"It doesn't give them the right to blow up your house." See, this is where I think you are simply dead wrong. In this case, it did. Also, Uday and Qusay were not in their own home. They had holed up in someone else's and the owner of the home was outside with US troops when the fire fight began. As for whether or not you would exterminate your enemies with chemcial weapons and such if you were king? If you think you would ..... man, I can't even respond to that. I fully have confidence that if I were king of some land I'd have enough of a decent soul not to do that. Monarchies are not my favorite form of government but there have been people in power ... kings, presidents, whatever ... who did not respond cruelly just because they could. The current king of Jordan and his father before him are prime examples. Hell, the former communist rulers of Czechoslovakia are actually good examples. When the country split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it was done peacefully. Sloth, your pronunciation that such people of power are likely do "have their way with their subjects" is simply a flawed assumption. And since your own judge of your character leads you to believe that you would do the same ... we all must simply be grateful that you aren't king of the country.
myke
PS - Where's your facts that the US has fired on protesters or a rebellion with chemical weapons as you state?
PS2 - Clearly, I have to go back to the point that it doesn't matter what Bush does or any member of his administration does. You will, due to your extreme hatred of them, find flaw in simply any thing they do. I'm not a supporter of bush and don't plan to vote for him the second go around either. But when you let your personal views of someone color your objectivity, your opinion becomes difficult to take as meaningful rather than "here we go again".
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
I don't have the time to prove it with quotes right now. I was taught that The USA is the country that trained Saddam Hussein and taught him how to make and use chemical weapons in the 10 year War with Iran. We were allied with him during that time.
The USA is the only government to use nuclear weapons on civilian populations and has as many if not more chemical weapons stockpiled as anyone. I have read reports (none from the mainstream press) that the USA has tested chemical weapons on the public (MK-ULTRA comes to mind).
The USA has a terrible human rights history on protesters who disagree with them, which you can read about in A People's History of the United States. Other examples include WTO Seattle, Kent State, MOVE, and even the Civil War. Yes the Civil war! All the South wanted was to be free of the US! We never assassinated Lee's grandchildren and then bragged about it.
I see every move of my country as hypocritical and if I have an extreme hatred (which I don't think I do) of the Reagan/Rumsfeld/Bush Administration it is because they has proved every good thing about this country I was taught as a youth wrong.
I was very conservative as a youth until these bozos showed up and made me realize that even Iraqi people have feelings too. I know all the old lies well. Death comes to those who reap it. However perhaps it is a spiritual death not a physical one.
You make it seem like I feel that Iraq is superior to the USA... I am not saying that I am saying that we are becoming fucking more like China instead of more like something cool and bombing Iraq and killing foreign heads of state with rocket launchers is not going to help that. That was my point anyway I think.
The USA is the only government to use nuclear weapons on civilian populations and has as many if not more chemical weapons stockpiled as anyone. I have read reports (none from the mainstream press) that the USA has tested chemical weapons on the public (MK-ULTRA comes to mind).
The USA has a terrible human rights history on protesters who disagree with them, which you can read about in A People's History of the United States. Other examples include WTO Seattle, Kent State, MOVE, and even the Civil War. Yes the Civil war! All the South wanted was to be free of the US! We never assassinated Lee's grandchildren and then bragged about it.
I see every move of my country as hypocritical and if I have an extreme hatred (which I don't think I do) of the Reagan/Rumsfeld/Bush Administration it is because they has proved every good thing about this country I was taught as a youth wrong.
I was very conservative as a youth until these bozos showed up and made me realize that even Iraqi people have feelings too. I know all the old lies well. Death comes to those who reap it. However perhaps it is a spiritual death not a physical one.
You make it seem like I feel that Iraq is superior to the USA... I am not saying that I am saying that we are becoming fucking more like China instead of more like something cool and bombing Iraq and killing foreign heads of state with rocket launchers is not going to help that. That was my point anyway I think.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
The American People Appease Their Leaders
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
No one, not me ... not anyone else I know of has stuck up for this country and said we have not made mistakes in our history. You simply point out nothing else. You point out the civil war and ww2 readily but point out nothing good this nation has done as well to balance it. The US nor any other nation is perfect. Our nation as an entity is like a giant amalgram of it's citizens, both good and bad. Also, I can't fathom some of the examples you choose to justify your own point of view. Lord knows, being an individual who has lived in the southern part of the US all of his life, I've heard arguements about the justifications of the "war between the states" over and over. I'm shocked that you would justifiy the south's actions with such a simplistic synthesis of the whole event by saying "all the south wanted was to be free of the US". The south also wanted to keep slavery alive as an institution. Using that as an example was the last thing I expected to read from you.
I think it is quite safe to state that you have a clear hatred of the Reagen to Bush administrations. Regardless of your statements to the contrary, the volume of posts and rhetoric you've espoused over and over has proven your hatred time and time again.
Every move of your country has not been simply hypocritical. Of all of the negative examples (and most of them quite old) that you listed as supporting your arguement, I can come up with as many to balance that out. For instance: 1) the US started a national park system as an idea that spread ecologic stewardship throughout the world. 2) we have the most stable democratic republic in the history of the world (no matter what presidential administration you hate, we have seen stable transfers of power between widely disparaging ideologies throughout our history) . 3) the current European western democracies along with South Korea & Japan can thank their prosperity on US taxpayers. Remember the Marshall Plan? 4) Our taxpayers are also currently paying (though this is not in the news very often) to help former Soviet republics and satellite states dismantle their aging nuclear weapons. 5) Bosnia-Herzegovina & Kosovo. 6) 7) 8) 9) ... I could go on and on. Point being ... you can point out lots of negative acts in our history as a nation, many of which I would have to concede as not a good thing. But by the same token, I can postulize as many examples of things our country has did that have been good.
If you only constantly point out the negative, it does tend to lead one to believe that you'd prefer to be elsewhere. Which is fine. Simply don't try to play it off as if your opinion is a factual account of what life is like here. It's simply not true.
myke
I think it is quite safe to state that you have a clear hatred of the Reagen to Bush administrations. Regardless of your statements to the contrary, the volume of posts and rhetoric you've espoused over and over has proven your hatred time and time again.
Every move of your country has not been simply hypocritical. Of all of the negative examples (and most of them quite old) that you listed as supporting your arguement, I can come up with as many to balance that out. For instance: 1) the US started a national park system as an idea that spread ecologic stewardship throughout the world. 2) we have the most stable democratic republic in the history of the world (no matter what presidential administration you hate, we have seen stable transfers of power between widely disparaging ideologies throughout our history) . 3) the current European western democracies along with South Korea & Japan can thank their prosperity on US taxpayers. Remember the Marshall Plan? 4) Our taxpayers are also currently paying (though this is not in the news very often) to help former Soviet republics and satellite states dismantle their aging nuclear weapons. 5) Bosnia-Herzegovina & Kosovo. 6) 7) 8) 9) ... I could go on and on. Point being ... you can point out lots of negative acts in our history as a nation, many of which I would have to concede as not a good thing. But by the same token, I can postulize as many examples of things our country has did that have been good.
If you only constantly point out the negative, it does tend to lead one to believe that you'd prefer to be elsewhere. Which is fine. Simply don't try to play it off as if your opinion is a factual account of what life is like here. It's simply not true.
myke
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
One man's freedom fighter is another's terrorist.
And America is losing the beer taste gap.
And America is losing the beer taste gap.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
See now you're being sensible. Sometimes it's all about semantics. Beer. That's a better subject. Yes, I'm convinced that Jamaica is going to take over the world with better beer. That's why we in the Carolinas are going to join Brett's new Canadian empire.
myke
PS - If I ever make it out to Seattle, you gonna buy me a beer or pour one over my head???
PS2 - Now can I get you to change my title to something more ... personal. Yeah, that's the ticket. But not insulting ....
myke
PS - If I ever make it out to Seattle, you gonna buy me a beer or pour one over my head???
PS2 - Now can I get you to change my title to something more ... personal. Yeah, that's the ticket. But not insulting ....
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
And please don't play the race card the Civil War was about money just like every other war. It's not like the northerner's have a great reputation for racial tolerance and benevolance (see ghetthos of any major northern city).
The USA is a great country who is run by very ordinary assholes. I can't say I could do any better. The people have given their government absolute power out of fear of terrorists and they have responded by launching 2 wars. Like I said when we invaded Afghanistan... who's next? And for what reasons.
As a free-thinking person I do not approve of unjustified illegal wars. If that makes me, Germany, France, and Hans Blix evil then I guess we are the bad people... I'd rather live in France anyway and will someday. Until then as an American I am bound by the duty to call a spade a spade and a Bush a bloodlusting Christian oil baron crusader.
I have no opinion on Iraq except that its their country not mine and they should decide who leads it now and not some puppet we decide will keep the oil profits flowing in our direction.
The USA is a great country who is run by very ordinary assholes. I can't say I could do any better. The people have given their government absolute power out of fear of terrorists and they have responded by launching 2 wars. Like I said when we invaded Afghanistan... who's next? And for what reasons.
As a free-thinking person I do not approve of unjustified illegal wars. If that makes me, Germany, France, and Hans Blix evil then I guess we are the bad people... I'd rather live in France anyway and will someday. Until then as an American I am bound by the duty to call a spade a spade and a Bush a bloodlusting Christian oil baron crusader.
I have no opinion on Iraq except that its their country not mine and they should decide who leads it now and not some puppet we decide will keep the oil profits flowing in our direction.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Of course I would buy you a beer. I am nothing like my online personality. I love everyone.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Okay you are now SoCo Swiller.
That's all I could come up with... but I kinda like that one.
Not hard to figure out but in case anyone is slow today:
SoCo = Southern Comfort
Swiller = 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE
That's all I could come up with... but I kinda like that one.
Not hard to figure out but in case anyone is slow today:
SoCo = Southern Comfort
Swiller = 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Now that's the spirit. See, now with you and McCutcheon on board for buying me beer ... all I have to do is get Mav, Mark, and any other nice Seattleite to join in and I can't get drunk for narry a nickel. So then the only question is, whose couch will I crash on????? 
Hey, France is a great country. They've got problems too. Just realize it ain't all bad in any of the modern republics. It ain't all good ... but it ain't all bad either. Whatever makes you happy.
It's so wondeful meeting new friends from all over. Makes the possibility of travel much more fun ... and much less expensive!
myke
PS - Sloth, dear Sloth. Now what about the nice new Latinized phrase for Myke???
Hey, France is a great country. They've got problems too. Just realize it ain't all bad in any of the modern republics. It ain't all good ... but it ain't all bad either. Whatever makes you happy.
It's so wondeful meeting new friends from all over. Makes the possibility of travel much more fun ... and much less expensive!
myke
PS - Sloth, dear Sloth. Now what about the nice new Latinized phrase for Myke???
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
You beat me to it. Wonderful. Swill is also what we feed the pigs here. Even the ones that live in trailer parks. Of course, I like to refer to them as "TPT" = trailer park trash.
myke
myke
-
<Dr Baltazar>
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Tommy! Take it easy, you busy man – I don’t want to have any heart attacks on my conscience. In case you’re not too busy to be reading this, I’d like to share my thoughts with you.
My general assumption about execution is that it does not specify whether those who die are armed or not at the time. Murder is always murder; the definition of the term is not known to take into account whether the victim was armed. Murdering assholes that many think deserve it is nevertheless murder.
And yes, the Geneva Convention outlines conduct for war. Just that the current US administration changed their wording of what was previously “the war in Iraq” to “a battle, not a war”. More on this is available here: http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/special_packages/iraq/archive/5979418.htm
On the same topic, what many would argue are prisoners of war at the naval base in Guantanamo bay according to the Geneva Convention, have fittingly been called “unlawful combatants” by the White House, thereby claiming they cannot be subject to the Geneva Convention. Nice little semiotic trick. Too bad this little trick of definition itself breaches the Geneva Convention.
Lastly: No, I don’t think the brothers were innocent creatures. Questioning the actions of one party does not necessarily mean taking sides with the other party. And yes, thinking about the mass graves makes my blood boil too.
The point I was trying to make was simply that even if the consequences of our actions are good, those actions must be based on legitimate decisions. I admit it might be a little precipitated to call the killing of Uday and Qusay murder, especially given the limited information that we have, but in the case of going to war with Iraq in the first place, that was an example of an action where something good came out of it (=the overthrowing of the Saddam regime), but where the decision to go to war was illegitimate. The UN may be an inadequate institution for peace, but there is currently no alternative to it and to ignore its decision was a big mistake. It sets a dangerous example for other countries. If we do not respect others (not talking about Saddam himself here, but the international community), how will there ever be peace in the world?
1) Let’s kill everybody who doesn’t agree with us, and there will be no one left to disagree and fight with (well tried but has proven unsuccessful)
2) Free reefer, popsicles and lessons in love to the people
My general assumption about execution is that it does not specify whether those who die are armed or not at the time. Murder is always murder; the definition of the term is not known to take into account whether the victim was armed. Murdering assholes that many think deserve it is nevertheless murder.
And yes, the Geneva Convention outlines conduct for war. Just that the current US administration changed their wording of what was previously “the war in Iraq” to “a battle, not a war”. More on this is available here: http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/special_packages/iraq/archive/5979418.htm
On the same topic, what many would argue are prisoners of war at the naval base in Guantanamo bay according to the Geneva Convention, have fittingly been called “unlawful combatants” by the White House, thereby claiming they cannot be subject to the Geneva Convention. Nice little semiotic trick. Too bad this little trick of definition itself breaches the Geneva Convention.
Lastly: No, I don’t think the brothers were innocent creatures. Questioning the actions of one party does not necessarily mean taking sides with the other party. And yes, thinking about the mass graves makes my blood boil too.
The point I was trying to make was simply that even if the consequences of our actions are good, those actions must be based on legitimate decisions. I admit it might be a little precipitated to call the killing of Uday and Qusay murder, especially given the limited information that we have, but in the case of going to war with Iraq in the first place, that was an example of an action where something good came out of it (=the overthrowing of the Saddam regime), but where the decision to go to war was illegitimate. The UN may be an inadequate institution for peace, but there is currently no alternative to it and to ignore its decision was a big mistake. It sets a dangerous example for other countries. If we do not respect others (not talking about Saddam himself here, but the international community), how will there ever be peace in the world?
1) Let’s kill everybody who doesn’t agree with us, and there will be no one left to disagree and fight with (well tried but has proven unsuccessful)
2) Free reefer, popsicles and lessons in love to the people
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
make mine super skunk, blueberry, and a sultry Iraqi princess.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Oh and Myke you can sleep at my place but you need to give me free tennis lessons.
Pentagon: Saddam's sons are dead
Myke, sure I'll buy you a beer or 2, and if any political conversation arises, you can quote facts, and I'll just bluster as I usually do.
Sloth is telling the truth, he's the least argumentative person I know, in person. He saves his arguments for posting.
Sloth is telling the truth, he's the least argumentative person I know, in person. He saves his arguments for posting.