Re: Yeah, I liked that one, too. -- Final End

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:43:27 02/21/03 Fri
Author: The Serpent
Subject: Re: Yeah, I liked that one, too.
In reply to: shauna 's message, "my favorite...." on 01:22:10 02/14/03 Fri

I thought, instead of "Bloody Bush," how about "Monster Bush?" Or, "The Blair Rich Project?"

A friend of mine's brother was shipped off last weekend to possibly die in a war that doesn't make a bit of sense to me.

Of course, even I can say that I like Bush and his freaky followers a lot more than I like Saddam Hussein (which isn't exactly saying much, since baby Bush hides his real sadistic crimes behind a Forest Gump facade with a Clint Eastwood edge), but I have to wonder what problems we'll face on down the road even if we do manage to take Saddam out of power with aggressive force.

There's no plans for democracy in Iraq's near future after a "victory." More like a military regime for the U.S. and other western countries - such as a Pentagon country. Something arms manufacturers would really like to sink their teeth into.

For the west; we have an obligation to protect and defend. Not to start up cock fights for more military regimes and possibly oil. We want to take those nasty weapons of mass destruction from those who will use them for their own twisted agenda? Take them out of the hands of everyone else. And if we do this wrong, and get so tied down with petty Iraq issues, that once this war happens, what's going to stop China from invading Taiwan?

Even U.N. arms inspectors are privately complaining about the quality of U.S. "intelligence" and accusing the United States of sending them on wild-goose chases.

Apparently the U.N. has been taking a precise inventory of Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missile arsenal, determining how many there are and where they are.

Discovering that the al-Samoud 2 has been flying too far in tests has been one of the inspectors' major successes. But the missile has only been exceeding its 93-mile limit by about fifteen miles and that, the Iraqis say, is because it isn't yet loaded down with its guidance system.

The al-Samoud 2 is not the 800-mile-plus range missile that Secretary of State Colin Powell insists Iraq is developing.

In fact, the U.S. claim that Iraq is developing missiles that could hit its neighbors � or U.S. troops in the region, or even Israel � is just one of the claims coming from Washington that inspectors here are finding increasingly unbelievable.

The inspectors have become so frustrated trying to chase down unspecific or ambiguous U.S. leads that they've begun to express that anger privately in no uncertain terms.

U.N. sources have told CBS News (of all people to broadcast this) that American tips have lead to one dead end after another.

Example: satellite photographs purporting to show new research buildings at Iraqi nuclear sites. When the U.N. went into the new buildings they found "nothing."

Example: Saddam's presidential palaces, where the inspectors went with specific coordinates supplied by the U.S. on where to look for incriminating evidence. Again, they found "nothing."

Example: Interviews with scientists about the aluminum tubes the U.S. says Iraq has imported for enriching uranium, but which the Iraqis say are for making rockets. Given the size and specification of the tubes, the U.N. calls the "Iraqi alibi air tight."

The inspectors do acknowledge, however, that they would not be here at all if not for the threat of U.S. military action.

So frustrated have the inspectors become that one source has referred to the U.S. intelligence they've been getting as "garbage after garbage after garbage." In fact, Phillips says the source used another cruder word. The inspectors find themselves caught between the Iraqis, who are masters at the weapons-hiding shell game, and the United States, whose intelligence they've found to be circumstantial, outdated or just plain wrong.

This is insane!

And watch the grammy's this Sunday. Supposedly a few singers are going to try and pull some anti-war stunts and throw out some verbal abuse to the Bush administration. Of course the network broardcasting this in America says they'll pull the plug on any who tries.

What a blatant act of censorship.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]