uh oh steve now you've gone and done it: thats was different they say, that doesn't really count they say, war is peace they say, we didn't see them gassing the kurds they say, we would never interfere in another nation's politics they say, we were just encouraging democracy they say, or fighting communism they say, they say a lot of things and its our duty as partriots to believe them cause they never lie, they say.
Well Blatham
I never knew you cared
(well not that much anyway!
). So its true, beneath that tough cold outdoors lumberjack exterior, there's a passionate warm hearted emotional, tender Canajun, bursting to spread love and kisses over the face of the world. And I had no idea :wink:
..........................
And a Happy new year to you all in BC, including our friends in Kamloops Kelowna, Vernon and my cousin in his log cabin in Prince George. And the dog.
Thanks Blatham, i thought it germaine to remind everyone of what the Iraqis will face. If not entirely innocent as individuals, i cannot think that as a nation they deserve to suffer what they undoubtedly will suffer.
Faith, Hope and Charity!
Peace on Earth and Goodwill Toward All Mankind!
Happy New Year All!
Started the first couple of hours of the new year with learning a lot (which seems [sic!] to be a good start):
- Iraq was believed to be "close to having a nuclear weapon" in the 1990s, though the US president acknowledged the United States does not know whether Saddam currently possesses such technology,
- nuclear weapons already believed to be in the North Korean arsenal or the fact that North Korean leaders could produce several more nuclear bombs in a matter of months if they carry out their threat to restart their nuclear program, don't matter, because Iraq might attack the USA: ""An attack from Saddam Hussein or a surrogate of Saddam Hussein would cripple our economy."
And I learnt that I must have misunderstood President Bush:
"You said we're headed to war in Iraq. I don't know why you say that," Bush told reporters. "I'm the person who gets to decide, not you. And I hope this can be done peacefully."
(all sources: ABC, German tv, Der Spiegel [= for quotations] et. al.)
Walter, I posted an answer to a very similar question on another thread. I'm not at all surprised by the apparent shift.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1048&start=608
timber
I hope Tantor has not been driven from this thread. He hasn't posted since the dust-up back around page 14. His reasoning was sound, and his appreciation of the military art evident. I didn't read anything there that did not coincide with stuff generally available from open sources, but sensed beneath that some understanding of what is happening the the Land of Shadows. I don't think Tantor a cheerleader for Bush, nor a war monger -- only a reasonably knowledgable armchair general. I hope as much can be said for my own take on the situation.
"This country is headed to war with a nation we armed in the first place for a tidy corporate profit, despite the fact that there is no evidence that nation is a threat anymore. Beyond the tens of thousands of civilian deaths this war will bring to the people of Iraq, beyond the potential for hundreds or thousands of American casualties, beyond the vastly increased threat of stateside terrorism this will cause, yet another tidy corporate profit will be made. Simultaneously, corporations and our government collude to keep average Americans from being able to call to account those who poisoned children during 40 years of profitable manufacture of what appears to have been a neurological poison. "
That's from William Rivers Pitt's brilliant "The Dead Remember", found here:
The Dead Remember
asherman: i highly regard your imput into these threads but i would also like to add that military rationale is just what it is, there also are various and assundry other visions of the global issues that confront modern society, your analylitical understanding is very important for all of us but some people discount and negate any viewpoint inconsistent with their own. personally i have been denigrated with the title of "poet" because, i assume i also offer other views of the world. as i am very sure this is not indicative of you, i find your explanations much more cogent and meaningful.
PDiddie
A pretty damning article by William Rivers Pitt, thanks. Not sure I am quite that cynical though. Surely the American public would understand and reject war for enhanced profits of well place corporations?
Or perhaps not, i really don't know. Could the US military seek sponsorship from some of these companies to offset the cost to the taxpayer? Eli Lilley Infantry Division? Rockwell first Army Airforce?
Steve
Your last paragraph is very funny indeed! May I pen a zesty marching tune for such a sponsored unit?
Boom chucka lucka lucka
Boom chucka lucka lucka
We're the Eli Lilliputions
enhancing attributions
with these M-16 solutions
standing proudly shoulder high
You're with us or the enemy
we fight for right and liberty
and limited liability
We're short statured samurai
Boom chucka lucka lucka
Boom chucka lucka lucka
brilliant Blatham, you should think about writing full time... oh sorry you do!
what was the tune btw?
Steve
Tah. Actually I'm a toolbelt guy, but writing for dollars would be a desireable shift, I confess.
Had no tune in mind, just a 4/4 beat. Feel free to compose.
By the by, a few weeks ago I was interviewed by Danny Baker on BBC London Breakfast. There was a smell-o-vision show in town here that they somehow got wind of, and through a friend who knows the producer, I was cajoled into attending and reporting back. They've asked me to be their unofficial (unpaid) Vancouver correspondent.
Asherman: While you praise Tantor for his armchair generalship, you seem not to notice that he only selectively answers those who criticize what he has written, and that he never provides sources for his information. Now, it is true that most of us do not provide sources when we state our opinions, in the case of Tantor, he has consistently referred to apparently ubiquitous Iraqi defectors, from whom he divines that Saddam was the eminence grise behind the 9/11 attacks--but he never actually provides any information to support such a contention. He has not answered the question of why the Administration does not use Iraqi involvement in 9/11 as the best reason to take out Saddam, one which the international community would likely remain mute upon, were there reasonable evidence presented. Finally, Tantor resorts to invective and sneering, insulting assumptions about those who disagree with him in a manner he is unwilling or unable to rebut. One can quote Tantor, and give reasons why one would discredit or discount what he has written, and it makes no difference--he will go over to the attack, and has here and elsewhere claimed that he does so in order to prevent more "attacks" against himself. His behavior here is mild in comparison to how he has historically posted at AFUZZ. The military knowledge which Tantor displays does not address the subject of the justice of the proposed war--and war without a just cause has always been hard for the American public to swallow, from the Mexican War to Panama. I personally have little regard for Tantor, despite his military analysis, because of the slighting tone he takes toward almost everyone here. I have been guilty of behaving badly with regard to him and his posts, and accept the just criticisms leveled at me for having misbehaved. I find it awfully hard to swallow that he has much to add to this discussion group, given the arrogant and contempuous manner in which he posts.
if you let me know when its broadcast, i will make sure I tune in: that should double the audience figures
I have some Iraqi questions for anyone who is willing to claim that such a war will be easy:
The Gulf States have said that they do not want their territory used for an invasion of Iraq. Turkey has recently stated that they would likely deny a US request to use the Incerlik air base for air operations during such an invasion--with only Kuwait and our naval air resources available, what would you contend will be our comparative ability to attack Iraq from the air, the comparison being with the Gulf War.
As mentioned above, we would likely not have the use of any bases other than what Kuwait can afford us--how do you contend that we can project immediate and overwhelming force from such a narrow field of operations? Given that we could probably effect an amphibious landing in the area of Basra, do you contend that we could accomplish this without significant casualties? What would you consider significant casualties?
Although it would be extremely irresponsible military operational planning to assume such a situation, many have said that the Iraqis will likely roll over and play dead, militarily. Do you contend that there would be few or no casualties from partisan action? What do you think the level of such casualties is likely to be? Do you think that US and allied forces would be the target of suicide terrorist attacks? If so, what do you surmise the likely ability of the US and allies to provide adequate security against this would be? Do you foresee an long occupation? How long?
What do you believe would be the sequel to a successful military operation?
Are there any takers out there?
yeah i think we ought to drop the Iraq invasion and go after Grenada again, they won't be expecting it so it should be pretty easy and who knows they might be planning on using their WOMD against Miami via sports fishing boats.
dyslexia I agree lets fight a war we can win and our Army would not have to travel that far. Let's do Cuba!
