Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:04 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3409
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
[quote author=whatchamacallit link=board=general;num=1045218507;start=0#4 date=02/18/03 at 06:58:21]speaking of assholes, how about this ugly s.o.b?<br>http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/2/17/141625.shtml<br>newsmax.com is now my daily resource for laughter. check it on out now![/quote]<br><br>I don't know how you can read this ! When I came across a sentence like 'Peace movements causes WAR', I stopped reading. I knew I was in the company of very dumb people.<br><br>Congratulations. You got a stronger stomach than me.

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3409
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
Pacifists being Hitler's children ? <br>Is this world upside down or what ?<br>Good is bad, black is white, truth is lie...<br>And USA thinks it's being given a mission from God to straighten up the world and it looks like the last chapters of the Revelation. Well, maybe Man is a failure after all. Let Man vanish and let Nature take over.<br><br>In the end, Man's superiority over the Animal Kingdom would have been to blow himself up with a remote control.

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2003 7:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3409
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
I'd like to know what is the percentage of americans who would dislike the way things are going in the USA. Sometime, some may speak about something that need to be changed. Sometime, they all salute the flag.<br>Yeah, how many ? Can they really change something ?

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 11:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3409
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
I couldn't help but hear Mr. Bush Fairy Tale on TV last night.<br><br>He said that he would put a democratic government in Irak, so the rest of Arab Nations would see what a beautiful thing it is, so they'd start doing the same, and in the process, Israel and Palestine would go along hand in hand, kissing each other's cheek.<br><br>And, ironically, on radio this afternoon, I heard about The Prime Chief of Afghanistan (what's his name, I don't remember, sorry) asking Bush to stay in Afghanistan cause he noticed that the Warlords of the South may be at it again in a very near future (as soon as the Americans leave I suppose). So much for the after-Taliban regime who was supposed to secure the country.<br><br>If the Arab countries would have wanted to change the way they do their own things, I guess they would not have waited for Mr. Bush. There may be some countries governed by dictators, but not all of these are. Not all countries in the world want to be a clone of the modern world. They may be right or wrong but that is not the question. <br><br>So, American soldiers and some allies will give their life for a fairy tale. Not counting the Iraqe people. <br><br>A non-elected president will start a world-not-wanted war, somehow based on what some would say as no-valid-proofs of non-existent mass weapons and no-proved links to Al-Qaida. I truly fear the consequences.  

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 9:05 pm
Posts: 423
Iraq's poisoned babies have turned me into a hawk<br>By Julius Strauss<br>(Filed: 27/02/2003) <br><br><br>There's something singular about a man who has been severely tortured. Maybe it's the way he struggles against failing eyesight caused by repeated blows to the kidneys. Or his lop-sided posture, the result of multiple broken bones that have failed to mend properly. Sometimes there is a tremor in the hands or a twitch, a minuscule outer sign of the torment within.<br><br>The man who sat opposite me in a small, bare room at the Kurdish border post this week had all the symptoms of a man who had been systematically broken. I encouraged him to tell his story and, slowly, sometimes reluctantly, he relived the terror of the 21 months he spent in Saddam Hussein's torture chambers.<br><br>"They put me in a cell at the secret police headquarters, tied my hands together with wire and then suspended me from the ceiling," he said quietly. "Then they beat me with batons and cables and ran electric shocks through my fingers and genitals. It went on for months. They never told me what my crime was."<br><br>I had seen such men before. When Serb forces unleashed a wave of expulsions, beatings and killings on the ethnic Albanians in 1999, I met a teacher in a refugee camp on the Macedonian border. I had known the man before the war. He was quiet and modest and had counselled moderation to the hotter heads in his village. When the war began, the Serbs had arrested him and beaten him within an inch of his life. So great were the physical changes they wrought on him that it was several minutes before I made the leap of recognition.<br><br>When I came to autonomous northern Iraq - which since 1991 has been protected from Saddam's reach by British and American warplanes - I was intensely sceptical of the wisdom of Washington's insistence on deposing Saddam. Its claims of links between al-Qa'eda and Baghdad seemed tenuous. As for the assertion that Saddam will soon have the bomb, well, the evidence was pretty flimsy.<br><br>Indeed, I could have reeled off a host of counter-arguments. At a time when the Western world is entering a long-drawn-out struggle against Islamist terrorism, it made little sense to fritter away resources to oust a man whose regime was weaker than ever. A war also risked alienating hundreds of millions of moderate Muslims whose support would be essential if the threat of Islamist extremism was to be neutered.<br><br>I agreed with the quiet-spoken Muslim men I met in Pakistan, Afghanistan and central Asia who said that a Middle East peace deal was a greater priority than ousting Saddam. As long as the Palestinians continued to die in the streets, they said, the fires of Islamist extremism would keep burning. I have not renounced these arguments entirely. But after little more than a week in northern Iraq, my eyes have been opened to the sheer scale of savagery that Saddam has unleashed on his people.<br><br>Since my arrival I have visited villages, refugee camps, tea houses and bazaars. Over tiny cups of strong, sweet tea I have listened to the stories of the many people who live in this mountainous refuge. Some are Kurds who have flourished under 12 years of self-rule, others recent arrivals who were expelled or fled Saddam's territories to the south. In Sulaimania, where I am based, Arabs, Turkomans and Assyrians now co-exist peacefully with the Kurdish majority, but they all have terrible tales to tell: it is as if the entire land and all its inhabitants have been visited by a calamity of biblical proportions.<br><br>In my time as a journalist I have seen the ethnic cleansing of Bosnia and the burning villages of Kosovo. I watched as Milosevic's stormtroopers, their minds addled by paranoia and hatred, levelled entire villages with little more than a Zippo lighter and a few cans of petrol. In Sierra Leone, I saw children - arms or legs hacked off by drugged-up thugs - struggle to haul themselves into broken wheelchairs. I even interviewed the thugs that maimed them, 15- and 16-year-olds with glazed eyes and heads full of demons.<br><br>In Afghanistan and Chechnya, the misery and suffering wrought often beggared description. But nothing could have prepared me for the odious evil of Saddam Hussein's rule.

_________________
Who ran a modeling school whereupon he!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 9:05 pm
Posts: 423
In the 1980s, while the West railed against Nicolae Ceausescu's plan to destroy 3,000 villages, Saddam Hussein actually did it. Then he murdered 180,000 Kurdish men above the age of 15 simply because he thought they might one day turn against him.<br><br>Backed by Western governments who feared the spread of the Ayatollah's Islamist revolution, he launched a speculative war against Iran that left the better part of a million men dead.<br><br>Nor has the killing stopped since. Thousands of Iraqis are still being executed without trial, and tens of thousands routinely tortured. Millions live in a state of numb fear. As I stood this week watching the dispossessed coming across the border into Kurdistan, I spoke to Kak Adil, the officer in charge of the Kurdish post. "They all have stories of beatings and brutal killings at the hands of Saddam," he said. "Only his servants live without fear."<br><br>I have met grown-up men who say they pray each day for the death of the dictator. The evil is there for all to see in Halabja, a small town the Iraqis gassed in 1988. It is in the wheezing chests of the women seeing out the remainder of their miserable lives and the red eyes of the men who cannot forget the sight of blood dribbling from the mouths of the dying children. Halabja has rates of leukaemia, cancer and congenital conditions many times the Iraqi norm. One doctor who works in the town told me: "A woman came to see me two months ago. She had given birth to a little girl who had no feet." Who could argue with taking action against the regime responsible for such outrages?<br><br>Assos Hardi, the editor of the liberal newspaper Hawalati in Sulaimania, was more mathematical in his appraisal. He said: "How many people do you think will die if America attacks Saddam? It will probably be less than the number of people he kills in a single month."<br><br>As the drums of war beat ever louder, I am still unsure of the strategic wisdom of opening a second front in the war against terror. But of the moral rectitude of such a course, there can be no doubt.<br><br>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/02/27/do2701.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/02/27/ixopinion.html<br>

_________________
Who ran a modeling school whereupon he!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 10:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3409
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
The world is full of madmen. Saddam, Milosevic, Osama, etc... And being against war doesn't mean being for any tyrant. Well, in my opinion, Bush is more and more becoming another one in a 'civilised sense' but you may, and some supporters will, disagree.<br><br>The thing for me (and everything Saddam did to its people is unquestionably bad) is that an attack by a western country against an Arab one will be seen like an act of agression, even by moderate ones, even by moderate muslims, even by arabs who dislike Saddam. We can hear it now. Thus, such agression would only feed the hate against USA and its allies, contributing in a not so far future, in more terrorists attacks against US interests, in US and abroad (it can be apply to allies too). That's what I mean when I say that I truly fear the consequences. I fear that 9/11 will look like a trip to Disneyland compared to what's in store for us. They're not afraid of bombing themselves up for Allah cause they think we're evil. In striking first, we will prove them right.<br><br>Saddam was put in place by US. Who will they put in place to replace him ? How can we be sure that it will be a good one ? It's already beginning to mess up in Afghanistan and USA was there not too long ago. Don't you think USA should stop playing the God's game ? What's in it for them that's really worth it ?<br><br>I don't deny there's a problem in Iraq, although not as serious a world threat as US government's trying to convince us. Should we risk our relative homeland security ? Should we take such a chance ? To gain what ? Oil reserves ? A son's revenge ? A change of regime that may set an explosive situation there ? <br><br>Yeah, there's a problem in Iraq but, I think, it should be dealt in another fashion, with a cold head. A war, I fear, would only start a series of other wars. There's problems elsewhere too, you know. <br><br>PEACE - For my children - PEACE

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 9:05 pm
Posts: 423
[quote author=whatchamacallit link=board=general;num=1045218507;start=15#18 date=02/28/03 at 00:23:14]Them, is this your opinion or do you post the thoughts and reports of someone else here?<br>[/quote]<br><br>I posted the link to the article, whatchamacallit.<br><br>Think of it as an editorial cartoon without the picture.<br>

_________________
Who ran a modeling school whereupon he!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 11:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 9:05 pm
Posts: 423
Here are my personal thoughts on the Iraq matter:<br><br>I believe that the international (and American domestic) "peace movement" is fueled by an anti-Bush furor that borders on lunacy.<br><br>It is clear that Saddam is in violation of several UN resolutions, including 1441, which not only demands that he provide a thorough accounting of weapons to have been destroyed since the end of Desert Storm, but which also demands "with regard to terrorism" that he <br><br>1) end repression of [Iraq's] civilian population; <br><br>2) provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq; <br><br>3) return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq (political prisoners!); and that he <br><br>4) return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq.<br><br>Why isn't the "peace movement" demanding, via protests and demonstrations, that Saddam comply with UN resolutions to avoid war?<br><br>Because Saddam is not the enemy of the "peace movement." George Bush is. Make no mistake.<br><br>The "peace movement" didn't rear its head when President Clinton bombed Iraq in 1998; the "peace movement" didn't protest the Clinton-led NATO war<br>in Serbia, the bombings in the Sudan or the campaign in Somalia. In fact, Clinton's attack on Iraq in 1998 was a unilateral action!<br><br>President Bush, far from seeking to act unilaterally, has attempted to lead the UN to show some spine with regard to Saddam and show that its own resolutions have teeth. There is no way short of the threat of military force to enforce Saddam's compliance.<br><br>Bush and Blair know this, and have been attempting to show the UN that a unanimous demand from its member-nations will serve to provide the needed threat to Saddam that failure to comply will result in his ouster by way of military power provided by a unified world.<br><br>France and Germany have been leading a (small) coalition to buy time for Saddam; they don't support the use of military might to enforce the resolutions to which they have demanded he be held.<br><br>This split in the UN has emboldened Saddam, who continues to play hide-and-go-seek with the UN inspectors (as he readies his arsenals full of chemical weapons [gas, nerve agents] and biological weapons [anthrax, smallpox]). He has gone so far as to warn that he will use these weapons on any invading force (and these are weapons he claims not to have. What the fuck???).<br><br>Bush and Blair have said that they will lead a coalition of nations to disarm Saddam if he refuses to disarm himself and if the UN refuses to act as a body.<br><br>There's no other way to get him to comply if he refuses to do so on his own! Is this not clear to everyone reading my words?<br><br>If the UN isn't going to enforce its resolutions, why is the UN making them? If it isn't going to enforce its resolutions, it is irrelevant!<br><br>Bush and Blair are trying to keep it relevant...but the sophisticates of Old Europe (and their apologists) are apparently deeply offended at the prospects of being led by an ignorant cowboy. <br><br>The result may well be that the U.S., U.K., Spain, Italy, Poland, Hungary, The Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Latvia, Slovenia, Denmark, Turkey, Romania, Portugal, Bulgaria and Australia might just have to go this one alone. <br><br>Somebody's got to do it or the UN will cease to be an entity that matters; in that case you'll see an entirely new alliance led by the U.S. and U.K. protecting the interests of the free world by itself. Is this what Old Europe wants?<br><br>Apparently. And it blows!

_________________
Who ran a modeling school whereupon he!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IRAQ - revisited
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 11:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 9:05 pm
Posts: 423
[quote author=MentalTossFlycoon link=board=general;num=1045218507;start=15#21 date=02/28/03 at 00:36:50]<br><br>Saddam Hussein is one evil motherfucker, and he simply needs a bullet in the head. I'd just as soon see that be the only bullet shot in the war, but I doubt it will be.<br>[/quote]<br><br>I agree. I'd like to see the mother of one of those poor raped and tortured Kurdish girls pull the trigger.

_________________
Who ran a modeling school whereupon he!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group