War

[island911]

Seems I touched a nerve; Speeder.

This "ignorant crap" as you've labled it, is from my observations of the actions of liberals.

My grade schooling was had a good share of liberalism. A few teachers even threw out population numbers and projections in an effort to scare students about population growth.

I also worked for a "world health" NGO (read: immersed in liberalism). THAT was an eye opener!

Other observations;
Up here in the NW I've seen greenpeace activists try to kill indians because the indians were hunting a whale.

I've seen the aftermath of liberals spiking trees, so that when the logs are processed at the lumber mill, the carbide saw blade expoldes like a grenade with enough shrapnel to kill any workers near by.

Granted, these are the extreme left, and there are more moderate liberals whom just want more free stuff; BUT, I stand by my observation that many (not all) liberals have a latent desire
to have "not so many people".

"my courage up against yours " peh-lease. Is your Dad stronger than mine, too?

[911SC Pilot]

Yes we ALL know they have 2


"""you might feel your on the right.. but your really on the LEFT! it's pretty obvious"""

Im on neither side thanks.


Its pretty obvious your one to jump on ones **** just because of their opinion. I never said "THIS is what we NEED to be doing. Thats cool, your loss.

And do me a favor, quit talking to me as if I am ignorant to this issue please. I was just expressing an opinion. Dont try to analize my political postion, because you cant.

[Targa Dude]

Just some food for your Thought..

16 May, 1918
The U.S. Sedition Act


United States, Statutes at Large, Washington, D.C., 1918, Vol. XL, pp 553 ff. A portion of the amendment to Section 3 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917.SECTION 3.


Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, . . . or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct . . . the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or . . . shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both....

Now, just imagine if we inforced this... Now tell me your not a Liberal..

Jorge (Targa Dude)

[speeder]

Absolutely agree that Iraq in the '90s was trying to hide/ keep weapons, just differ in the interpretation of what they still possess. The most current assessment from inspectors on the ground this year is that his arsenal is seriously depleted, which of course would be good news for our forces when they go in. The guy, (Sadam), is a POS, but he is not a complete idiot when it comes to self-preservation, he has known for years that he is in our cross-hairs and it is logical that he does not want to disarm. I just differ w/ Bush & Co. that the inspections coupled w/ extreme pressure from our forces massing was doing the job w/ no young American blood spilling. It is not hard to form the opinion that Bush does not want inspections to continue because every report was reducing his argument for attacking NOW, why do that when we are giving his weapons stash an enema, albeit a slightly slower one.

I see this conflict as hugely political, rather than an immediate national security emergency that justifies a first strike war on a country that is not actively battling us, (or anyone else for that matter), AT THIS TIME. It is also a country, evil dictator and all, that was filled with U.N. inspectors getting what by all accounts was unfettered access to all sites in the country. A huge change from the '90s, when inspections were a joke, I'll admit.

I listen very carefully to what our leaders tell us, and question the info. It's my right and obligation as an American. Plenty of Bush's arguments for invading Iraq now do not pass the logic test, IMO.

[911SC Pilot]

"""Now tell me your not a Liberal.. ""

Ok, Im not.

[Targa Dude]

Ok... DIPLAY YOUR FLAG.. MY FRIEND..

Jorge (Targa Dude)

[911SC Pilot]

"""Now, just imagine if we inforced this... """

Ya, half of America would be in prison.

[911SC Pilot]

[island911]

Two things are apparent from the decade of inspections, and defectors;

1) Saddam has WMD

2) Saddam has made a Huge effort to hide, and keep hidden his WMD programs.

[turbo6bar]

Originally posted by 911SC Pilot
"""Now, just imagine if we inforced this... """

Ya, half of America would be in prison.

According to the link posted earlier jane fonda on snopes the Sedition Act has been overturned. I guess this means Targa Dude will just have to take things into his own hands and call all liberals morons.

Jurgen

[Targa Dude]

And now SADDAM Gets to see and personaly experience..

MOAB!!!

Jorge (Targa Dude)

[911SC Pilot]

Of course he has WMD. I wonder why the inspectors arent.,.,.,.or didnt look into all of his hiddin tunnels and bunkers he has across that land. He has them, prob has more now.

[Rolf]

I never post on this BBS, I just linger around here reading up on early 911's, but...

God Bless a Country were we can disagree at the top of our lungs. Reminds me of something I read once:

"I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat. "

"God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle aged male, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club. "

"Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without the thought of quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus. "


P. J. O'Rourke

God bless the fighting forces of the United States of America!

Steve in Portland, OR

[island911]

"I wonder why the inspectors arent.,.,.,.or didnt look into all of his hiddin tunnels and bunkers he has across that land."

Because the inspectors wanted to get out alive.

[targa87]

targa dude, you crack me up. the most conservative members of the supreme court would never read that stautory section as applying to anything said here.

racea911, i don't think liberals or conservatives in the US would give you much argument about the WMD issue. the fact remains that iraq is in material breach of a number of UN resolutions; even liberals understand that (and so do the french). isn't the question really whether it's in our best national interest for the US to take preventive (not preemptive) military action w/o UN approval? forget the peripheries, many to the right and left of center find it hard to say yes.

believe it or not, there are well known conservatives who question current US policy (brent scowcroft for one stressed the importance of obtaining multilateral support before taking action). even the US state department has serious questions regarding bush's goals to use the war to foster democracy in the middle east.

[targa87]

rolf, what are you talking about!? of course santa exists. moreover, he takes clear action against the naughty. they don't get gifts.

but seriously, that's a great quote. ;-)

[island911]

refreshingly clear thinking, targa87.

though, scowcrofts' concerns are about image. The miltary action is about defense.

Clearly, a preventative military action can be said to be something new for this country. Though, this is a new time.

and yeah, Rolf, that's a great quote.

[racea911]

Originally posted by targa87
racea911, i don't think liberals or conservatives in the US would give you much argument about the WMD issue. the fact remains that iraq is in material breach of a number of UN resolutions; even liberals understand that (and so do the french).

Didn't Speeder just say that the UN weapons inspectors had unfettered access to all sites within the country. Doesn't seem to me that unfettered access and the continual complaints Hans Blix reported on Iraqi interference and non-compliance are one and the same. Some say liberals don't doubt that there were material breeches, while the next liberal says that the UN inspectors had unfettered access.

[racea911]

oops

[targa87]

racea911

1441 called for unfettered access. initially, this was not the case. over time, blix cited improvements, but he never said that iraq was in full compliance.

where's the debate?