kids: get ready to be be drafted for corrupt politicians

[Annie]

St. Clemans,
I believe that Iraq was behind/funded/supported much of the terrorism going on prior to 9/11. As far as I'm concerned, there is a better than even chance they may have been connected to 9/11-though as you pointed out earlier, that cannot be 'proven'.

I think that Iraq was probably behind the OKC bombing, but that is a long story, that has been discussed for a long time. I have no doubt that Iraq under Saddam would have caused as much carnage here as possible, we just didn't give him any more time.

From my point of view, we were lucky that he had so much faith in Chirac, that he didn't 'come clean' if he really was.

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by Kathianne
St. Clemans,
I believe that Iraq was behind/funded/supported much of the terrorism going on prior to 9/11. As far as I'm concerned, there is a better than even chance they may have been connected to 9/11-though as you pointed out earlier, that cannot be 'proven'.

I think that Iraq was probably behind the OKC bombing, but that is a long story, that has been discussed for a long time. I have no doubt that Iraq under Saddam would have caused as much carnage here as possible, we just didn't give him any more time.

From my point of view, we were lucky that he had so much faith in Chirac, that he didn't 'come clean' if he really was.

So given all these problems you see, let me ask again, what would you have suggeted to the 100,000s of Iraqi conscripts before the invasion? Should they have followed your advice that "if the country 'calls' one should be willing to answer, either by serving or by emigrating"?

 

[Annie]

Personally I think those people were in deep s*it. Considering the number of weapons they had and have, I must wonder why a coup didn't take place. Then again, they may have been intimidated by the non-existant WMD....

Do you think those gassings were faked?

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by Kathianne
Personally I think those people were in deep s*it. Considering the number of weapons they had and have, I must wonder why a coup didn't take place. Then again, they may have been intimidated by the non-existant WMD....

Do you think those gassings were faked?

The regime was doing all sorts of disgusting things, especially when they developed closer relations with us. Are you suggesting that when a regime, like Saddam's is doing awful things people shouldn't serve their country when called?

 

[eric]

So why do you think the 9/11 terrorists attacked us and what does this have to do with what's going on in Iraq?

Let me ask you, do you think the people who perished on 9-11 deserved their fate ?

I certainly hope you are not insinuating that this attack was somehow justified.

 

[Annie]

Oh NOW I see, the gassing of the Kurds was the US fault. Hey why not?

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by Kathianne
Oh NOW I see, the gassing of the Kurds was the US fault. Hey why not?

And just who sold them necessary components for these weapons? Who showed no interest in bringing the genocide of the Kurds before the UN in the 1980s? Did you even hear about this before 1991? Why has Saddam gassed no one since he has been our enemy, but gassed many when he was our ally?

 

[jimnyc]

Just another sucker who probably thinks gun manafacturers are responsible for deaths and not those using the guns in crimes. What a sad way of looking at things.

 

[Annie]

SL Clemens, (sorry I kept getting that wrong),

Saddam was like a lot of other very bad despots we 'allied' with during the Cold War, which btw, has now been over for more than a decade. I don't think that we ever 'savored' our relations with the unsavory, but did what had to be done at the time.
I noticed all the 'admiration' for Kennedy yesterday, yet most of these unsavory relationships were made during his and LBJ's administrations-for logical if not moral reasons. Actually, I guess they would be moral, considering they took an oath to protect the nation and they were doing what they believed necessary.

I do not think the US has a perfect record at picking friends, after all look how long we considered France an ally. sheesh. I also know that we have a very mixed record on nation building, which is hard with our short attention span.

I do know that if pull out of Iraq too soon, it will become obvious to all why we should have stayed.

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Just another sucker who probably thinks gun manafacturers are responsible for deaths and not those using the guns in crimes. What a sad way of looking at things.

Indeed, the Soviets, Brits, and French who sold Saddam weapons are also in part responsible for the civilian atrocities for which such weapons were necessary components.

 

[DKSuddeth]

I have a hard time understanding how it is that when the 'left' points out a theory that doesn't make sense to the 'right' that we are nothing but aluminum foil beanie wearing black helicopter seeing freaks but the 'right' can point out a theory (i.e. hussein behind the OKC attack) and it obviously makes all the sense in the world.

To me that just smacks with the attitude of 'I'm right, you're wrong regardless of what evidence you have or we don't have.

its completely ridiculous

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I have a hard time understanding how it is that when the 'left' points out a theory that doesn't make sense to the 'right' that we are nothing but aluminum foil beanie wearing black helicopter seeing freaks but the 'right' can point out a theory (i.e. hussein behind the OKC attack) and it obviously makes all the sense in the world.

To me that just smacks with the attitude of 'I'm right, you're wrong regardless of what evidence you have or we don't have.

its completely ridiculous

Where in the world did anyone ever say that Hussein was responsible for the Oklahoma City attack?

 

[eric]

I have a hard time understanding how it is that when the 'left' points out a theory that doesn't make sense to the 'right' that we are nothing but aluminum foil beanie wearing black helicopter seeing freaks but the 'right' can point out a theory (i.e. hussein behind the OKC attack) and it obviously makes all the sense in the world.

DK, it is the constant America bashing that get to people. As well as the insinuations that somehow we had 9-11 coming to us. This is where the problem lies.

 

[DKSuddeth]

The following was by kathianne.

.

I think that Iraq was probably behind the OKC bombing

I was made aware of this 'theory' a while back. It seems that a few years ago, there surfaced some reports that an arabic female was the sole witness to yet one more person seen running away from the truck that McViegh left and that this person appeared to be of iraqi descent. Some federal investigation or report further intimated that this person might have been iraqi intelligence (I'm not being accurate, just going on what I remember). Now, to me, this is reminiscient of an attempt to further implicate hussein as an active supporter and directly responsible for terrorism, or conspiracy if you will. I've run across many diehard bush supporters and iraq war supporters who would swear that this is the absolute proof that hussein is a promoter of terrorism.

Conversely, I look at theories regarding 'the badge man' or other theories involving the JFK assassination (and it wouldn't surprise me completely if in the next couple of years some conspicuous piece of evidence is 'leaked' that shows a probable link between castro and the assassination to paint castro as a terrorist supporter) yet these are immediately met with derision and denounced as bunk and the 'nuts' get labeled wearing aluminum foil beanies

 

[DKSuddeth]

DK, it is the constant America bashing that get to people. As well as the insinuations that somehow we had 9-11 coming to us. This is where the problem lies.

I can tell you where this comes from.

Since even before 9/11 we've had some small groups decry our governments foreign policy because of the harshness that results from it, the iraq sanctions included. It goes all the way back to the end of WW2 when FDR made a decision to either unify the world or take economic advantage of the natural resources in the middle east. Since we had two great big oceans to provide a buffer from direct attacks on the civilians nobody really cared.

Our foreign policy has therefore been executed to provide the american energy industry with huge gains and since the american people benefitted also, who cared?

Now, before anyone goes off on the explanation of the fact that there were no DIRECT attacks on the civilians as a result of our policies lets take a look at a scenario for a second.........

If muslim terrorists, or another arab government, stuck to military or government targets, and lets say that one of these targets that were attacked had some HUGE devastating after effects that resulted in our political leaders exercising unprecedented powers, maybe even powers that they don't really have, in the name of 'national security' and it results in mass detentions of americans, hysteria to the point of riots so bad that civilians are actually killed to quell the violence, and social infrastructure damage that results in famine and/or disease. How should our reaction be then?

My point is that, even though our foreign policy didnt directly attack civilians it had an almost immediate indirect effect. That indirect effect was also devestating to their people. They obviously see OUR citizens non concern as an approval or acceptance of our governments actions so they view us as also being responsible.

But nobody wants to accept that responsibility, they would much rather hear they hate our freedoms so they can go on with their isolated little lives in a big big world.

 

[eric]

Since even before 9/11 we've had some small groups decry our governments foreign policy because of the harshness that results from it, the iraq sanctions included

Here we go with the spin again. The iraq sanctions were brought on by one person and one person only Sadam.

It goes all the way back to the end of WW2 when FDR made a decision to either unify the world or take economic advantage of the natural resources in the middle east

It is not America's job to unify anyone. Please clarify the statement "take economic advantage", because in most businesses you take any advantage you can get. Since when is the game of life played fairly?

Our foreign policy has therefore been executed to provide the american energy industry with huge gains and since the american people benefitted also, who cared?

Don't you think that our much of our foreign policy was shaped by matters of security? Keep in mind the cold war.

They obviously see OUR citizens non concern as an approval or acceptance of our governments actions so they view us as also being responsible.

So this bestows upon them the right to kill innocent people because of their views?

Look I admit our government has done wrong in the past, just as every other one that has ever existed, it still does not justify 9-11.

 

[Annie]

There has been substantial reporting out of OKC about the possibility of Middle East/Iraq involvement. I was not saying that I KNOW it or that it's PROVEN, anymore than the WMD have been ruled in or out.

Why is it that when someone writes something you disagree with, you act as though I called you or someone else whom you do agree with a name?

I have a hard time understanding how it is that when the 'left' points out a theory that doesn't make sense to the 'right' that we are nothing but aluminum foil beanie wearing black helicopter seeing freaks but the 'right' can point out a theory

Up until then, the conversations had been civil.

Even more to the point, I had already agreed with him regarding the US involvement with Saddam and his ilk-not a 'theory' but a fact. Try reading the thread and being civil, just my opinion.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Here we go with the spin again. The iraq sanctions were brought on by one person and one person only Sadam.

I don't think hussein said "i'll go ahead and give myself THESE sanctions. the UN, at the request of the security council, put these sanctions on hussein. it backfired on them. the spin is saying hussein is responsible for them. lets really call the sanctions what they were supposed to be. punishment. that punishment did NOT have the desired effect that the security council thought that it would (or did it).

It is not America's job to unify anyone. Please clarify the statement "take economic advantage", because in most businesses you take any advantage you can get. Since when is the game of life played fairly?

I'm still researching this. I had a paper on it from awhile back but it had to do with roosevelts first Litvonia deal and then led to Trumans expected confrontation with moscow. I'll keep looking. this also applies to your other statement...

Don't you think that our much of our foreign policy was shaped by matters of security? Keep in mind the cold war.

So this bestows upon them the right to kill innocent people because of their views?

I didn't say this bestows them the right, I said this is how they view OUR (meaning the citizens) non-involvement or concern with regards to how the US government implemented foreign policy and its effects on them meaning if WE didn't show any concern, then why should they?

 

[eric]

if WE didn't show any concern, they why should they?

DK, I'm not asking for nor do I want their concern. At the same time I do not want their terrorism. Believe me in the end they will be the ones who will lose the concern game.

I don't think hussein said "i'll go ahead and give myself THESE sanctions

No, he just failed to comply with the UN resolutions. By the way, yes it is a punishment.

 

[DKSuddeth]

DK, I'm not asking for nor do I want their concern. At the same time I do not want their terrorism.

and how about YOUR concern? would you concern yourself with the results of our policy? obviously not if you don't care what happens to them but if thats the case then why would they concern themselves with how you're going to react with their attacks?

Thats the problem with alot of people nowadays, if it doesn't directly concern them then they don't care. I admit, before I joined the marines in 84 I didn't concern myself with what happened over there, but since the Iran contra deal I have.

By the way, yes it is a punishment.

and who was it supposed to punish? i'm sure it wasn't supposed to punish the people of Iraq but thats the effect that it had.