Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe

[DaddyHalbucks]

THIS IS HISTORY THAT HAS BEEN AND / OR WILL BE LEFT OUT OF OUR TEXTBOOKS.

Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between England and America for food and war materials. At that time the US was in an isolationist, pacifist mood, and most Americans wanted nothing to do with the European or the Asian war.

Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not yet attacked us. It was a dicey thing. We had few allies.

France was not an ally, as the Vichy government of France quickly aligned itself with its German occupiers. Germany was certainly not an ally, as Hitler was intent on setting up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan was not an ally, as it was well on its way to owning and controlling all of Asia. Together, Japan and Germany had long-range plans of invading Canada and Mexico, as launching pads to get into the United States over our northern and southern borders, after they finished gaining control of Asia and Europe. America's only allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada, Australia, and Russia. That was about it. All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the East, was already under the Nazi heel.

America was certainly not prepared for war. America had drastically downgraded most of its military forces after W.W.I and throughout the depression, so that at the outbreak of WW2, army units were training with broomsticks because they didn't have guns, and cars with "tank" painted on the doors because they didn't have real tanks. And a huge chunk of our navy had just been sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor.

Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England, that was actually the property of Belgium, given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler (a little known fact). Actually, Belgium surrendered on one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day just to prove they could. Britain had already been holding out for two years in the face of staggering losses and the near decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later, and first turning his attention to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse, in the late summer of 1940.

Ironically, Russia saved America's butt by putting up a desperate fight for two years, until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany.

Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Moscow alone... 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but also more than a 1,000,000 soldiers.

Had Russia surrendered, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire war effort against the Brits, then America. And the Nazis could possibly have won the war.

All of this is to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things. And now, we find ourselves at another one of those key moments in history.

There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or wants and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world. The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs -- they believe that Islam, a radically conservative form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe, then the world. And that all who do not bow to their will of thinking should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews. This is their mantra.

There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East -- for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation, but it is not known yet which will win -- the Inquisitors, or the Reformationists.

If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihadis, will control the Middle East, the OPEC oil, and the US, European, and Asian economies. The techno-industrial economies will be at the mercy of OPEC -- not an OPEC dominated by the educated, rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis. You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins.

If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, and live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th century into the 21st, then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge.

We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda and the Islamic terrorist movements. We have to do it somewhere. And we can't do it everywhere at once. We have created a focal point for the battle at a time and place of our choosing........in Iraq.

Not in New York, not in London, or Paris or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we are doing two important things.

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad people, and the ones we get there we won't have to get here. We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed.

World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a "whimper" in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for fourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in 1945 -- a 17 year war -- and was followed by another decade of US occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again ... a 27 year war.

World War II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year's GDP -- adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars. W.W.II cost America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action.

The Iraq war has, so far, cost the US about $160 billion,which is roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 3,000 American lives, which is roughly the same as the 3,000 lives that the Jihad snuffed on 9/11. But the cost of not fighting and winning W.W.II would have been unimaginably greater -- a world dominated by German and Japanese Nazism.

This is not 60 minute TV shows, and 2 hour movies in which everything comes out okay. The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly. Always has been, and probably always will be. The bottom line is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away if we ignore it.

If the US can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an "England" in the Middle East, a platform, from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates. The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and never ending war. And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons. Unless somebody prevents them.

We have four options:

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.

2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is).

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

4. Or, we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe. It will, of course, be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier.

If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.

The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.

Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.

...

[DaddyHalbucks]

PART 2

...

Remember, perspective is every thing, and America's schools teach too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the young American mind.

The Cold war lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Forty-two years. Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany

World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year occupation, and the US still has troops in Germany and Japan. World War II resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept.

The US has taken more than 2,000 killed in action in Iraq. The US took more than 4,000 killed in action on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism. In W.W.II the US averaged 2,000 KIA a week -- for four years. Most of the individual battles of W.W.II lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far.

But the stakes are at least as high ... A world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms ... or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law).

It's difficult to understand why the American left does not grasp this. They favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but evidently not for Iraqis.

"Peace Activists" always seem to demonstrate here in America, where it's safe.

Why don't we see Peace Activist demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea, in the places that really need peace activism the most?

The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc.

Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

Raymond S. Kraft is a writer living in Northern California. Please consider passing along copies of this article to students in high school, college and university as it contains information about the American past that is very meaningful today -- history about America that very likely is completely unknown by them (and their instructors, too). By being denied the facts of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They are prime targets for misinformation campaigns beamed at enlisting them in causes and beliefs that are special interest agenda driven.

[reynold]

A good source of German history.

[foe]

great article

[DaddyHalbucks]

Peaceniks may not realize that the history of the peace movement is...
W A R.

Peace movements produce apathy, which results in unpreparedness, which signals weakness, which invites war.

If you lay down... you get slaughtered by bloodthirsty tyrants like Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, etc..

[Scottish Guy]

never overrun me

[MaDalton]

sorry, won't do it again

[BigCashCrew]

I am reading this and there are a lot of great points. So far I agree.

[warlock5]

Wait, who the hell is the "Jihad"? The Taliban? Bin Laden? Iran? Syria? Palestine? Hamas? Sunnis? Shiites? Ahmadinejad? Farmers in Afghanistan growing opium?

[notabook]

lmao, I knew it was going to be some bullshit propaganda after the first couple of lines For some reason it didn't stop me from reading the whole thing.

[rogueteens]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

complete bollocks, its full of mistakes, but the above one made me laugh the most, every one knows Hussein had NOTHING to do with 9/11 in fact while Bush tried to tell America this, the rest of the world just couldn't believe their ears! And to believe that many Americans still think that the War was over 9/11 !!!!

It is actually a fact the Suddam Hussein was AGAINST the Al Qaeda networks as they were operating as terrorists in Iraq against the Hussein govenment

[Webby]

Started reading this and it commences with known fact (not something that is left out of any history books) - and a reasonable assessment....

Then it deviates from fact/history to opinion - and to elements that are total crap - then on to the writer's agenda.

Can't be bothered replying in detail - but will attempt two aspects..

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

True Saddam has no connection whatsoever to 9/11 - why mention it?? There is no evidence Saddam was supporting any "terrorist movement for decades". He was engaged by the US to assassinate democratically elected members of the Iranian government - and chosen for this task because he was a known thug. The US had no qualms about him murdering people - nevermind labelling him a terrorist.

Saddam was then equipped/funded by the US to engage in a war with Iran which did kill many people. It takes two to tango - in this instance Saddam and the US.

Reference to WMD is amusing - and a persistance of linking the WMD term to Saddam/Iraq because he killed a number of people - without using actual WMD as we know them. The same WMD terminology can be applied to the current US government who have killed more innocent people in the 21st century than any nation or group of nations.

Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy.

Americans, specifically the US government, never had any desires of liberating shit - get real. It never was the duty of any other nation to elect to liberate anyone. The US government caused the Iraq problem - and they deserve no sympathy when they have to lie in the bed they made for themselves. The worst enemy of the US people is their own government - not that of any other nation.

[Webby]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

complete bollocks, its full of mistakes, but the above one made me laugh the most, every one knows Hussein had NOTHING to do with 9/11 in fact while Bush tried to tell America this, the rest of the world just couldn't believe their ears! And to believe that many Americans still think that the War was over 9/11 !!!!

It is actually a fact the Suddam Hussein was AGAINST the Al Qaeda networks as they were operating as terrorists in Iraq against the Hussein govenment

Agree - too many "mistakes" - let's hope this ass never gets to write any history books

[pr0nto]

Don't you know that Saddam was an extremist Muslim and one of the lead officers of Al Qaeda, and that he personally flew one of the planes into the WTC (He survived. Stealth parachute).

[tony286]

right wing crap

[Webby]

Originally Posted by pr0nto

Don't you know that Saddam was an extremist Muslim and one of the lead officers of Al Qaeda, and that he personally flew one of the planes into the WTC (He survived. Stealth parachute).

Shhhhh... don't tell anyone - else they'll want to write it in history books

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Webby

There is no evidence Saddam was supporting any "terrorist movement for decades"..

actually im pretty sure saddam made direct cash payments to palestinian suicide bombers families..

everything else you said was pretty close to on the mark

[Webby]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

actually im pretty sure saddam made direct cash payments to palestinian suicide bombers families..

everything else you said was pretty close to on the mark

True Smokey - this was one of the claims prior to invasion time. Got to be honest - never checked to see if that story stood up (probably another uncheckable story). There would be a logic of mixing the pot and upping the anti about Saddam - tho, who knows, there could be elements of truth, but when you look at Saddam's "interests" - it's kinda unlikely.

[BusterBunny]

congrats to the winners

[SmokeyTheBear]

Instead of reading through his entire ramble i suggest you read this

"We are killing bad people" . he is a racist plain and simple.. anyone who thinks babies are fair targets because they are muslim is a sick idiot..

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by Webby

True Smokey - this was one of the claims prior to invasion time. Got to be honest - never checked to see if that story stood up (probably another uncheckable story). There would be a logic of mixing the pot and upping the anti about Saddam - tho, who knows, there could be elements of truth, but when you look at Saddam's "interests" - it's kinda unlikely.

Abu Nidal lived in Bagdad. ;)

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Webby

True Smokey - this was one of the claims prior to invasion time. Got to be honest - never checked to see if that story stood up (probably another uncheckable story). There would be a logic of mixing the pot and upping the anti about Saddam - tho, who knows, there could be elements of truth, but when you look at Saddam's "interests" - it's kinda unlikely.

it wouldnt suprise me if it was another one of those "rumours/facts"

To be honest i was fairly undecided about this whole iran affair, until i started doing some checking on the often heard rumours/facts about iran wanting to "wipe out" israel and threatning to use nukes.. upon closer examination these all appear to be complete false paraquotes.

The "wipe out" statement often attributed iran was nothing more than someone using zionism as en example in a quote.. i.e. the zionist regime will be wiped out , just as ussr was wiped out.. taken out of context it would appear they truly do want to kill all jews. taken in context and with ussr as an example , we realise exactly what the statement means.. it means a non-violent crumbling of a broken idea..

Then the nuclear threat.. was nothing more than someone saying basically if we had nukes colonialism would be impossible because we could flatten israel if they tried to attack us "

pretty big stretch to call that a threat

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by rogueteens

complete bollocks, its full of mistakes, but the above one made me laugh the most, every one knows Hussein had NOTHING to do with 9/11 in fact while Bush tried to tell America this, the rest of the world just couldn't believe their ears! And to believe that many Americans still think that the War was over 9/11 !!!!

It is actually a fact the Suddam Hussein was AGAINST the Al Qaeda networks as they were operating as terrorists in Iraq against the Hussein govenment

Saddam had to go.

Just as Bush predicted, Iraq became a staging ground for Al Qaeda.

With Saddam gone, Al Qaeda moved in.

[Cyrano]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

it wouldnt suprise me if it was another one of those "rumours/facts"

To be honest i was fairly undecided about this whole iran affair, until i started doing some checking on the often heard rumours/facts about iran wanting to "wipe out" israel and threatning to use nukes.. upon closer examination these all appear to be complete false paraquotes.

The "wipe out" statement often attributed iran was nothing more than someone using zionism as en example in a quote.. i.e. the zionist regime will be wiped out , just as ussr was wiped out.. taken out of context it would appear they truly do want to kill all jews. taken in context and with ussr as an example , we realise exactly what the statement means.. it means a non-violent crumbling of a broken idea..

Then the nuclear threat.. was nothing more than someone saying basically if we had nukes colonialism would be impossible because we could flatten israel if they tried to attack us "

pretty big stretch to call that a threat

Correct. The Zionists are actively contributing to the demonization of, and misinformation surrounding Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran.

[Rochard]

The face of war has changed. During WWII news took weeks to hit back home and was carefully controled by the US Government. In some cases, more US soliders died on a single day than have died in Iraq during the entire course of the war. The death of an American Solider is tragic, but war isn't pretty. We should be thankful the US was able to accomplish what has in Iraq with such a small number of losses.

There were dozens of reasons to take out Saddam and his government. On the very day he took power he executed members of the Iraqi government, and later he slaughtered his citizens by the thousands. The question shouldn't be if the US should be in Iraq, but instead the question should be why the US isn't in other countries - namely Africa - where the same crimes are being committed. Don't tell me it's because Africa doens't have oil; We were in Africa and because of a single firefight (Blackhawk Down) public suppoer for this cause no longer existed. It is time as Americans we do the right thing.

As for the ones who attacked us on 9/11, well, I have no respect for them at all. They are cowards who attcked and killed thousands of innocent people without warning. When we come after them they hide like little children.

These people believe we do not have the right to exist because some of us choose to worship a god other than theirs. Yet at the same time in the US we allow everyone to worship the god of their choice - which pisses them off to no end. And they will continue to attack us.

It's only a matter of time until they have a nuclear bomb. This will change the course of history and I'm guessing a small handful of countries will disappear off the map - and entire races might just cease to exist.

Their god will not protect them any more than our god will. And I'm willing to bet there isn't any vigins waiting for anyone on the other side.

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by Webby

Started reading this and it commences with known fact (not something that is left out of any history books) - and a reasonable assessment....

Then it deviates from fact/history to opinion - and to elements that are total crap - then on to the writer's agenda.

Can't be bothered replying in detail - but will attempt two aspects..



True Saddam has no connection whatsoever to 9/11 - why mention it?? There is no evidence Saddam was supporting any "terrorist movement for decades". He was engaged by the US to assassinate democratically elected members of the Iranian government - and chosen for this task because he was a known thug. The US had no qualms about him murdering people - nevermind labelling him a terrorist.

Saddam was then equipped/funded by the US to engage in a war with Iran which did kill many people. It takes two to tango - in this instance Saddam and the US.

Reference to WMD is amusing - and a persistance of linking the WMD term to Saddam/Iraq because he killed a number of people - without using actual WMD as we know them. The same WMD terminology can be applied to the current US government who have killed more innocent people in the 21st century than any nation or group of nations.



Americans, specifically the US government, never had any desires of liberating shit - get real. It never was the duty of any other nation to elect to liberate anyone. The US government caused the Iraq problem - and they deserve no sympathy when they have to lie in the bed they made for themselves. The worst enemy of the US people is their own government - not that of any other nation.

Maybe you can help to re-write history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja

[Webby]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

actually im pretty sure saddam made direct cash payments to palestinian suicide bombers families..

everything else you said was pretty close to on the mark

Think ya may be correct and there is something likely something about Saddam diverting around 20% of the UN Food Program budget towards those in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. It would appear there were payments to families of those who died, including suicide bombers, and also payments to those who had their homes blown/demolished by the Israeli army and also included miscellaneous payments for other stuff as compensation for loss of one kind or other to occupants of Gaza and the West Bank.

Who knows... but it also appears the angle on that story that claimed Saddam was offering payments for suicide bombings is prob not quite accurate The actual words claiming this came from Rumsfeld - "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has raised the amount offered to relatives of suicide bombers from $10,000 per family to $25,000". Rumsfelds comment is prob technically accurate, tho there is little indication Saddam was "offering" funds to incite others to bomb - more of compensating the families and others in that region.
But.. who knows?

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Saddam had to go.

Just as Bush predicted, Iraq became a staging ground for Al Qaeda.

With Saddam gone, Al Qaeda moved in.

hahahahaha... wow.

he had to be forceably removed... because of something that would happen if he was forceably removed.

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by Webby

Who knows... but it also appears the angle on that story that claimed Saddam was offering payments for suicide bombings is prob not quite accurate The actual words claiming this came from Rumsfeld - "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has raised the amount offered to relatives of suicide bombers from $10,000 per family to $25,000". Rumsfelds comment is prob technically accurate, tho there is little indication Saddam was "offering" funds to incite others to bomb - more of compensating the families and others in that region.
But.. who knows?

it was widely reported in the news and he was also proudly admitting it and was using it for PR.

since cnn is just "propaganda".... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm


" One by one, at least 21 families came up to receive their cheques from the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), a local pro-Iraq group.

A Hamas suicide bomber's family got $25,000 while the others - relatives of militants killed in fighting or civilians killed during Israeli military operations - all received $10,000 each.

Another banner in the hall described the cheques as the "blessings of Saddam Hussein" and PALF speakers extolled the Iraqi leader in fiery speeches."

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Rochard

We should be thankful the US was able to accomplish what has in Iraq with such a small number of losses.

could you enlighten us as to what the usa has accomplished.. ?

Originally Posted by Rochard

These people believe we do not have the right to exist because some of us choose to worship a god other than theirs.

who are "these people " ?

Originally Posted by Rochard

It's only a matter of time until they have a nuclear bomb. .

Im not sure who "they" is, but if you mean muslims, they already do.. they have for years and haven't used them..

If you just mean extremists, it wont be long before they can brew a biological weapon that would be much more effective.. and lobbing nukes at them isnt going to stop this, neither is taking over countries to make them like us..


The solution is in the kids.. they will be the ones taking over for us people and kids feed on education.. once your educated you no longer believe whack nut religious beliefs like killing yourself.. win them over with education

[Webby]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Maybe you can help to re-write history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja

I never actually mentioned Halabja so far - but now that you have elected to pull that one out of the bag, - yes, Saddam did commit human rights violations in that region.

Also note where he accquired chemical weapons to enable these attacks - he was supplied with and used the same weapons against Iran.

There did not appear to be any great concern about the victims of Halabja during the Gulf War - which was about two years after Halabja. Nor was there any concern for the Marsh Arabs after the Gulf War - why the great concern for those who died at Halabja now? Sounds like more cherry-picking for convenience.

What exactly is your point??



PS There is no doubt Saddam was a thug and committed gross violations, but keeping quiet as a matter of convenience during these times and whining afterwards has no credibilty. The US govt (and Rumsfeld specifically playing a role) were the best of friends while the people of Halabja were wiped out - and that friendship remained afterwards until the Gulf War.

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

it was widely reported in the news and he was also proudly admitting it and was using it for PR.

since cnn is just "propaganda".... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm


" One by one, at least 21 families came up to receive their cheques from the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), a local pro-Iraq group.

A Hamas suicide bomber's family got $25,000 while the others - relatives of militants killed in fighting or civilians killed during Israeli military operations - all received $10,000 each.

Another banner in the hall described the cheques as the "blessings of Saddam Hussein" and PALF speakers extolled the Iraqi leader in fiery speeches."

lets agree on the fact he was a bad guy and whether directly or indirectly he WAS supporting terrorism.. i think it was a pr move not an incentive..either way not good.. saddam could have been wiped out with one sniper

The problem is the blame is one sided , saddam saw the hypocracy of a rogue nation imposing its will over and over again despite repeated sanctions by the u.n. , iraq itself was under u.n. sanctions and forcibly complying. while israel on the other hand simply ignored international law and everyone does nothing.. Either way an eye for an eye __________.. so paying suicide bombers is just tit for tat..

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by Webby

I never actually mentioned Halabja so far - but now that you have elected to pull that one out of the bag, - yes, Saddam did commit human rights violations in that region.

Also note where he accquired chemical weapons to enable these attacks - he was supplied with and used the same weapons against Iran.

There did not appear to be any great concern about the victims of Halabja during the Gulf War - which was about two years after Halabja. Nor was there any concern for the Marsh Arabs after the Gulf War - why the great concern for those who died at Halabja now? Sounds like more cherry-picking for convenience.

What exactly is your point??



PS There is no doubt Saddam was a thug and committed gross violations, but keeping quiet as a matter of convenience during these times and whining afterwards has no credibilty. The US govt (and Rumsfeld specifically playing a role) were the best of friends while the people of Halabja were wiped out - and that friendship remained afterwards until the Gulf War.

Halabja is direct evidence of the WMDs that you say don't exist.

In reality, Halabja is the tip of the iceberg.

Saddam not only had WMDs, but he had a massive program to hide them.

Some were sent to Syria before the US invasion. Some were buried. Some were even sunk in rivers.

[notabook]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Halabja is direct evidence of the WMDs that you say don't exist.

In reality, Halabja is the tip of the iceberg.

Saddam not only had WMDs, but he had a massive program to hide them.

Some were sent to Syria before the US invasion. Some were buried. Some were even sunk in rivers.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

could you enlighten us as to what the usa has accomplished.. ?

who are "these people " ?

Im not sure who "they" is, but if you mean muslims, they already do.. they have for years and haven't used them..

If you just mean extremists, it wont be long before they can brew a biological weapon that would be much more effective.. and lobbing nukes at them isnt going to stop this, neither is taking over countries to make them like us..

The solution is in the kids.. they will be the ones taking over for us people and kids feed on education.. once your educated you no longer believe whack nut religious beliefs like killing yourself.. win them over with education

What has the US accomplished in Iraq? For better or for worse, the US armed forces stolled into the country and over ran it with what - less than one thousand killed on our side? That's impressive - even if the other side basically ran and hid like school children.

When I say "they" or "them" I don't mean Muslims. That's way too general of a statement. Some of my own family is Muslim, but they don't spend their free time planning on blowing up buildings here in the US. I'm talking about the extremists. You know, the ones who want to kill us?

Tossing nukes at them isn't the answer. But it will be the return volley the moment a nuke goes off in the US or one of our allies. Once it gets escalated to this point it's game over for someone and it won't be the US. You can destroy all of the lower 48 states and yet the US will still have the firepower to fire back thanks in part to our friends in the US Navy.

I do agree with you about the "kids". They need to be trained not to hate. There are differences between races and the gods they choose to worship, but this surely doesn't mean we cannot get along. The US allows Muslims to worship their god of choice, and even after 9/11 we didn't go around killing Muslims in the US (thank god we didn't!).

But if we retrain their children...... Wouldn't that be improper and what we are fighting against in the first place?

It's just a fucking huge mess.

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

lets agree on the fact he was a bad guy and whether directly or indirectly he WAS supporting terrorism.. i think it was a pr move not an incentive..either way not good.. saddam could have been wiped out with one sniper

The problem is the blame is one sided , saddam saw the hypocracy of a rogue nation imposing its will over and over again despite repeated sanctions by the u.n. , iraq itself was under u.n. sanctions and forcibly complying. while israel on the other hand simply ignored international law and everyone does nothing.. Either way an eye for an eye __________.. so paying suicide bombers is just tit for tat..

i was just pointing out that he was doing that and was using it for PR... it wasn't Rumsfeld who brought it up intially. if i was saddam, i would be doing the same thing.... its a perfect move on his part "supporting the families of martyrs". its hard to directly criticise by the west and will make him more popular with arabs.

[Webby]

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

it was widely reported in the news and he was also proudly admitting it and was using it for PR.

Hear ya PP...

Quote from another news report... "Since Iraq upped its payments last month, 12 suicide bombers have successfully struck inside Israel.." Can't say if this was an increase in attacks on Israel or if the money element is a thing that would be considered by a suicide bomber.

The same news article claims "Palestinians say the bombers are driven by a priceless thirst for revenge, religious zeal and dreams of glory ? not greed." but who knows, could be in some instances, others not.

Either way, it's all bollocks and not good news.

Not got the article around at the moment, but interesting to see the background of "suicide bombers" and their families. One was an 19 year old law student - who never expressed any extreme views to her family or had any known affiliations with political orgs. She had a dental appointment, but never kept that - and next anyone knew she had blown up some folks and herself. Some people can be predictable or they can give a clue - on others, we will prob never know what's going on in their minds.

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Halabja is direct evidence of the WMDs that you say don't exist.

In reality, Halabja is the tip of the iceberg.

Saddam not only had WMDs, but he had a massive program to hide them.

Some were sent to Syria before the US invasion. Some were buried. Some were even sunk in rivers.

hahahaha...
now you have found the elusive WMD's

you're on a role!

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Some were sent to Syria before the US invasion. Some were buried. Some were even sunk in rivers.

Some others went to North Korea, some to Somalia ...

Those WMD are pretty smart and vicious, but at least they are pilling up FREQUENT FLYER POINTS

you are the other side of CHKSIT ( or whatever that conspiracy freak is called )

[Webby]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Halabja is direct evidence of the WMDs that you say don't exist.

In reality, Halabja is the tip of the iceberg.

Saddam not only had WMDs, but he had a massive program to hide them.

Some were sent to Syria before the US invasion. Some were buried. Some were even sunk in rivers.

Mmmmm... OK then

So, to take this concept further, where exactly is this "massive program" based that it can be hidden???

Did you see the trucks shipping out WMD to Syria or Iraqi forces burying WMD or sinking them into rivers??? *lol* Sheesh.. the fantasy lives on

Are you aware that it is almost impossible to wipe traces of material from locations for many decades - and there were no traces of WMD material found??

Are you also aware that the actual evidence provided by Mr Powell to the UN included emphasis on a site where there was "known" WMD, but that site was never a secret and already overrun by journalists prior to Mr Powell's delivery to the UN - and it was already known there were no traces of WMD in that location. The press new the facts - it's a pity the CIA had an inability to read a newspaper and get more accurate intelligence.

I know - all these WMD's were mobile and on the trucks Mr Powell gave "evidence" of to the UN - and they were all on their way to Syria

One guy I got sympathy for is Colin Powell - he was suckered by swamplife.

There is also little doubt IAEA was also well-aware there was little chance of the existance of WMD - and the US government was provided with this information which they elected to ignore since it was not "suitable" at the time.

[minusonebit]

You know, we really have some ignorant fucks around here.

Yes, Hitler overran half the world in WWII. Yes, we and some of our allies helped to bring it back from the edge of the rim. But isn't anyone smart enough to ask how Hitler got into power to begin with? A close, unbiased examination of the facts shows that Hitler and Bush are very much alike in their conquests for power. So similar in fact, I personally believe they may have been joined at the hip at one stitch in time.

Of course, now that we have (supposedly) executed their beloved Saddam and destabilized the entire fucking hemisphere, there is very little chance left that we could safely pull out of the mess. That was the point of no return.

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by Rochard

What has the US accomplished in Iraq? For better or for worse, the US armed forces stolled into the country and over ran it with what - less than one thousand killed on our side? That's impressive -

i said what did they accomplish not what did they do..


I could walk into a church with 5 guys and off 20 or 30 people and only lose 2 or 3 guys . is that an accomplishment ?

The accomplishment is what did they GAIN by getting over a thousand people killed?

just being there isnt an accomplishment.. certainly not worth the deaths of 1000 us boys and thousand upon thousands of iraqi's

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm talking about the extremists. You know, the ones who want to kill us?

as opposed to us the ones who ARE attacking and killing people . lol

I havent heard of one single iraqi or iranian who has either made a single threat to america or me or attacked anyone outside of their own country.. not one..

so if you agree that the extremists certainly arent all iranian or iraqi then you must have the reasoning to understand we shouldnt be attacking innocent civilians in these countries..

Originally Posted by Rochard

Tossing nukes at them isn't the answer.

this we agree..

Originally Posted by Rochard

But it will be the return volley the moment a nuke goes off in the US or one of our allies. Once it gets escalated to this point it's game over for someone and it won't be the US. You can destroy all of the lower 48 states and yet the US will still have the firepower to fire back thanks in part to our friends in the US Navy.

i think we need to re-establish who and what the threat is.. muslims have nukes they arent using them on us ( india/pakistan) . hordes of peacfull muslims live everywhere.. they arent the problem..

As far as i can tell iran is also not a threat as i havent seen one credible actual threat in any way..

Originally Posted by Rochard

But if we retrain their children...... Wouldn't that be improper and what we are fighting against in the first place?

well thats the great part about it and why these problems are arising.. ( the internet ) these backward nations/dictatorships have relied on keeping their people in the dark for the most part with a limited understanding of the rest of the world.. if you grow up and everyone is a shit farmer , you will prob be a shit farmer.. once you realise the rest of the world arent shit farmers, you stop listening to people telling you " there is no way but shit farming"

Originally Posted by Rochard

It's just a fucking huge mess.

amen..

[pOrRiDgE]

I have a sidenote on this, for anyone considering islam a religion of terror: Saddam was, as someone mentioned earlier, basically a thug. Im no historian so I dont have the full history on him but I do know that when he came to power he wasnt a religious person, which is supported by the fact that he took aid from the US to combat Iran.

The only reason Saddam turned to islam was because of growing disapproval among his population and other religious leaders in the region. Kind of like the kid who buys you some candy after hes beaten you one time to many.

Saddam wasnt a religious leader, he wasnt even a believing muslim, he was an asshole with a lust for power. Just like any other despotic leader of government with a religious agenda as hook he used this to tighten the grip on his people. Politics are nothing but fucking dirty business.

[DarkJedi]

[Gunni]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.

...

hahaha, what a load of bullshit
So Islam extremists are all of a sudden going to take over the whole western world using suicide bombs and other terrorist activities??

I wonder if ETA is going to take over Spain before that happens and then battle it out with Al-Qaeda when the time comes

[Matt 26z]

I love it when people spread the fear that the US could one day be under the control of Islamic extremists. It just shows their sheer stupidity.

Take a look at everything that would have to happen from step A to step B to step c for one of these groups to siege control of our government.

The other day I saw a woman who lost her son in Iraq talking on TV about how we are doing a great thing because they could have eventually come here and made us live under Islam.

How would they have gotten across the Atlantic? Could their air force had gotten past ours? Then what about a land invasion? The whole idea of any of this is just plain stupid.

[donnie]

Originally Posted by Rochard

When I say "they" or "them" I don't mean Muslims. That's way too general of a statement. Some of my own family is Muslim, but they don't spend their free time planning on blowing up buildings here in the US. I'm talking about the extremists. You know, the ones who want to kill us?

Some of my family are christians and, believe it or not, they DON'T plan on blowing up any abortion clinics or killing doctors performing abortions. I know it's hard to believe but it's the truth.

You should stick to being a pornographer and leave this kind of things to people with higher education than just high school

[Corleone]

Originally Posted by DarkJedi

wtf this is for real?

[RSD]

We have already lost the war against terror. 10 years ago when I was 16 I already knew that the Islamic Jihad would come and take-ver the world. Just like the Romans... they also lost!

[JFK]

its was a good read, all the way down to when it switched to Current world situation............lost me right there