Damn straight man. I feel ya there. I cannot fight as I have asthma and they will not take me but other than that I would. The US needs to wake up. We all have differing agendas but man remember the 11th??? WTF happened to that unity that resolve. Jesus people that was not that long ago. Most people can remember what happend on the Simpsons better than when the last war was. Wake up.
To US=good people: Relax I will get to Iraq. First Waco. In your last reply you stated “I firmly believed these people should not have flaunted the law”. Again, what law was broken? And do you really believe that they deserved to die over said violations? I take it from your last response - or lack thereof - that you decided to ignore the question in order to cover up your weak arguement, because who in their right mind could believe that the punishment(death) fit the crime(broken laws!?)
About the raping of little girls. Do you KNOW he did this? Was there proof? Y’know like a vidoetape or somehting? Speaking of videotapes, there was footage shot during the siege which shows the offensive was taken by our “brave” law enforcement officials. Just a bunch of jack-booted thugs!
Now I don’t know if Koresch raped little girls or not but I do believe he deserved a fair trial, don’t you? If he was found guilty, put him on death row and kill the scumbag.
Your question “Are you suggesting that raping of little girls doesn’t give the law the moral imperative to punish the offender?” Don’t put words in my mouth. Go back and read the post, it is self-explanatory. If you really read my post then I would consider your question to be borderline retarded. Those children in the compound were murdered by various “law” enforcement officials, not Koresch. However taken from what you’ve said that must have been justified because the alleged perpetrator was killed as well. Plus they “flaunted laws” so -kill’em all! This whole Waco subject helped shed light onto your version of morality. It is no wonder you are so war happy.
Now Iraq. It is not difficult for me to believe that Saddam has broken some violations. However, it is difficult for me to believe that he is a threat. Let me ask a bold question. If Saddam has broken violations does it really make a difference? Enough to go to war?
Why are we having to bribe his neighbors with goodies(money and other types of aid) if he is soooo bad? Wouldn’t they be begging for our help? They aren’t!
Your comments about sanctions are a little bewildering considering what I’ve written in my posts. By the way, what the hell are sanctions for? They do nothing but bolster the party in power and only cause resentment of the U.S. by the inhabitants. A lose/lose situation.
This government has lied to us about too many things. Even wars. Examples like Vietnam spring to mind(Pentagon Papers). There is a great debate about WWII at the Independent Institute.org. It has to do with prior knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and what the Rosevelt Administration knew. Plenty of other examples too long to list here.
Why do you think our “leaders” are benevolent? Considering history, most things point in the ohter direction.
We all can relate to the banning of ephedera(so long MD6) by the FDA and the outright lies and deception found in the mass media concerning it and other related supplements. We have to find an alternative source to find the truth. I believe we’ve found it here in T-Mag. I beleive the same thing can be said of this war. The media serves it’s own purpose for the elite. There is no such thing as a free press in the mass media anymore. You ahve to seek out alternative news sources. Otherwise you’ll be bombareded with lies until you eventually believe them.
Force is to communism what propaganda is to democracy – Noam Chompsky
mark,
I’m sorry that you decided to resort to personal attacks. I also defend your right to say those things, however. Let me clear up some of your misconceptions. Here is definitive proof about the rapings. Please look on this website: www.rickross.com/reference/waco/waco4.html. Please be man enough to apologize for your unwarranted attacks against my argument.
Here is a report from an independent investigation concluded in the year 2000. Remember, this is a Republican investigating the actions of a democratic administration. Look on: www.rickross.com/reference/waco/waco259.html.
If you seek some further discussion of the issues, please read more on that website. If you don’t bother to read these suggestions, or if you can’t bring yourself to admit your error, well I hope some of my fellow T-men will take the opportunity to enhance their own knowledge of the events.
Iraq: I do not want to discuss this issue with you any longer. I pray for the troops and their families. I also pray for the innocents in Iraq.
To Mark:
The sanctions are rules to keep him from doing the same evil things that he has done in the past (invading other countries for their resources and gassing his own people). The sanctions were imposed on him by the United Nations, in which, France, Germany, and other countries signed. It was also 17 sanctions that he disobeyed. The last sanction was to show proof of disarmorment by december or they will suffer the consequences. Saddam disobeyed this too. Are we supposed to let Saddam get away with this? This is the reason the UN was set up for. Sort of like an international court. If some of these other countries would have some balls then maybe the UN would work.
Mark.
Use your head.
Failure to disarm constitutes reason to use force against the country in violation of U.N regulations. The U.N. has repeatedly failed to disarm Iraq. Don't use the 'military action as a last resort' argument. This is the last resort. We simply cannot take another 10 years to get this done.
It's that simple.
I wont validate your conspiracy theories, which youre trying to validate with your websites.
To David H,
I do believe we have a simple miscommunication, but some of the arguments you just took up in your last post I do disagree with.
First you are correct the Northern Alliance fought the ground war, with large support from our Special Op forces. I believe you were insinuating that this was a major component of the war to remove the taliban regime while I believe it was minimal. This is just a difference of opinion.
Now on to your statement that we had the “will of the afghan people.” First of the Taliban is supported by the Pashtuns which comprise over 50% of the nations population, and secondly their close cousins(in ethinicity) the pathans who number 10% of the pakistan population, approx 14.5 million support the pashtuns and fought along side them or supported them from pakistan. The taliban brought an end to the maurading war lords in Afghanistan(for a more horrific government) and the majority of the afghan people embraced this(except the Uzebeks and other ethinicities) . The Norther Alliance was also only comprised of 10-12thousand soldiers.
I was merely trying to draw a parralell and point out the fact that even with a 10yr and brutal effort at restoring the communist regime in afghanistan the soviets were defeated, and with a one month effort we removed the taliban that is all.
To Mark,
I noticed how you don;t respond to me anymore, you are really hurting my feelings. Anyway I think I will leave this thread because Noam Chompsky was quoted, I believe that is a sign of the apocolypse.
To U.S.=good people: I have not visited the website you refer to but will do so. However, let’s say for sake of argument that Koresch did rape those girls in the compound. Why is it okay for “law” enforcement officials to murder the people inside including the girls he alledgedly raped? You have only danced around that question. Also why do you think the punishment(death) fit the Crime(broken laws)? You avoided that one as well.
It makes little difference what party investigates what party. Both are corrupt beyond repair and are far more intertwined than you realize. They will only go so far until it starts to hurt one of their own and then the investigation comes to an abrupt hault. See the death of Vincent Foster for a recent example.
I also pray for our soldiers as they are being used as pawns for the purposes of the elite.
To anyone, especially those for the war.
First of all I beleive that Saddam is a murderous tyrant. However, there are alot of those in the world. So if that si justification for a war then get ready because Iraq is just the begining. Where is our next target? How about N.Korea or China or Cuba Or Sudan or…
Why is Saddam such a threat that a pre-emptive strike is warrented? The U.S. was able to deter Stalin or Mao - both of whom were more brutal and dangerous than Saddam. They also posses chemical, biological and NUCLEAR weapons(Iraq doesn’t) So please explain why we can’t deter Saddam who is a much less deadly adversary.
The issue is whether or not he posses an imminent threat to the U.S. It has nothing to do with “liberation” or whether he broke violations. Look at what the Soviet Union and China have done! By the way the U.S. has gone against the will of the U.N. plenty of times so why go to war against Iraq because they do it?
Politicians constantly lie. Look at what they say all the time about Social Securtiy, Mediscare, budget surpluses and even previous wars like Vietnam. So when going to war shouln’t we be our most skeptical?
War is unpredictable but one thing is certain. The size and scope of the Federal government will grow along with a concurring loss of freedoms that will never return. It’s kinda ironic that the neocons talk a lot about shrinking the size of the Federal Gov. but then enthusiastically support policies that subvert thier said philosophy. What a bunch of traders. I’m so glad I woke up to their deception a number of years ago.
Furhter more I cannot find any real justification for this war. Ours is not a defensive action as Iraq hasn’t attacked us. Plus it will only consolidate more hatred against the U.S. for trying to run the world. We are getting into a very frighteneing situation.
Dear balloon lost in New Jersey,
Hey, since you decide to address responses to me without using my proper name, I shall respond to you in creative ways.
I ALWAYS ANSWER QUESTIONS. I NEVER AVOID A SUBJECT. I believe that these people should have been captured, if possible, and put on trial. However, koresh is on record via a FBI microphone as gloating about killing a FBI agent. That is what the agents were up against. If law enforcement is being fired on, I support them 100% in using deadly force. Please read the second website that I quoted. It appears your assertion of “murder” is way off. In fact, the report shows that the FBI DIDN’T FIRE BULLETS AT ALL!!! In fact, they fired three gas canisters at an outlying area of the compound. There apparently was quite a delay between that firing (which didn’t hit the main compound by the way) and the start of the fire. Let me be crystal clear (so even a democrat can’t weasle around the issues), since koresh was raping little girls, he and his nutball cult needed to be brought to justice.
mark,
I’m eagerly anticipating your response. Good luck,
United States=Good Guys
Scall, you’re now acknowledging that “the Northern Alliance fought the ground war.” That’s all I said, and have been saying. I never insinuated “that this was a major component of the war.” I haven’t implied anything.
Instead, I stated a fact: The N.A. fought the ground war.
This statement doesn’t suggest the importance of either the ground war or the ground war as fought by the N.A. It only states that the N.A. fought the ground war, and they did. You can decide for yourself whether or not such fighting was integral to the toppling of the Taliban regime. That isn’t my point.
The statement does, however, demonstrate the difference between our war and the war the Soviets fought, and this is my point. Everything else is irrelevant here.
Now to your disagreement.
Yes, we did have the goodwill of the Afghan people. Let’s ignore logic momentarily and examine the obvious:
Was there gratitude on the part of Afghans for our act of liberation?
Were there celebrations throughout Afghanistan when the Taliban fell?
Were there allied Afghans who fought for us?
Were there non-allied Afghans who rose up against the Taliban government?
Was there resistance by Afghans to our War in Afghanistan?
The obvious answers: Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, and No.
So did we have the goodwill of the Afghan people? Yes we did. But you disagree with this. What do you propose then? If we didn’t have their goodwill, then what did we have?
Now let’s forget the obvious so we can dissect your logic.
First of all, Pashtuns comprise only 40% of the nation’s population. That said, the Pashtuns did not support the Taliban; they preferred them. They preferred them over a similarly extremist government dominated by other ethnicities, such as the Tajiks or Uzbeks. In this sense, you can technically be right to say Pashtuns supported the Taliban, especially if you want the facts to support you. But saying so would be misleading. By the way, this preference disappeared when our war of liberation began, as previous concerns ceased to remain an issue.
You mentioned Pakistan. Yes, Pakistan supported the Taliban. They financed, supplied, armed, and installed them. They gave them power. The Taliban were even raised in Pakistan. Anyway, let’s continue our discussion of Afghans.
The majority of the Afghan people did embrace the Taliban when they came into power and brought law & order to the country. Such an embrace is normal and expected, especially when one considers the power vacuum in Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal. The Taliban brought security, and this is all that mattered to a nation that experienced the civil chaos that occurs with a lack of government.
This doesn’t change the fact that the Afghan people continued to suffer under the Taliban. And it certainly doesn’t change the fact that we had their goodwill as we removed the Taliban from power.
But you’re confident we didn’t have their goodwill. Tell me, Scall, what we had instead. Tell me the real feeling of Afghans towards our liberation. Certainly you must know.