Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2003 11:36 pm
Allah wants your hairy ass.
You big BOOB!!!
You big BOOB!!!
"Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Page 2 of 3
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2003 11:43 pm
looks like you might be "hanging around" for a while, binnie...
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2003 8:00 am
I have waited on replying on this for a while, thought of just letting it pass.
BUT
Until Iraq fires the first shot,
Until the UN and the rest of the world says go
Until you have more then 52% of Americans saying go
Until you figure how many mothers will be hanging yellow stars in there window,
Until you know that if Iraq is not stopped you will have another Hitler on the loose
Until you know that this will not be another Viet Nam
Until you tell me what kind of wall we will erect this time
Until then the cost in dollars should be spent on solving the problem diplomatically,
In a war, everybody loses, even if you win.
If there is no other way,
Until you have tried everything and I mean everything,
Until then, I will not be convinced that war is the right way to go.
Viet Nam Vet,
Riverwind
BUT
Until Iraq fires the first shot,
Until the UN and the rest of the world says go
Until you have more then 52% of Americans saying go
Until you figure how many mothers will be hanging yellow stars in there window,
Until you know that if Iraq is not stopped you will have another Hitler on the loose
Until you know that this will not be another Viet Nam
Until you tell me what kind of wall we will erect this time
Until then the cost in dollars should be spent on solving the problem diplomatically,
In a war, everybody loses, even if you win.
If there is no other way,
Until you have tried everything and I mean everything,
Until then, I will not be convinced that war is the right way to go.
Viet Nam Vet,
Riverwind
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2003 9:41 pm
I wish that I had said what you just said. 
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2003 10:26 pm
Add my vote, Riverwind. You have put the whole thing in perspective.
I watched Colin Powell on 20/20 tonight... scary! They are absolutely determined to start shooting, but they refuse to articulate the reasons.
I watched Colin Powell on 20/20 tonight... scary! They are absolutely determined to start shooting, but they refuse to articulate the reasons.
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 4:47 pm
I have to reply in kind...
There is this fact: Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners." However, the Israelis would not release any prisoners with "blood on their hands." Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mr. Atta was freed and eventually "thanked the US" by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center.
This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified.
We really should consider that Ronald Reagan called Osama binLaden a "FREEDOM FIGHTER" in 1980.
President Clinton could have captured Osama Bin Laden, but instead refused the offer of Sudan to hand Bin Laden over to the United States.
Then binLauden masterminded 9-11, among other things.
SO,... Freedom fighter = terrorist = mass murderer.
and... well, according to his record in the Kurdish insurrection in Iraq Saddam ALREADY = mass murderer.
Senator Schumer writes, "September 11th awakened us to the reality that technology has enabled a small group of diabolical people living halfway around the globe to make large parts of our society vulnerable to attack. For the first time, we are engaged in a war in which more Americans are likely to die on the home front than on the battlefield.
Why do we need to remove Saddam form Iraq?
Because we allowed him to escape the first time on the condition that he give up his warring ways. Now, we see him digging up weapons of mass destruction that he claimed did not exist so he can stave off the invasion.
So how long do you think it will take him to organize an attack on America?
Uhhh. Gee, I don't know.
It is very interesting, huh? How long will it plutonium to be cleaned up if a "dirty bomb" is set off in Times Square?
Uhhh. Gee, I DO know.
The best information on how long Cherynobl will remain radioactive is 100,000 years.
Let's see...Khufu's Pyramid in Egypt is a tad over 6,000 years old.
The Sphinx? Well, there IS a theory that it's head is 10,000 years old. Best estimates place it at around 6,000 years, also.
I would suppose that we could close the Holland tunnel.
Who says that Saddam has Plutonium? Well, try the head of his nuclear arms program who has recently defected to the United States.
and...who would you have us to believe, a Nuclear Physicist or Saddam?
Riverwind, I wish that I could give you the information that you seek. I do not suppose that it is possible.
I will, however, join you in a prayer for a peacful outcome.
A-1
There is this fact: Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners." However, the Israelis would not release any prisoners with "blood on their hands." Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mr. Atta was freed and eventually "thanked the US" by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center.
This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified.
We really should consider that Ronald Reagan called Osama binLaden a "FREEDOM FIGHTER" in 1980.
President Clinton could have captured Osama Bin Laden, but instead refused the offer of Sudan to hand Bin Laden over to the United States.
Then binLauden masterminded 9-11, among other things.
SO,... Freedom fighter = terrorist = mass murderer.
and... well, according to his record in the Kurdish insurrection in Iraq Saddam ALREADY = mass murderer.
Senator Schumer writes, "September 11th awakened us to the reality that technology has enabled a small group of diabolical people living halfway around the globe to make large parts of our society vulnerable to attack. For the first time, we are engaged in a war in which more Americans are likely to die on the home front than on the battlefield.
Why do we need to remove Saddam form Iraq?
Because we allowed him to escape the first time on the condition that he give up his warring ways. Now, we see him digging up weapons of mass destruction that he claimed did not exist so he can stave off the invasion.
So how long do you think it will take him to organize an attack on America?
Uhhh. Gee, I don't know.
It is very interesting, huh? How long will it plutonium to be cleaned up if a "dirty bomb" is set off in Times Square?
Uhhh. Gee, I DO know.
The best information on how long Cherynobl will remain radioactive is 100,000 years.
Let's see...Khufu's Pyramid in Egypt is a tad over 6,000 years old.
The Sphinx? Well, there IS a theory that it's head is 10,000 years old. Best estimates place it at around 6,000 years, also.
I would suppose that we could close the Holland tunnel.
Who says that Saddam has Plutonium? Well, try the head of his nuclear arms program who has recently defected to the United States.
and...who would you have us to believe, a Nuclear Physicist or Saddam?
Riverwind, I wish that I could give you the information that you seek. I do not suppose that it is possible.
I will, however, join you in a prayer for a peacful outcome.
A-1 Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2003 12:20 am
A-1 thies are the things that we as americans have to take into concidreation and that is why we have to take this action to rid this cancer from our planet. And yes a fuew prayers are surley welcom.
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2003 1:39 am
With all due respect Riverwind,
I didn't vote for the U.N.
The U.N. doesn't have the best interest of the American people as it's primary goal, nor does 'the rest of the world'
With nuclear or biological weapons, waiting until Iraq fires the first shot would be the worst possible of ideas.
How many people have to die in Iraq at the hands of their government before it's enough? How many have to die at the hands if Iraqi sponsered terrorism? 1000? 10000? 100000?
There will certainly be loss of life, but when it comes down to it the men and women we send into battle have volunteered with the understanding that this is their duty.
I respect your service in Viet Nam, but that war was a political boondogle, not a military one.
America is not the world's bully. We are the most humanitarian nation on the face of the planet, yet we are villified. We don't kill our own citizens, nor do we oppress or torture them. Yet we are villified. We don't wantonly kill, torture, or oppress citizens of other countries, yet we are villified.
For every contry we have been engaged with militarily we have a longstanding history of reaching out afterwards with both money and manpower to help rebuild nations that are stronger and more free than they were before.
There is no moral equivalence between the United States and any of the thug nations that so captivate the imagination of the blame America first crowd.
If our government had wanted to start the war on Iraq it certainly could have done so by now. We are exploring every diplomatic option. But make no mistake when and if those options fail I expect, I demand that our government do what's in the best interest of the United States regardless of what the United Nations says or doesn't say.
You may have a difference of opinion, but for anyone to portray the government or the majority of people supporting the war as "wanting" war is foolishness.
No one wants war, but when dealing with a regime (and by the way be don't have a Bush "regime" in America - that is outright offensive; we have a democratically elected government that can and does peacefully change hands at the will of the American people. No such luxury exists in Iraq) that does not want to negotiate is a waste of time and effort.
We either have principles or we don't. We either support the strength of America and the propositon that our way of life is a good thing or we don't.
I do.
I didn't vote for the U.N.
The U.N. doesn't have the best interest of the American people as it's primary goal, nor does 'the rest of the world'
With nuclear or biological weapons, waiting until Iraq fires the first shot would be the worst possible of ideas.
How many people have to die in Iraq at the hands of their government before it's enough? How many have to die at the hands if Iraqi sponsered terrorism? 1000? 10000? 100000?
There will certainly be loss of life, but when it comes down to it the men and women we send into battle have volunteered with the understanding that this is their duty.
I respect your service in Viet Nam, but that war was a political boondogle, not a military one.
America is not the world's bully. We are the most humanitarian nation on the face of the planet, yet we are villified. We don't kill our own citizens, nor do we oppress or torture them. Yet we are villified. We don't wantonly kill, torture, or oppress citizens of other countries, yet we are villified.
For every contry we have been engaged with militarily we have a longstanding history of reaching out afterwards with both money and manpower to help rebuild nations that are stronger and more free than they were before.
There is no moral equivalence between the United States and any of the thug nations that so captivate the imagination of the blame America first crowd.
If our government had wanted to start the war on Iraq it certainly could have done so by now. We are exploring every diplomatic option. But make no mistake when and if those options fail I expect, I demand that our government do what's in the best interest of the United States regardless of what the United Nations says or doesn't say.
You may have a difference of opinion, but for anyone to portray the government or the majority of people supporting the war as "wanting" war is foolishness.
No one wants war, but when dealing with a regime (and by the way be don't have a Bush "regime" in America - that is outright offensive; we have a democratically elected government that can and does peacefully change hands at the will of the American people. No such luxury exists in Iraq) that does not want to negotiate is a waste of time and effort.
We either have principles or we don't. We either support the strength of America and the propositon that our way of life is a good thing or we don't.
I do.
Riverwind (imported) wrote: Sat Mar 08, 2003 8:00 am I have waited on replying on this for a while, thought of just letting it pass.
BUT
Until Iraq fires the first shot,
Until the UN and the rest of the world says go
Until you have more then 52% of Americans saying go
Until you figure how many mothers will be hanging yellow stars in there window,
Until you know that if Iraq is not stopped you will have another Hitler on the loose
Until you know that this will not be another Viet Nam
Until you tell me what kind of wall we will erect this time
Until then the cost in dollars should be spent on solving the problem diplomatically,
In a war, everybody loses, even if you win.
If there is no other way,
Until you have tried everything and I mean everything,
Until then, I will not be convinced that war is the right way to go.
Viet Nam Vet,
Riverwind
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2003 6:56 am
Your points are well taken and I agree with most all of them. If it were my decision I would have no problem pushing the button. I also agree that the UN has out lived is purpose and we should not be supporting it as we have done the last 50 years. But I still have questions on this pending war and the reasons behind it.
I don聮t know about you in your area but here the price of gas is up about 35 cents a gal and reports are that it will be over $2.00 by summer. Why? Is there a gas shortage? I don聮t think so, I could be wrong. Who is profiting from this conflict? Who are the oil barons in this country? I know of one family. So far I see the oil company聮s making a profit and I am a capitalist at heart and I don聮t have a problem with any company making a profit, I do have a problem with the oil company聮s making a profit claiming an oil shortage.
Is this personal between Bush and Saddam? God I hope not.
I have not ever agreed with everything a president does and with a smile on my face I can say it聮s been a long time sense I voted for the guy that won. I was not and I am still not a Clinton fan, yes I believe he made some mistakes in policy in my opinion and that is true with every president we have had.
Bboy I hate to contradict THE ONE WHO MUST BE OBEYED but we do not live in a democracy never have, we live in a Republic, which is a bit different. If we lived in a democracy Gore would be president because he did get the majority of the votes. We have a system that I have questioned most of my life and that is the Electoral College where you must win the majority of votes in your state. Right after the election a high-ranking democrat was asked this same question and this was his answer. Thanks again to our founding fathers for the wisdom or dumb luck of setting up the Electoral College, with out it politician's would never visit or campaign in any states other then the ones with a high population. Then he said look at the map, as it stands now if Gore wins the election and gets in Air Force One, he would not fly over any state between Washington DC and California that he won. Interesting, for the first time in my life the Electoral College made sense.
I still say we should try everything we can before we start shooting. What about sanctions, cut off his ability to sell oil, bankrupt the bastard.
I guess what I fear the most is that if we bomb Iraq is that it will escalate. A1 you are so right about dirty bombs and they scar the hell out of me. I don聮t want this to turn into WWIII, which it has the making for and being right may not be the right answer. I don't want Einstein聮s words may come back to haunt us, "If we have a WWIII, WWIV will be fought with slingshots".
I guess sense 9/11 no American and certainly not me has had the warm cozy that we have always enjoyed. It makes me mad as hell and what the hell lets make glass of IRAQ and get over it. Where then do we go? Nowhere in history has a religious war made any sense and that is what I see this as. Are we prepared to kill or wipe out every Muslim nation that supports terrorists? Are we prepared to do this as a nation at what cost? I don't ever remember reading about a religious war that was won.
I don聮t know the answers, all I have is questions, the same questions I stated above.
In the gulf war a dozen years ago there was a defined objective, we had a mandate from almost every nation, we may have not defined that objective completely as we should have but we did accomplish our goal, what is our goal in this one? To stop terrorists or to kill Saddam or both? Will this stop the terrorists? NO. Will it stop Saddam? YES. Who replaces him? which country is next? Which country that has
Where does it end?
Where does it end?
Is it time for me to go buy a slingshot?
Yes its time we prayed.
River
I don聮t know about you in your area but here the price of gas is up about 35 cents a gal and reports are that it will be over $2.00 by summer. Why? Is there a gas shortage? I don聮t think so, I could be wrong. Who is profiting from this conflict? Who are the oil barons in this country? I know of one family. So far I see the oil company聮s making a profit and I am a capitalist at heart and I don聮t have a problem with any company making a profit, I do have a problem with the oil company聮s making a profit claiming an oil shortage.
Is this personal between Bush and Saddam? God I hope not.
I have not ever agreed with everything a president does and with a smile on my face I can say it聮s been a long time sense I voted for the guy that won. I was not and I am still not a Clinton fan, yes I believe he made some mistakes in policy in my opinion and that is true with every president we have had.
Bboy I hate to contradict THE ONE WHO MUST BE OBEYED but we do not live in a democracy never have, we live in a Republic, which is a bit different. If we lived in a democracy Gore would be president because he did get the majority of the votes. We have a system that I have questioned most of my life and that is the Electoral College where you must win the majority of votes in your state. Right after the election a high-ranking democrat was asked this same question and this was his answer. Thanks again to our founding fathers for the wisdom or dumb luck of setting up the Electoral College, with out it politician's would never visit or campaign in any states other then the ones with a high population. Then he said look at the map, as it stands now if Gore wins the election and gets in Air Force One, he would not fly over any state between Washington DC and California that he won. Interesting, for the first time in my life the Electoral College made sense.
I still say we should try everything we can before we start shooting. What about sanctions, cut off his ability to sell oil, bankrupt the bastard.
I guess what I fear the most is that if we bomb Iraq is that it will escalate. A1 you are so right about dirty bombs and they scar the hell out of me. I don聮t want this to turn into WWIII, which it has the making for and being right may not be the right answer. I don't want Einstein聮s words may come back to haunt us, "If we have a WWIII, WWIV will be fought with slingshots".
I guess sense 9/11 no American and certainly not me has had the warm cozy that we have always enjoyed. It makes me mad as hell and what the hell lets make glass of IRAQ and get over it. Where then do we go? Nowhere in history has a religious war made any sense and that is what I see this as. Are we prepared to kill or wipe out every Muslim nation that supports terrorists? Are we prepared to do this as a nation at what cost? I don't ever remember reading about a religious war that was won.
I don聮t know the answers, all I have is questions, the same questions I stated above.
In the gulf war a dozen years ago there was a defined objective, we had a mandate from almost every nation, we may have not defined that objective completely as we should have but we did accomplish our goal, what is our goal in this one? To stop terrorists or to kill Saddam or both? Will this stop the terrorists? NO. Will it stop Saddam? YES. Who replaces him? which country is next? Which country that has
we are pissed at do we take out next? China for its stand on Human rights? Does this not give other countrys the same logic in there conflicts with there enemys? India and Pakistan?
Where does it end?
Where does it end?
Is it time for me to go buy a slingshot?
Yes its time we prayed.
River
Re: "Is war on Iraq worth the financial cost?"
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2003 9:03 am
Our form of government is a representative republic established through democratic elections.
Bboy
de路moc路ra路cy
(d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de路moc路ra路cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
3. Majority rule.
4. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.
Bboy
de路moc路ra路cy
(d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de路moc路ra路cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
3. Majority rule.
4. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.