the forest because of all the trees in the way.

As to the merits of Colin Powell...Frankly, that is one individual that I would believe over my own mother (nothing against her). I don't think it was so much that nobody believed him, it was that noone has the courage (with the exception of the UK and Spain) to stand up in the face of terrorism.

While it is true that the Iraqi regime and Al-Qaeda don't see eye to eye, they do have a common enemy. I think that both groups are smart enough to not fight each other in lieu of fighting the "real enemy."

Also, here's a fact. Neither you nor I have the intelligence information that the US has. Making blanket statements like "The terrorists are not coming from Iraq" is completely your opinion. Nothing in your previous statement was based on facts. The fact of the matter is, that we have to believe our elected officials until they are proven to have lied. We elected them (I don't even want to hear about the Miami-Dade thing), if you don't like them we have a process to get rid of them...I bet they wish they had such a system in Iraq, but since Saddam gets 100% of the vote I guess he would just win anyway.

Also, the statement about Colin Powell really bothers me. I would just like to hear you say (type) a statement to the effect that you, Mr. Skippy, would take the word of Saddam Hussein over Colin Powell (or for that matter Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Aschcroft, etc). It just strikes me as odd that you would think that Saddam Hussein is an honest fellow.

Here is my logic on this...

Saddam says "I have no WMD."

Collin Powell says "Yes you do...here's some pictures of it"

Saddam: "You made those up!"

Powell: "No I didn't."

And you believe Saddam. Hopefully I am horribly misinterpreting what you said.

Think of it this way. Nobody in the Middle East wants Saddam in power. Because of their religion, they are againt standing up to him. (Good old boy attitude) We are doing the world a favor by getting rid of this dictator. How can you condone someone who payes people to commit suicide bombings against inocent people and kills his own people becasue they disagree?
This is not about Oil. We don't need Irag's oil. There is plenty of it from other countries.
It's about human rights. The same human rights that you and I have. The right to live in peace and practice my beliefs without fear of threat.

"He seems like a real nice guy"

My favorite Powell quote is as follows (regarding the plan regarding how to defeat the Iraqi army).

"First we're going to cut off it's head, and then we're going to kill it."

This is not "good Uncle Tom" as you put it. What evidence do you have that Colin Powell is a liar ?

You said that Colin Powell lied to the UN, this was in reference to his address regarding Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Therefore, comparing the two is totally applicable.

Also, it is not "besides the point" that Saddam is evil. It IS the point that Saddam is evil. So evil that given enough time he will probably give Al-Qaeda the means to carry out some of the worst terrorist attacks ever.

Also, when you say that he has "overseen acts of terror in other countries." Would you care to be a bit specific ? Vague and ambiguous statement are the marks of those who don't know what they're talking about.

Also, just for the record you stated that I am "trying to be patriotic." Guess what comrade, I am patriotic, there is no trying about.

Also just for the record...we did try to invade Cuba. It didn't go too well, but we did try it. And no country in the world is hurt more than Palistine by our generous gifts to the Isrealis. Even though we may not be there in person, we are there in spirit.

Also, I saluting the flag every nearly time I see it.

You have no idea of what you're talking about. It would take me hours to unbrainwash you, so I'm just going to say, 'don't be too hard on yourself when the truth about this war comes out'. I've gotta go. It's been fun you misinformed patriots!

If you have heard of the "Bay of Pigs" invasion, guess what that refers to Cuba.

I have given numerous specific facts. You have given nothing but general statements that are totally baseless.

I would say that I am both well-read and educated about current and historical events (if I do say so myself). Anyone who uses "brainwashing" in an argument has already lost.

We will rid the world of Saddam, and you know what, in the process we will ensure that YOU, Skippy (and your friends and family) are safe from terrorism.

United We Stand, Fear No Evil.

Ok, I can't help it. Here's some reading for you, but since you're so well read you should already know it:

The dirt on Colin Powell:

http://www.disinfo.com/pages/dossier/id803/pg1/

http://davidgrenier.com/journal/42

So far I have read through the first link, I will post again after I have read the second. In the first here are my findings.

#1, this is not a good or reliable source for the floowing reasons. 1). It is clearly biased and unprofessional. case and point uses of objectionable language, references to President Bush as "Dubya" (funny when Conan O'Brien says it, but not in a supposed reliable source), completely lacking proper references for citiation (simply listing websites at the end of a document is insufficient to say the least).

#2 "Powell still has no compunction about killing civilians during war." Good, the last thing we need are military leaders who are afraid of killing civilians. Unfortunately, civilians die during wars, approximately 35,000 died during Desert Storm (along with 100, not 200 thousand soldiers Source: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gu...fwar/index.html ). Also, going to another point. The article also critizes Powell for advising Bush to end the war. The actual reason for this was to end the "highway of death" which was the flood of Iraqi soldiers, attempting to flee Kuwait, that were being bombed mercelessly. Retreating is a military move, surrendering is not, therefore they were acceptable targets.

#3 Iran-Contra, the information given here is so vague that is can be totally discounted. If you get the information from a guy who told a guy who told a guy, you simply don't report it. The only thing that I found in this was the statement that Powell supported the Nicaraguan contras. This, especially under the circumstances, was a very good thing as they were fighting a communists at the time.

#4 Powell's conection to the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. I wasn't too familiar with this, and I plan to read a little more. However, when reading a report about it (and the cover up) Colin Powell's name never appeared. Here is a link.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/pro.../Myl_intro.html

#5 And my personal favorite, "After only four days of fighting, and although American units had yet to encircle Iraqi forces, Powell convinced President Bush to halt ground operations." I have already explain about the "Highway of death." But I would like to examine this statement further. In 4 days, we inflicted 100,000 military and 35,000 civilian deaths, 150,000 soldiers were wounded, and 70,000 were captured. The Iraqi's did not need to be encircled, we ran over the top of them without a problem.

In summation this article is a gross example of how people can try to distort facts and make up ridiculous stories about people. I hope that every time you read ANY article, you are as critical of it as I was to this one.

The other article is just more of the same. If you read it take it with a grain of salt (and my fingers are tired from typing about the first one). Colin Powell is an honorable man of character and I am proud to have him representing me, as the Secretary of State (if only he would run for president...).

Brainwashed my butt. You must be another ill informed student who will protest to get out of class to raise hell.

Don't dodge the issue, skippy. IS or IS NOT Saddam willing and able to finance terrorist efforts against the United States of America?

If your answer is YES, then you must realize that Saddam's removal will most likely not be possible without war.

If your answer is NO and this country pulled away from removing Saddam in a manner that would have you screaming with joy, you must be prepared to be held accountable for anything that occurs as a result of Saddam's ties with terrorism now or in the future - including the deaths of more American civilians should it come to that.

Are you ready to stand by your man Saddam, skippy?

Inf act everyday the adress cpowell gave to the UN comes very clearly true. Collin powell acuses Iraq of having Drones. iraq denies it. Drones found. Iraq denies having chemical weapons. Iraq all but threatens US troops with chemical weapons. Iraq denies they have political prisoners from iran iraq war. This morning sadam releases these prisoners he didnt have. So who is the liar? YOu want to wait to the rest of what powell told the UN comes true? Maybe next he will use the anthrax he says he doesent have. There is no doubt who the liar is, and its not the US government. THanks

I think, given Rebel's argument, that Ms. Saddam is the liar here. He has done nothing but contradict himself in the last few months.

stay United, yes
united for the war against terrorist, yes
united for the war for oil and supremacy, NO.

see that: http://nowar.tchacheurs.com/why_en.html
and that: http://nowar.tchacheurs.com/iraq_timeline_letter.pdf

and you trust the US governement ??????

USA's 30 Years of UN Vetoes

Year - Resolution Vetoed by the USA

1972 Condemns Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids.

1973 Afirms the rights of the Palestinians and calls on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.

1976 Condemns Israel for attacking Lebanese civilians.

1976 Condemns Israel for building settlements in the occupied territories.

1976 Calls for self determination for the Palestinians.

1976 Afirms the rights of the Palestinians.

1978 Urges the permanent members (USA, USSR, UK, France, China) to insure United Nations decisions on the maintenance of international peace and security.

1978 Criticises the living conditions of the Palestinians.

1978 Condemns the Israeli human rights record in occupied territories.

1978 Calls for developed countries to increase the quantity and quality of development assistance to underdeveloped countries.

1979 Calls for an end to all military and nuclear collaboration with the apartheid South Africa.

1979 Strengthens the arms embargo against South Africa.

1979 Offers assistance to all the oppressed people of South Africa and their liberation movement.

1979 Concerns negotiations on disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race.

1979 Calls for the return of all inhabitants expelled by Israel.

1979 Demands that Israel desist from human rights violations.

1979 Requests a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupied Arab countries.

1979 Offers assistance to the Palestinian people.

1979 Discusses sovereignty over national resources in occupied Arab territories.

1979 Calls for protection of developing counties' exports.

1979 Calls for alternative approaches within the United Nations system for improving the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

1979 Opposes support for intervention in the internal or external affairs of states.

1979 For a United Nations Conference on Women.

1979 To include Palestinian women in the United Nations Conference on Women.

1979 Safeguards rights of developing countries in multinational trade negotiations.

1980 Requests Israel to return displaced persons.

1980 Condemns Israeli policy regarding the living conditions of the Palestinian people.

1980 Condemns Israeli human rights practices in occupied territories. 3 resolutions.

1980 Afirms the right of self determination for the Palestinians.

1980 Offers assistance to the oppressed people of South Africa and their national liberation movement.

1980 Attempts to establish a New International Economic Order to promote the growth of underdeveloped countries and international economic co-operation.

1980 Endorses the Program of Action for Second Half of United Nations Decade for Women.

1980 Declaration of non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.

1980 Emphasises that the development of nations and individuals is a human right.

1980 Calls for the cessation of all nuclear test explosions.

1980 Calls for the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

1981 Promotes co-operative movements in developing countries.

1981 Affirms the right of every state to choose its economic and social system in accord with the will of its people, without outside interference in whatever form it takes.

1981 Condemns activities of foreign economic interests in colonial territories.

1981 Calls for the cessation of all test explosions of nuclear weapons.

1981 Calls for action in support of measures to prevent nuclear war, curb the arms race and promote disarmament.

1981 Urges negotiations on prohibition of chemical and biological weapons.

1981 Declares that education, work, health care, proper nourishment, national development, etc are human rights.

1981 Condemns South Africa for attacks on neighbouring states, condemns apartheid and attempts to strengthen sanctions. 7 resolutions.

1981 Condemns an attempted coup by South Africa on the Seychelles.

1981 Condemns Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, human rights policies, and the bombing of Iraq. 18 resolutions.

1982 Condemns the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. 6 resolutions (1982 to 1983).

1982 Condemns the shooting of 11 Muslims at a shrine in Jerusalem by an Israeli soldier.

1982 Calls on Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights occupied in 1967.

1982 Condemns apartheid and calls for the cessation of economic aid to South Africa. 4 resolutions.

1982 Calls for the setting up of a World Charter for the protection of the ecology.

1982 Sets up a United Nations conference on succession of states in respect to state property, archives and debts.

1982 Nuclear test bans and negotiations and nuclear free outer space. 3 resolutions.

1982 Supports a new world information and communications order.

1982 Prohibition of chemical and bacteriological weapons.

1982 Development of international law.

1982 Protects against products harmful to health and the environment .

1982 Declares that education, work, health care, proper nourishment, national development are human rights.

1982 Protects against products harmful to health and the environment.

1982 Development of the energy resources of developing countries.

1983 Resolutions about apartheid, nuclear arms, economics, and international law. 15 resolutions.

1984 Condemns support of South Africa in its Namibian and other policies.

1984 International action to eliminate apartheid.

1984 Condemns Israel for occupying and attacking southern Lebanon.

1984 Resolutions about apartheid, nuclear arms, economics, and international law. 18 resolutions.

1985 Condemns Israel for occupying and attacking southern Lebanon.

1985 Condemns Israel for using excessive force in the occupied territories.

1985 Resolutions about cooperation, human rights, trade and development. 3 resolutions.

1985 Measures to be taken against Nazi, Fascist and neo-Fascist activities .

1986 Calls on all governments (including the USA) to observe international law.

1986 Imposes economic and military sanctions against South Africa.

1986 Condemns Israel for its actions against Lebanese civilians.

1986 Calls on Israel to respect Muslim holy places.

1986 Condemns Israel for sky-jacking a Libyan airliner.

1986 Resolutions about cooperation, security, human rights, trade, media bias, the environment and development. 8 resolutions.

1987 Calls on Israel to abide by the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of the Palestinians.

1987 Calls on Israel to stop deporting Palestinians.

1987 Condemns Israel for its actions in Lebanon. 2 resolutions.

1987 Calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon.

1987 Cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States.

1987 Calls for compliance in the International Court of Justice concerning military and paramilitary activities against Nicaragua and a call to end the trade embargo against Nicaragua. 2 resolutions.

1987 Measures to prevent international terrorism, study the underlying political and economic causes of terrorism, convene a conference to define terrorism and to differentiate it from the struggle of people from national liberation.

1987 Resolutions concerning journalism, international debt and trade. 3 resolutions.

1987 Opposition to the build up of weapons in space.

1987 Opposition to the development of new weapons of mass destruction.

1987 Opposition to nuclear testing. 2 resolutions.

1987 Proposal to set up South Atlantic "Zone of Peace".

1988 Condemns Israeli practices against Palestinians in the occupied territories. 5 resolutions (1988 and 1989).

1989 Condemns USA invasion of Panama.

1989 Condemns USA troops for ransacking the residence of the Nicaraguan ambassador in Panama.

1989 Condemns USA support for the Contra army in Nicaragua.

1989 Condemns illegal USA embargo of Nicaragua.

1989 Opposing the acquisition of territory by force.

1989 Calling for a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict based on earlier UN resoltions.

1990 To send three UN Security Council observers to the occupied territories.

1995 Afirms that land in East Jerusalem annexed by Israel is occupied territory.

1997 Calls on Israel to cease building settlements in East Jerusalem and other occupied territories. 2 resolutions.

1999 Calls on the USA to end its trade embargo on Cuba. 8 resolutions (1992 to 1999).

2001 To send unarmed monitors to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

2001 To set up the International Criminal Court.

2002 To renew the peace keeping mission in Bosnia.

i am sooo tired about hearing that this war is for oil

So am I caps. thanks nowar -
I wonder if you know that Israel was protecting itself from terrorists. just as the US is in many of those.
I'm all for Israel kicking Arab A$* since they have been blown up year after year.
It started when 5 Arab nations joined against israel in 1948-1949 for the first War. They attacked the day after Britain left the area.

the poor underdog Saddam being taken on by the evil United States?!?!?!?! Hey Charles if you are in the US get out. With that attitude you need to be deported right away. Why don't you go live with this poor innocent man?

o im sorry, i havn't been able to log on in a week and am a little confused to as what is going on...lol, so you are prowar them?