Thats what he has been impling.. lol! We have done just fine without his oil for the last 12 years... we can and will continue to do fine without it.

Let take care of matters at home!

Unless you can say you know what the economy would be if 9/11 never happened... (and you can't) - then when are people like you going to quit blaming him for the results? - It was huge man, and it's still not close to "healing" itself. The man has no magic wand to wave.

You've been voting right all along - don't let people who have never considered all the facts sway you.

Ignorance is worse (in debates and conversations) than spelling mistake. Think about your approach before replying again to what I wrote.
It seems you managed to understand well enough what I said - I hardly see how I can be regarded as illiterate, while at the same time much of what you said has grasp in reality and much of it is an expression if ignorance.
It's a lengthy process and hardly the place to educate you about the Israeli-Arab conflict and why your observation about when/how Israel will have peace with the Arab world has no base in reality.
I never said you are stupid. As a native English speaker you should know the difference between Ignorance or lack on knowledge and stupidity. (though calling me illiterate is stupid enough).

we could buy all his oil cheaper than what this war is going to cost...

Must be something else huh? - Cause that old argument just doesn't really even make sense.

There it is in a nut shell.

Right on target.

XXX let me repeat it for the 3rd time:

you haven't made one single point that has withstood opposition. Everything you've said has been shot down and exposed as foolish, and apparently your only defense is to call everyone else stupid and ignorant.

THAT is transparent stupidity.

agreed.

Instead of flooding this board you could have pasted this URL and avoiding copyright infringement
http://www.evworld.com/databases/sto...fm?storyid=490
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

First, I don't need to make a point, you do since this thread is about alternatives to the war with iraq.
Second, I didn't say much so how can you shoot down what I said. All i said is that you talk nonsense - which I am right about and noone disproved me.
Third - I didnt, untill very soon now, called you stupid.
You are acting stupidly and should reread this thread to see that.
You said US has nothing to do with Iraq and Saddam. That is a "stupid" remark.
I don't need to explain that. That will be a waste of time as much as trying to explain to you "why bullets can kill". Don't waste my time - read about it first.

Hate to break it to you, the Palestinian/Israel problem is symbol over substance. Bin Laden has only recently begun using Israel/Palestine as one of his complaints.

The real reasons behind islamo-fascism is as follows:

Believe it or not, during the golden age of Islam, Islam had pronounced influence throughout the world in science, culture and politics. The decline of Islam, which had been going on for centuries, but finally the final blow, the disbanding of the Ottoman Empire after WWI, left muslims wondering what happened. Over the years, the people in the NEWLY defined muslim nations became increasingly disatisfied with regimes and leaders that western powers France and England installed. For years muslims vented their anger at their own governments. But in contemperary times they increasingly began venting their angst outward, to the western supporters of their corrupt governments.

For example, Mubarek in Egypt has a long history of oppressing and quelling disent in that country, yet Egypt has long been one of the leading recipients of U.S. aid (they rank 2nd).

Osama and his lot who also despised their own governments viewed much of their struggle as a struggle against modernity. They yearned for return of the golden age of Islam. They see moderninty as the root cause for the decline of Islam.

If their were peace in Israel and the disputed territories tomorrow, unfortunately terrorism would continue to exist. To cite Israel-Palestine as the source of most of the muslim world's hatred towards the west is not only naive, but a reckless and irresponsible propagagation of one of the greatest myths of the middle east.

my last post to you, since I can see that this is completely pointless:

"First, I don't need to make a point, you do since this thread is about alternatives to the war with iraq."

nobody needs to give reasons NOT to go to war. I don't ask my friends to give me reasons why I should NOT punch them in the face. It's assumed as a matter of civility that I will not punch them in the face without a damn good reason.

the case has to be made to go to war, and it has to be a damn good one if you place ANY value on human life.

geez...you really are naive.....go read a book on the history of the middle east and Islam....

The focus on the Palestinian plight is to divert attention from the many domestic problems and inter-Arab conflicts, and to direct the Moslem-Arab frustration against Israel and the "infidel" west.

No need to hate to break it to me :)
Been doing a quick piece of research, and I withdraw my statement about it being the No 1 reason, however, I still think it has significant affect having read a few diverse articles.

Also found this page;
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/...01gilwhite.htm

It is so easy to forget events. This page has reasons for Arab hostility towards the US, and while I absolutely do not subscribe to some of them, it's still an interesting read.



Quoted by JeremySF
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hate to break it to you, the Palestinian/Israel problem is symbol over substance. Bin Laden has only recently begun using Israel/Palestine as one of his complaints.

The real reasons behind islamo-fascism is as follows:

Believe it or not, during the golden age of Islam, Islam had pronounced influence throughout the world in science, culture and politics. The decline of Islam, which had been going on for centuries, but finally the final blow, the disbanding of the Ottoman Empire after WWI, left muslims wondering what happened. Over the years, the people in the NEWLY defined muslim nations became increasingly disatisfied with regimes and leaders that western powers France and England installed. For years muslims vented their anger at their own governments. But in contemperary times they increasingly began venting their angst outward, to the western supporters of their corrupt governments.

For example, Mubarek in Egypt has a long history of oppressing and quelling disent in that country, yet Egypt has long been one of the leading recipients of U.S. aid (they rank 2nd).

Osama and his lot who also despised their own governments viewed much of their struggle as a struggle against modernity. They yearned for return of the golden age of Islam. They see moderninty as the root cause for the decline of Islam.

If their were peace in Israel and the disputed territories tomorrow, unfortunately terrorism would continue to exist. To cite Israel-Palestine as the source of most of the muslim world's hatred towards the west is not only naive, but a reckless and irresponsible propagagation of one of the greatest myths of the middle east.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by scooby doo as scooby does

The US to help solve the Palestine/Israel problem instead of simply supporting the Israelies. (No 1 reason US hated).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

you'll grow up to realize the world is not a Teletubbies show.
BTW. Can you tell me how good a friend you are with Saddam? :1orglaugh

Maybe you didnt understand... This is an Arab/Palestinian problem. Not a US/Arab/Palestinian or the rest of the worlds problem.

Religous wars that have been going on since the beginning of time will never be solved.. Not by US intervention or anything else for that matter. They will continue to throw rocks at eachother for 10,000 more years, just like have for the last 2,000.

Once again... we have issues of grave concern right here in our counrty... issues that have solutions. This should be our focus.

A Democratic Iraq in the region is a very interesting thought. It can't be an American puppet regime though. It would need to be an independent state....food for thought.

:)

No need to take than link too seriously :)
From their site - "word from their president" (http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/newwelcome.htm):
Newsflash to their president: There is a thing called biological warfare :thumbsup

Also - from the article itself
:1orglaugh

Israeli-Arab conflict is not a religion conflict. Its cultural conflict and entity-related (Zionism+Western factors). It does have roots though in religion but that is filtered through culture.
PLUS
This conflict is has nothing to do directly with the Iraq coming war. Its effects are indirect at best if not side-effects.
Israel is only the buffer that kept terror from reaching US and Europe before.

That's sad.

These conflicts were going on hundreds and hundreds of years before the US ever existed. Please

Cultural/Religion I would say the two go hand and hand.

Sad but true. Read about the conflict of Islam and Europe. Read about the problems of Kuwait with the rest of the arab world. Read about the history of Jewish communities in Arab countries 100 years ago (and the undisturbed [in Arab standards] way of life they had until Israel was founded).
Tell me what you think after you do.

You could say that Culture and Religion is the same in the aspect of the conflict, but then again it would be as accurate as saying the terrorism and Islam is the same thing.

Anyway - back to the issue of this thread.
What do you suggest US do? Leave the area and ignore Iraq, Iran. Lybia and their weapon/military plans? Do the same with N.Korea? and focus on "US economy"? and everything will be jolly good? :glugglug

You really have no idea what you or anyone else is talking about do you?

This is silly.

Have a great evening

Enron? Worldcom? results of 9/11?

You don't really think your arguments should be taken serious - do you? Still, I guess its fun for you to express something you might call "opinion". Oh well, everyone gets his kick from different things.
Good night..

No - nor have both added together had near the effect on the economy as 9/11 did - not even worth mentioning.

You deny 9/11 had acute financial effect?
If so - how can you seriously argue Enron and Worldcom had negative effect on the economy?

Enron and Worldcom as well as AOL had a great effect on the US economy. 9/11 had even bigger effect. much bigger.

Right again!!


We were in big trouble far before 9/11. The events of that day were just the last nail in the coffin.

Was it Bush's fault? No.... but he has not addressed those issue head on like he has the "Iraq issue".

As aweful as 9/11 was.... what Enron, Worldcom and the others did to the stability of the US ecomony has a stonger and longer lasting effect then 9/11 will have on the US. The events of 9/11 just gave it more speed.

do nothing.
The US put saddam in power, live with yah governments fuck up and get over it.

:ak47: = :2 cents:

and you arrived at that conclusion.... how?

You are certainly welcome to your opinion - but you are sorely lacking when it comes to the facts...

The cost to added security after 9/11 ALONE is having more of an effect than Enron - it's costing the States a fortune - not to mention the air line industry - and that's on TOP of the actual cost when it happened.

Then add world-wide economies as they have had to spend tons on their own security....

Sorry - I think you missed the big picture on this one....


:)

I never said that the cost of the events of 9/11 were going to be less.. I said that 9/11 was the nail in the coffin.

Enron, Worldcom and the like were just terrorist attacked carried out by people in $1000.00 suits. Our economy was in a very fragile state, before 9/11. Those "terrorist" acts have been swepped under the rug, by Bush and his big money buddies. You dont think the terrorist of 9/11 knew they could deliver the final blow to the US ecomony?

So like I said - if it wasn't for 9/11 - you can only guess what the economy would be like today.

You have your guess - I have my guess.

The problems with Enron didn't begin when Bush Jr. was swore in. The totaly inflated stock market - completely out of line and was way too high by all standards of finance was given to us by Clinton.

There's just so much you can blame on one man - even if he's President...

I figure we should just round up all those women, mothers, grandmothers, motherinlaws, you name it, the ones who's made it an art and a lifetime's goal to inflict guilt trips on everyone within a 100 mile radius and send parachute them in. I can almost guarantee within 2 hours the entire country will be sobbing like a naughty child and Saddam will agree to play nice forever and ever amen, as long as he can still have some of gramma's cookies.

Well... You can be glad that isn't the way it works here 'mate'.

we're going to fix it.


:thumbsup

I agree 100%

My point was.... If Bush had dealt with the ecomony as aggressively as he has gone after Saddam... we might have a much better outlook on our future and he might have had a prayer in hell of getting re-elected.

You seem to have no idea what terrorism is. You will once you live in the shadow of it.
Terrorism is not "bad thins you hear about in the TV/Radio".
Terrorism (of the effect of it) is - not being able to conduct your life freely due to fear of getting hurt, killed or tourtured etc.. by someone else who has this effect on you just to get what he wants.
Enron/Worldcom were crimes indeed, but don't get carried away mixing terms and calling it terrorism. It makes your arguments less clear and logical.

Get your facts straight. America--like western Europe and most of the west--did support Iraq until the late 80s. Why? Because Saddam seemed a lesser evil than his archrival, Iran. A secular madman is genarally preferable to a fanactical religious madman.

A little history lesson:

Saddam Hussein has been the most powerful man in Iraq for over 3 decades. A family relative, Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, came to power as president of Iraq in a coup d'etat. Thanks to a promotion by Ahmad, Saddam eventually seized power, and through brutal intimidation, torture, suppression of dissent, he and the Ba'ath Party have been in power ever since.

Interesting article...thanks! What I find most interesting is that this guy Francisco Gil-White has changed his view and acknowledged. Refreshing, given that most people (particulary in the press) find it problematic to change their stance, much less admit it.

WWJD?

Muslims in most of the middle east live in poverty. Did you see the pics from Afghanistan? A religion/culture that has shown no real advancement in 1500 years is certainly going to begin to get followers that become disgruntled. You then have two choices: change your way of life or destroy a competing and/or more successful one.
Outside of oil, the Arab countries have not made major investments in any other indusries. Therefore, when the oil runs out they go back to herding sheep.

... just send all your Arab traffic to dialers.
:2 cents:

I still haven't heard any of the dove side offer any real alternatives to making Saddam comply with inspections other than force???

There are none.

The only cure for a rabid dog is to kill him.

You need to lay off the conspiracy websites, man. You are presenting your or someone else's opinions regarding Bush's motives as fact. Statements that begin with "the real reason for ..." come straight from the best-seller and highly popular "Conspiracy Theories for Dummies". They can also be found in blogs written by John Q. Layman from his bunker in the middle of Missouri after he gets home from his job at the jellybean factory.