>>>you are naive<<<
Thank you for your kind words, Vitas.
>>>you got the first punch from the Arab world on 9/11<<<
Can you update me on the presidential commission to investigate 9/11? But you're right. We got clobbered more than we ever would have imagined. Call it an eye-opener. But look what Bush has done since he gave his best speech, in the aftermath of the tragedy. He rightfully took down Al Qaeda's nation state controlled by the Taliban, Afghanastan. The whole world was in sympathy--all of Europe and all of the Arab (you didn't hate the Arabs then, did ya) world--everybody, everywhere supported that effort. Everyone on this thread agrees that America and all would would ally with her should go after the terrorists.
How come we're bogged down in Iraq? Contrary to 42 percent who believe Iraq was involved in 9/11, there is nothing but public relations level speculation to prove Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. This is a fact!
After 9/11 Bush had the high ground. But he went far off the path by picking Saddam as the next target when the true target is the terrorists themselves. I'm not convinced that Iraq could have become an ally in tracking down Al Qaeda, much like Kaddafi of Libya has become. There's no love lost between Saddam's secular form of government and OBL's want for fanatical religious government. They are diametic opposites. It's sorta like saying Farrakan and Fallwell hang out together.
>>>now you are going to pontificate that there is no chance of a second punch and a third punch<<<
That's speculation and particularly in light of the above, it's far afield speculation. Bush has a motivated reason to pick on Saddam--bad economy, corporate scandal that leads directly into his administration, including himself over the Harken deal (aren't the Democrats nice not to go after a Paula Jones type deposition in a civil matter, via a Harken shareholder or something). He's also using the war for cover to knock down environmental and health care policies that many people in this country consider important, but they're not gonna notice 'cause they're out buyin' duct tape. And when they turn on the tv, all they see is generals. When they turn on the radio, they learn that we're still supposed to hate Clinton. And the FoxNews team might as well all be wearing cheerleaders suits with a big B-U-S-H on the front.
Sorry, Vitas. In the absence of proof, which you haven't got, your contention is speculative only and wouldn't hold u in any court of law were the specific facts tried before one.
>>>nope, can't happen because PT says so -lol-<<<
Unlike you, from what I've seen of your writing on this thread, I admit that sometimes I'm wrong. But I don't think I am on this, however.
>>>ever hear of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me?"<<<
Are you talking about when the US vetoed the UN Resolution that condemned Iraq's invasion of Iran? Or are you talking about when Reagan put forward Iran-Contra as a means to arm, with weapons from Israel, the Iranians?
>>>you may be willing to assume the risks yourself, but what gives YOU the right to assume the risks for OUR children<<<
The war trigger is instant death to too many children. The aftermath of the war--which is where OBL's theater then comes into play--will see children far and wide become victims to terrorism as the war on Iraq--and this is CIA acknowledged--will help OBL recruit more terrorists. Do you realistically think fundamental religious fanatics are going to say, "Wow, that was heavy. We better stop terror. I'm gonna go out and get a job." Problem is there's no job, there's only a hatred now and a greater one tomorrow should this war happen. Yes, more children in America are likely to die from promulgating the war.
By the way, one thing I left out in my response to your first question. Bush entirely missed the boat by failing, immediately following 9/11, to call an international conference to discuss what breeds terrorism. He further missed the boat by not calling an Arab conference to deal with the same issue. He also missed the boat by not seizing the opportunity to diplomatically use the 9/11 tragedy to relate to Saddam Huseein differently, perhaps enlist his government's support to help capture the terrorists.
>>>blocking the Suez canal is the logical way to cripple the capitalist world?s economy<<<
Iraq is allied with Egypt and is unlikely to do any such thing. Where did you find this speculation? It's my understanding that it's projected he has 12 scuds which never were very accurate. You seem to have more faith in Saddam than what you accuse me of--lol!
Me? I think the bastard should be brought before a war crimes tribunal. The US pr machine is heavy doing everything but what it should be doing: precisely that--name him a war criminal and get international support, both among governments and people--and set that table as it should be set. Why ain't that happenin, Vitas?
>>>why do you think Egypt and Israel get more U.S. aid than anyone else in the world<<<
The gist of Egypt and Israel US funding is a result of a prior deal from a treaty signed to help ease the tensions in the region, to help keep Egypt and Israel at peace. Were they not at peace things would be worse. Do us a favor--I'm pretty busy myself--find out exactly how the Suez Canal is funded. I'd enjoy knowing that.
>>>duh ? they keep the Suez open<<<
You gonna vote for Bush-Norreiga in the next election--lol?
>>>the bottom line is that your route kills any possibility
of International disputes being worked out through diplomacy<<<
Are you saying that hard-headedly or due to certain knowledge? Knowlege that the vast numbers of peoples and governments in the world don't share.
>>>a country files a complaint and PT's stance is that the other side does not have to comply because there is no authority to enforce UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED COMPLAINTS<<<
The authority of UN 1441 is to keep inspections happening in Iraq with a provision for reporting back to the Security Council. There is no deadline in the resolution, including not even a deadline for the reports. The reporting now taking place is from a precedent of a previous resolution (this according to Blix--you wanna argue with him--lol?). There is absolutely nothing that stipulates war can result due to a unilateral interpretation of 1441. The closest language that comes to that is the phrase "serious consequences." But "serious consequences" could be interpreted in any number of ways. Key to you understanding how 1441 got adopted is there would not have been a 15 to 0 vote of approval if a standard for war was a provision (don't believe me--ask those who were at the table) when the resolution was adopted.
>>>Saddam already thinks he can?t be touched because UTTER IDIOTS such as yourself have told him so<<<
Again, Vitas, thank you for your kind remarks. You're so mirroring in your personality and you don't even realize this. Continue, if you must.
>>>according to your theory, we should not prosecute murderers in our country because it costs too much<<<
Well, simply put, we don't kill 1,000 people because of one murder. If that's what you mean, yes, it costs too much.
>>>under your theory there is NO possibility of world peace<<<
Under my theory the world would, well, you know, party hearty! (LOL)
>>>under the reality of world practice there are numerous possibilities for this ending, short of war, in a world wide policy of world peace<<<
I vote for peace! Resoundingly so!!!
>>>and if it does come to war, it will be a lesson to the next set of a$$holes that want to disrupt the world that, post 9/11, the world is not taking any $hit from anyone anymore<<<
Possible. But I doubt it. If it does come to war the risk is for a greater war to come into process. I mean, Vitas, you're writing as if the whole wide world, except Iraq, is a stable place. It ain't that way--there's always a couple dozen war conflicts in play at any given moment, a lot of it having to do with poverty, education, jobs, etc. You know, the kind of stuff that America, as the leading nation, should be leading on.
>>>your theory has ZERO possibility of working<<<
You're right ... I don't know nuthin'! Leave me alone then!
as for the venom, you propound ridiculous theories, you libel our President and our country and then you don't allow yourself to be held accountable? You know the drill. |
