[PLUG-TALK] Chirac's shocker... Iraq.

alex alexlinux at qwest.net
Tue Dec 23 05:26:29 UTC 2003


On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 17:57, Chuck Mize wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 16:34, alex wrote:

> 
> You're right the government should get back to national defense and
> interstate commerce and not starting wars all over the globe.
> 
I believe that the Gov't IS taking care of the National Defense by
fighting the war against terrorism. Would you rather that we have
terrorist attacks on a regular basis like they have in say, Israel?
Or are you also for the driving of the Jews into the Mediterranean and
the destruction of the U.S.?
I remember Clinton giving Arafat 90% of what he wanted and the Israeli's
got nothing in return except a little security. What happened but Arafat
WALKED AWAY from the table and sent the homicide bombers back to kill
more civilian Jews. Yes, I think we should just ignore all the warning
signs and give ourselves to Alla.
> > > 

> > 
> > No, so long as there are people like you who will allow evil people to
> > do as they wish because "We don't want to hurt anyones feelings". I'd
> > rather do the right thing for the right reason than the wrong thing for
> > the sake of political correctness.
> 
> What about when Reagan and Bush I sold chemical and biological weapons
> to Saddam and funded the Taliban in Afghanistan. Were those the right
> things for the right reasons?
> 
Oh, you mean the CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS? We ignored the fact that he had
chemical weapons that he had made. Unless you're a real dunce, it's not
that hard to make say, mustard gas. That's some pretty simple stuff.
As for Afghanistan, we were assisting(with conventional weapons) the
Afghans in the defense of their country from an invading Soviet army.
> > > 

> 
> So you are condoning the actions of an administration that has close
> personal ties to the bin Laden family and the Saudi royal family? Does
> it make one an elitist to be outraged that the current administration
> lied to the American people to justify war-mongering?
> > 
Close personal ties??? Well, another person that has a dream!
Of course, Oregon does love dreamers.
But really, I surely don't feel that I was lied to for the purpose of
war-mongering. I do feel that I am one of the many that think Saddam was
a brutal dictator and will be happy to watch the pay-per-view event of
the century when Saddam loses his head. I also feel that if he had
nothing to hide he had nothing to lose by allowing the U.N. inspectors
FULL and UNFETTERED access to all areas of his country as the U.N.
requested in numerous resolutions. Gee, our favorite dictator might even
still been in power if only he had let the weapons inspectors do their
job.(sniff sniff)

> 
> I remember the Twin Towers and I am sickened that those 3,000 deaths
> were used as a justification to take away personal freedoms, alienate
> the world community and make war for no other goal than monetary profit.
> I am also disgusted by people like you who throw it back in the face of
> anybody who speaks out against those atrocities.
> 
Let me guess you're still going on about how the Patriot Act has taken
away your personal freedoms. Hell, our own state and local gov't has
done more in that direction than the Patriot Act has. Ever tried to cut
a tree on your own property that YOU paid for with YOUR money? AH AH!
That's a NO NO!!! How about build something on that same property? OH
NO!!!! You can't do that either(unless you want to pay thousands in
fees).
The only thing that the Patriot Act did was put existing laws all in one
place. To get a search warrant you still need to go to a Federal Judge
and tell them why you want it. Randomly tapping phones is still not
permitted without a warrant. They can hold you, just like they could
before, if you are considered a material witness AND a flight risk.(Mike
Hawash is a prime example of this) Really! Please tell me what personal
freedoms have you lost? I haven't lost any.
> 
> 
> > Russia, France and Germany seemed to see the oil for food program as a
> > way to make large sums of money for themselves. I wonder how much the
> > leaders and higher ups from those countries(and the U.N. for that
> > matter) made off of that "humanitarian" program.
> 
> I can't believe you would even make that argument when all of Bush and
> Cheney's cronies are getting set up to make billions in profit on the
> "rebuilding" of Iraq.
> 
It's really hard to make up the millions and billions in debt that all
three countries are being asked to forgive Iraq of. I mean it has been
all over the news. There were sanctions, U.N. sanctions I might add, in
place all during the time that that these debts were incurred by Iraq. 
wonder what then they owe all that money for. I thought that the only
way they were to get food and medicine into the country was to sell oil.
I wonder what Saddam bought?
> 
> > 
> > Uh, no. Most of the destruction in Iraq is because Saddam refused to
> > follow the mandates set forth by the U.N.
> 
> Oh really? Just because the weapons inspectors couldn't find any
> imaginary weapons of mass destruction?

Well, they were denied access to numerous sites that were suspected of
being facilities for the production of WMDs. Which only brings us back
to the question of what was Saddam hiding?
> > > 
> > > > Sometimes you need a big corporation to get the job done.
> > > 
> > > And what is "the job" and WHY does it need to "get done"?
> > 
> > Getting the infrastructure of Iraq up and running as quickly as possible
> > is the job. Who else can you name to get it done? Maybe we should put
> > the U.N. in charge and then it can be like Afghanistan. I would argue
> > that the people there are in fact no better off now than when we ran the
> > Taliban out. WOW! Let's have the U.N. run the world!!!!!!
> > > 
> 
> I'd rather see the U.N. put in charge of it than Halliburton.

The U.N. couldn't find it's kester with both hands at high noon in the
Sahara Desert in the middle of July. But of course we need only look at
the ang up job they've done in Veitnam, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the list
goes on and on. You  scream about the corruption in this country but
ignore the fact that right now Libya is in charge of policing human
rights violations! I guess that they would be experts in that area?
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG-talk mailing list
> PLUG-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
-- 
alex <alexlinux at qwest.net>





More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list