"Gear" up now!, they don't like us!!

[liftsiron]

granby140 This is an insult to our whole nation as a whole. Anyone who is not willing to go to war for our nation should get the fuck out. Our forefathers fought bled and died to give us freedom. We are now abusing the freedoms they have worked so hard to give us. This bashing or president and our nation makes me sick. Is this what our founders wanted? To give us the right to ruin our own country internally? Come on guys. Stand up for whats right.

If you are not for this war, them simply let it be. No one is forced to go to war at this point. When a person joines the armed forces, they join knowing they might have to go to war. They willingly made that decision so let them be. And for all you guys who say this war is nothign but oil, what is the problem for that. We need as much as we can get. We use enough so why not stock up on it.

And as for comparing Bush to Hitler is sheer stupidity. If Hitler was our leader the problem would have been solved a long time ago. Kill them he woulda said. End of story. I am not condoning hitlers actions but he had BALLS. A few more of us should grow them and stand up to those who threaten us. Talking only gets you so far. Sooner or later fists start to fly. Lets not get sucker punched again. Why dont we hit first for a change. 1 shot is all we need.
God bless America


granby, unless you are currently in the military or have recently enlisted, you are talking through your ass, it is easy to talk like a tough shit when others are about to die, in your place.

 

[Frackal]

LOL exactly - hey granby, you must not know much about our 'forefathers' do you? If you did, you'd realize that the last thing they would want for us is to NOT question our government and blindly follow it, even when the civil rights that they and others fought to protect are being chiseled away....

In truth, your post is nothing but un-thought out, mindless, generic crap, the same rheteroic you'd hear from a million other Americans....it's meaningless because no thought was behind it...


Oh and granby, I ask again, when talking about threats, what about bin laden? Remember bush after 9/11? "Dead or alive"?
Now he says he doesnt really care where he is?

You really think saddam is a bigger threat than him?

 

[FreakMonster]

You're an idiot. A war on Iraq would be to disarm them of weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is in violation of a UN treaty,for possessing such arms. They've had 12yrs to disarm.
If Iraqi civilians die in this potential war it will be by the hands of SODAMN INSANE ! Innocent civilians are not the target! Saddam's regime is. But you can be damn sure that Saddam will use his own people as pawns in a war. He's done it before...

I'm fucking sick and tired of hearing this bullshit over and over and over again about the need to go to war with Iraq because they possess weapons of mass destruction and have violated the UN resolutions. What a weak fucking arguement. SO FUCKING WHAT? Why don't we go after Isreal too!! HUH?

Israel Is Researching and Producing WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

United Nations inspectors MUST BE ADMITTED TO ISRAEL to begin the dismantling of Israel's stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Israel has:

1). Nuclear Weapons.

2). Evidence of Israel's Nerve Gas Program found in Amsterdam Plane crash.

3). Israel's Biological Warfare Program.


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992


Note that Israel is still in VIOLATION of many of these Resolutions.

Resolution 106: "...'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"

Resolution 111: "...'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"

Resolution 127: "...'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"

Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"

Resolution 171: "....determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"

Resolution 228: "...'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"

Resolution 237: "...'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"

Resolution 248: "...'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"

Resolution 250: "...'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"

Resolution 251: "...'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"

Resolution 252: "...'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"

Resolution 256: "...'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation"

Resolution 259: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"

Resolution 262: "...'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"

Resolution 265: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"

Resolution 267: "...'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"

Resolution 270: "...'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"

Resolution 271: "...'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"

Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"

Resolution 280: "...'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"

Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"

Resolution 298: "...'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"

Resolution 313: "...'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"

Resolution 316: "...'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"

Resolution 317: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"

Resolution 332: "...'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"

Resolution 337: "...'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"

Resolution 347: "...'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"

Resolution 425: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"

Resolution 427: "...'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon"

Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"

Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

Resolution 450: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"

Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"

Resolution 465: "...'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"

Resolution 467: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"

Resolution 468: "...'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"

Resolution 469: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians"

Resolution 471: "...'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

Resolution 476: "...'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'"

Resolution 478: "...'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'"

Resolution 484: "...'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"

Resolution 487: "...'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"

Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"

Resolution 498: "...'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"

Resolution 501: "...'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"

Resolution 509: "...'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"

Resolution 515: "...'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"

Resolution 517: "...'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"

Resolution 518: "...'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"

Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"

Resolution 573: "...'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters"

Resolution 587: "...'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"

Resolution 592: "...'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"

Resolution 605: "...'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians"

Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"

Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians"

Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians"

Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount"

Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations"

Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians"

Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return"

Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians"

Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return."


(From Findley's Deliberate Deceptions, 1998 pages 188 - 192)

The following are the resolutions vetoed by the United States during the period of September, 1972, to May, 1990 to protect Israel from council criticism:

"....condemned Israel's attack against Southern against southern Lebanon and Syria..."

"....affirmed the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, statehood and equal protections..."

"....condemned Israel's air strikes and attacks in southern Lebanon and its murder of innocent civilians..."

"....called for self-determination of Palestinian people..."

"....deplored Israel's altering of the status of Jerusalem, which is recognized as an international city by most world nations and the
United Nations..."

"....affirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people..."

"....endorsed self-determination for the Palestinian people..."

"....demanded Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights..."

"....condemned Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and its refusal to abide by the Geneva
convention protocols of civilized nations..."

"....condemned an Israeli soldier who shot eleven Moslem worshippers at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount near Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem..."

"....urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Lebanon..."

"....urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Beirut..."

"....urged cutoff of economic aid to Israel if it refused to withdraw from its occupation of Lebanon..."

"....condemned continued Israeli settlements in occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, denouncing them as an obstacle to peace..."

"....deplores Israel's brutal massacre of Arabs in Lebanon and urges its withdrawal..."

"....condemned Israeli brutality in southern Lebanon and denounced the Israeli 'Iron Fist' policy of repression...."

"....denounced Israel's violation of human rights in the occupied territories..."

"....deplored Israel's violence in southern Lebanon..."

"....deplored Israel's activities in occupied Arab East Jerusalem that threatened the sanctity of Muslim holy sites..."

"....condemned Israel's hijacking of a Libyan passenger airplane..."

"....deplored Israel's attacks against Lebanon and its measures and practices against the civilian population of Lebanon..."

"....called on Israel to abandon its policies against the Palestinian intifada that violated the rights of occupied Palestinians, to abide by the Fourth Geneva Conventions, and to formalize a leading role for the United Nations in future peace negotiations..."

"....urged Israel to accept back deported Palestinians, condemned Israel's shooting of civilians, called on Israel to uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention, and called for a peace settlement under UN auspices..."

"....condemned Israel's... incursion into Lebanon..."

"....deplored Israel's... commando raids on Lebanon..."

"....deplored Israel's repression of the Palestinian intifada and called on Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians..."

"....deplored Israel's violation of the human rights of the Palestinians..."

"....demanded that Israel return property confiscated from Palestinians during a tax protest and allow a fact-finding mission to observe Israel's crackdown on the Palestinian intifada..."

"....called for a fact-finding mission on abuses against Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands..."

 

[granby140]

Yes we should question our government. But never should we talk the shit about it that we are now. If you do not like what our great nation is doing, then simply get the fuck out.

 

[sergio]

Freakmonster- the US is coming down harder on Iraq because Saddam is a known tyrrant, and his dictatorship is responsible for taking hundreds of thousands of lives,not to mention links to terrorist organizations. He's USED weapons of mass destruction on his own people,the Kurds, and other neighbouring countries.
The war between Israel and the Palestinians goes back almost 200 yrs, looks like they'll never resolve anything...
Heck, the whole friggin' middle east is a mess....

 

[Frackal]

Yes we should question our government. But never should we talk the shit about it that we are now. If you do not like what our great nation is doing, then simply get the fuck out.

Man you are one dense, brainwashed individual.... THE ONLY THING THAT KEEPS THIS NATION IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE, AND NOT A DICTATORIAL REGIME IS THIS SORT OF DISCUSSION.

 

[FreakMonster]

Freakmonster- the US is coming down harder on Iraq because Saddam is a known tyrrant,

A weak arguement. There are also other dictators who are known tyrants. Madeline Albright when asked a few years ago on US television whether the death of 500,000 Iraqichildren as a result of UN sanctions was a price worth paying, she replied 'Yes I believe it was a price worth paying'. The real acid test on whether the West conforms to this doctrine of an ethical foreign policy is to look at the West's current allies in the 'War on Terror'.
This reveals several unsavoury people like Islam Karimov the butcher of Tashkent who routinely kills and imprisons his political opponents. While Baghdad anticipates the imminent prospects of cruise missiles, F16's and carpet bombing Tashkent expects with bated breath, bumper US aid packages, more IMF loans and further encouragement in its crackdown on Islamic groups.

and his dictatorship is responsible for taking hundreds of thousands of lives,not to mention links to terrorist organizations. He's USED weapons of mass destruction on his own people,the Kurds, and other neighbouring countries.

First I see you've been brainwashed into thinking that there is a link between Iraq and Al Queda. You must have missed the numerous claims by both the CIA and FBI that they found no LINK between the two. Also Saddam does not gain anything by aligning himself with Al Queda.

Your next claim is that Saddam Hussein is a special case in that he has a track record of using his WMD's on his own citizens as well as previous experience of invading his neighbours. However the use of WMD's and invading other countries is not confined to Saddam and the same accusation can be legitimately applied at the US, Britain or Israel . So in need of a convincing argument Britain and America prophesise that Iraq could develop nuclear weapons within months and then pass these over to groups such as Al Qaeda. This latter argument gives rise to the new neo conservative thinking within the Bush White House which states that pre-emption is a perfectly acceptable political and military doctrine especially after 9/11 which they say has changed the international and security landscape.The advocators of this doctrine or as some have described the real 'axis of evil' are Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney and Deputy Defence Secretary Wolfowitz. They believe in the absolute superiority of the United States and the fact that multilateral and international Institutions such as the UN are constraints on the US acting in her own national interests. Consequently they believe a pre-emptive attack on Iraq is not only justified but imperative. No wonder that even European diplomats believe that the lunatics have now taken over the asylum. The issue with pre-emption as many have pointed out is that it can only be carried out it seems by the United States or its allies. Under similar circumstances a Syrian and Egyptian attack on Israel would equally be justified. Israel has WMD's, has invaded its neighbours and remains a menace, violates international law and onventions, oppresses its own people and is led by a brutal leader who has been implicated in war crimes. This argument also conveniently ignores the fact that Iraq's past aggressions have not only be done with the West looking on but have been done with the latter's tacit approval. The Iraqi president has no track record of acting alone as even the invasion of Kuwait shows, where the US ambassador's wink and nod were well understood.

 

[sergio]

A weak arguement. There are also other dictators who are known tyrants. Madeline Albright when asked a few years ago on US television whether the death of 500,000 Iraqichildren as a result of UN sanctions was a price worth paying, she replied 'Yes I believe it was a price worth paying'. The real acid test on whether the West conforms to this doctrine of an ethical foreign policy is to look at the West's current allies in the 'War on Terror'.
This reveals several unsavoury people like Islam Karimov the butcher of Tashkent who routinely kills and imprisons his political opponents. While Baghdad anticipates the imminent prospects of cruise missiles, F16's and carpet bombing Tashkent expects with bated breath, bumper US aid packages, more IMF loans and further encouragement in its crackdown on Islamic groups.



First I see you've been brainwashed into thinking that there is a link between Iraq and Al Queda. You must have missed the numerous claims by both the CIA and FBI that they found no LINK between the two. Also Saddam does not gain anything by aligning himself with Al Queda.

Your next claim is that Saddam Hussein is a special case in that he has a track record of using his WMD's on his own citizens as well as previous experience of invading his neighbours. However the use of WMD's and invading other countries is not confined to Saddam and the same accusation can be legitimately applied at the US, Britain or Israel . So in need of a convincing argument Britain and America prophesise that Iraq could develop nuclear weapons within months and then pass these over to groups such as Al Qaeda. This latter argument gives rise to the new neo conservative thinking within the Bush White House which states that pre-emption is a perfectly acceptable political and military doctrine especially after 9/11 which they say has changed the international and security landscape.The advocators of this doctrine or as some have described the real 'axis of evil' are Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney and Deputy Defence Secretary Wolfowitz. They believe in the absolute superiority of the United States and the fact that multilateral and international Institutions such as the UN are constraints on the US acting in her own national interests. Consequently they believe a pre-emptive attack on Iraq is not only justified but imperative. No wonder that even European diplomats believe that the lunatics have now taken over the asylum. The issue with pre-emption as many have pointed out is that it can only be carried out it seems by the United States or its allies. Under similar circumstances a Syrian and Egyptian attack on Israel would equally be justified. Israel has WMD's, has invaded its neighbours and remains a menace, violates international law and onventions, oppresses its own people and is led by a brutal leader who has been implicated in war crimes. This argument also conveniently ignores the fact that Iraq's past aggressions have not only be done with the West looking on but have been done with the latter's tacit approval. The Iraqi president has no track record of acting alone as even the invasion of Kuwait shows, where the US ambassador's wink and nod were well understood.

The UN is responsible for the lives of 500,000 Iraqi children? Yea...whatever...
Any harm that comes to the Iraqi people is a direct result of Saddam's actions. He cares nothing about his own people, just his desire to stay in power. He routinely executes members of other political parties who try to rise up against him. He is known to have killed 35 of his family members,some for not wanting to comply with him.
He rules with fear. He has the strength of the military. His own people are afraid of him. They are an oppressed people. They need to be liberated..
Of course Freakmonster, you already know all this,Saddam is one of many tyrants, but the UN can only handle one of them at a time it seems...
And as far as your comparison of Iraq's actions to those of the US, Britain in the past....BIG DIFFERENCE..the US does not try to conquer other countries, nor control their own people with an iron fist. All they're trying to do is defend themselves and other nations from tyrants and terrorist groups. I think it's a noble cause.
This is not about politics/oil, but about freedom and security

 

[Frackal]

ahahaha



Bro, you're right about the US 'in recent history' not being as bad as saddam of course...but I think you're way off when you say that this is only about the war on terror.

 

[sergio]

ahahaha



Bro, you're right about the US 'in recent history' not being as bad as saddam of course...but I think you're way off when you say that this is only about the war on terror.

The US has NEVER been as bad as Saddam. And where did I say it's only about war on terror?