Unfortunately, negotiated peace does not have a very good track record. That isn't to say that it isn't worth trying. It is preferable to war. But, I think there is a point where there are no other options.
The current problem does not involve hostilities between the various Arab countries and Israel. Saddam attacked another Arab state and then bombed Israel as a way to involve them and break up the 1991 coalition.
Solutions? First you have to define what the problem is. In this case, it is Saddam and his refusal to comply with the terms of the cease-fire. We have said repeatedly that there are consequences for failure to comply.
We have tried sanctions. They failed. Even former Sec. of State Albright has admitted that over 500,000 Iraqi children have died because of the sanctions. German companies have been suppying weapons manufacturing equipment. Other countries have been making deals with Iraq. And now it is being reported that North Korea may be suppying weapons material to Saddam.
We've tried inspections. But for inspections to work, there has to be complete and absolute compliance. For 12 years, Saddam has refused to do so, even now. In 1998, the inspectors were booted out, some say removed. This resulted in Clinton's Operation: Desert Fox which dropped more cruise missles and bombs than all of Desert Storm.
To avoid war, the onus is on Saddam. He is the one who started this mess.
Peace at any cost to avoid war is not peace. It is appeasement.
If you look back at history, the only time the world has had "peace" for any length of time was after war in which the loser surrendered "completely".
In the end, as I see it, we have 3 choices....
1) Saddam complies completely and absolutely. 2) Saddam goes into exile and the Iraqi provisional government complies completely. 3) We keep our word.
I don't hold much hope for the first two.
----
To your question about Middle East peace, I liken the solution to Dave Grundy's quitting smoking. For it to succeed, it has to be something that they want. Until that happens, there is little anyone can do that will be effective and long-lasting.
[ February 22, 2003, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: Glenn Taylor ]
posted
Fred, I feel that I gave a fair solution to the immediate problem in my second post near the end of page 1. I'm sure some would dissagree, but that's my solution. The method in which it is acheived, we pay big bucks for. I do like your idea of uniting the islamic countries to avert future problems, but keeping them seperate and quarraling with one another is probably the best for all.
-------------------- "Don't change horses in midstream, unless you spot one with longer legs" bronzeo oti Jack Davis 1410 Main St Joplin, MO 64801 www.imagemakerart.com jack@imagemakerart.com Posts: 1549 | From: Joplin, MO | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
glenn....there is no disscussing "pertinent" issues. you tend to be a "sound bite" of the geo w. bush camp. and you tend to to the same as geo w when you are approched about some details other then how bad sadamn is to his people, how many children died over there and how this administration is NOT ADDRESSING THE SAME PROBLEMS IN THIS COUNTRY. you say you dont care how thew french, german, russians feel.....well we(the one who detest this personel war of geo w.)would rather see 300 BILLION SPENT ON THE 41 million without health care(you wont even address this, as many times as ive said it) or the HOMELESS(in your conservative world they dont exist) or the JOBLESS AND IDIGENT(again they dont live in your perfect world). as for the problems of the IRAQY people, untill they decide to get a regiem change, sadam is not a problem we need to address, and spend that money her in this country.........but you will defend this administration...because you voted for it....as letterman put it last nite, "geo w. dont need the U.N. support to go to war, he also didnt need the THE AMERICAN PEOPLES support to get the office of president"
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
I'm trying to keep the discussion on topic, but you keep thowing up a bunch of straw dogs. I've invited you to discuss this on another BB which would be a more proper venue considering the depth necessary to properly respond to the issues you've raised. Whether you want to take me up on that offer is up to you. I'll not air them here knowing the past history of discussing such things on this BB.
If that is not an acceptable answer, I'm sorry. It's the only one you'll get from me unless you get permission from Steve.
posted
PLANT CORN and HAVE A BARBEQUE. There, it's settled.
CrazyJack
-------------------- Wilson Ardmore Sun Signs 164 Team Track Rd. Auburn, Ca hatfield@vfr.net Posts: 100 | From: Bowman,Ca | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow,Great bunch of posts. Really makes me think.I`m surprised at how polite everyone is.Just my two bits,I have to agree with most of what Myra has to say. Just for the record I am a Vietnam vet and consider myself a patriot.
-------------------- Bob & Marcia Peach Peach Signs Inc Sandwich, MA rpeach9828@aol.com Posts: 1021 | From: Sandwich, MA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
glenn...you did a "political shuffle" AGAIN. you are a polititian...you wont respond to a question that you know if you answer....will not be the right one(in keeping with your skewed view). you keep saying how bad sadamn is and how he mistreats his people and children and since you are so "fiscally conservative" all you need to answer is....it better to spend 300 BILLION on a war, to remove a dictator, who is of no imenet threat to this country....or spend that money HERE FOR ITS PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING MISTREATED by their own govt by not givin AN AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM for its 41 MILLION people????? is that so hard to answer and its not off the topic....which is WAR which = 300 BILLION spent on KILLING, DESTROYING and adding more veterans to the DISABLED, MAMED, CRIPPLED AND DEAD. but to you and yours this is EXCEPTABLE? and these things happen in war and colaterial damage is ok? i think if they would take that 300 BILLION their gona spend killing and destroying...and apply it to HOMELAND SECURITY AND HEALTH CARE FOR OUR OWN....it would be money well spent. as for me going to a bb that is where you and yours pump each other with "sound bites" of this administration....i didnt fall off the turnip truck yesterday, and i wont be like a bull taken to slaughter.....heheheheheheheheh and i love james carvelle....and airanna hufington.....
[ February 23, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: old paint ]
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never have subscribed to the viewpoint of the government, or taxpayers in general owing me or anyone anything, except for those who cannot provide for themselves. The elderly and indigent part of our society are taken care of by Medicare and Medicade. Not perfect, but none the less much better than I or you get.(US p.o.v.) The government making healthcare financially affordable to the public, is very welcomed (rid the price gouging), but their are too many politics envolved for that to happen anytime soon. I'm tired of listening to the "what is in it for me" entitlement attitude, and for sure am tired of financially supporting those who subscribe to that point of view. Most of our unemployed, are unemployable (slackers), because of their attitudes, and misdirected work habits. Most of the homeless in my area, are there because they choose that lifestyle. Most of them beg for food money, and then spend it on liquor. What more do I/you owe them? I know that this is getting off of the subject, but maybe will maybe serve as a "fiscally conservative" point of view, and not at all skewed.
I am not a republican nor a democrat, but I am a conservative. I achieve for myself, I share with others that need my assistance, as I can, without the NEED for a bureaucratic government to very poorly misdirect my funds...As far as war is concerned, I am for all methods available to avert it, but we do, very much have a problem at hand. Nip it in the bud/buds! For passiveness to prevail, all must be passive,,,, which they are not.
-------------------- "Don't change horses in midstream, unless you spot one with longer legs" bronzeo oti Jack Davis 1410 Main St Joplin, MO 64801 www.imagemakerart.com jack@imagemakerart.com Posts: 1549 | From: Joplin, MO | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: you keep saying how bad sadamn is and how he mistreats his people and children and since you are so "fiscally conservative" all you need to answer is....it better to spend 300 BILLION on a war, to remove a dictator, who is of no imenet threat to this country....or spend that money HERE FOR ITS PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING MISTREATED by their own govt by not givin AN AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM for its 41 MILLION people?????
Joe, First, your question is a straw dog and built on assumptions.
The US Constitution specifically charges the US government with the duty to defend these shores. It does not require the government to provide a socialist healthcare program.
1) How do you know that the war against Saddam is going to cost $300 Billion?
2) It is "claimed" that 41 million Americans do not have health insurance. Answer me this, how many of them don't have insurance because they choose not to? I was one of them until I reached my 30's.
3) Your arguement is one of moral equivalency. How is it that we spend 42% of revenue on social programs, 19% on non-militaryspending and only 16% on the military and social liberals such as yourself say that we are spending too much on the military and not on socialist programs that have failed or are failing in other countries?
I want to know what you know and your specific source of information that you base that on. I'm not interested in you telling me what you think you know parroting something you've heard someone say.
As for the BB I referenced, its participants consist of Libertarian, Democrats, Greens, Republicans and Independents. If you really want to discuss everything you've brought up, I really encourage you to muster up the courage and give the BB a shot. The only thing I recommend is that your writing be clear, not so convoluted like you've demostrated here. This means - use paragraphs and complete sentences.
----
On edit: Karen, I got your e-mail and responded to it, but it came back as undeliverable.
posted
ok....1st off what is a straw dog? 2nd..300 BILLION for a war, is still unanswered. that what they figure it will cost(done by the same who figure the u.s. budget)and that is a "conservative" figure. it will be more with the occupation of iraq. CLAIMED.....you need to get out more, pay attention to whats going on in your own backyard. and who in their right would not want some kinda health care? most people in this country are one hospital stay from being bankrupt or homeless. i dont see how you can say "fiscally conservative" and then be in favor of this war of money. as the indians used to say "you speak with forked tounge." MORAL? your the moral conservative, not me....i hear the word all the time. but its only used as it fits the conservative needs. as for all the other countries with social programs that failed....iam not asking for that, like i said all i want is health care that is the same as congress and senators have....for the same payments. "I'm not interested in you telling me what you think you know parroting something you've heard someone say." you should reread that statement and apply it to you. all i tell you is what i think, its personel and from the heart and that also is how i type...on the fly as the thoughts come up. yes iam not real wordy, i speak from the heart about things i think are "morally " wrong. again since you see my ramblings as nothing more then "convoluted", it would totally be inept on my part to show up at a bb where i would be nothing more then the dummy who cant type. thank you.
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
1) Look it up. Its time for you to make an effort.
2) I did respond. I asked you how you know that it will cost $300 Billion. State a source please. Considering that the entire 2003 budget for the millitary is $322 billion, you've got my curiosity.
3) National Healthcare. This discussion belongs on another BB. But, I will share this with you.
A) In 2001, 41 million Americans do not have health insurance according to Census records.
B) Of those 41 million, 7.7% of them earn more than $75,000 per year. Why should I, a person who earns half that, be required to help pay for something that they won't do for themselves? As for the rest, how many of them choose not to have insurance?
C) On August 26th, 2002, I became an expert on government-run insurance programs. Rather than looking at the surface, I strongly suggest you read the fine print before you sign on. Trust me on that.
D) Have you ever asked yourself why insurance companies support a government-run insurance program?
Joe, that is all I'm going to say about healthcare. If you want to discuss it any further, you know where I'll be. Any further comments on anything other than the war with Iraq and the protests will be ignored by me.
posted
I had thought of offering up a referee type comment that OP should accept that his views, un-tainted by personalized typing style, are out here for everyone to have access to. Making Glenn agree should not be an objective, as he has his right to his beliefs...
But then, I got to where I feel a more important point I need to make here is this.
Glenn, your cut & pasted comments by Amir Taheri made for interesting reading for a while until I got tired of Amir lumping all the most extreme cases of fanitical & pompous overblown mis-guided "Anti-War" commentary into one long-winded, self-important, heavily exaggerated, & supremely skewed misrepresentation of reality.
I think this thread has, for the most part, avoided the trap of becoming a discussion that serves to divide us. The little slings & jabs between a few, may lean more towards divisiveness then educating, or raising awareness among each other through sharing information & views.
But to me Glenn, Amir's comments added to this thread, where many of your friends & fellow letterheads have intelligently &/or emotionally stated various logical, level-headed, & legitimate anti-war views, SERVES NO GOOD PURPOSE.
Although it is just a link we can click or not & just a "story" we can read or not, & believe or not, and just because you didn't write it Glenn, IMO, it is a slap in the face to anyone here who has spoken out on views contrary to yours.
I won't bother to dredge up war mongering images & commentary of demented kill-crazy extremists, white supremicists, skinhead nazis, or trigger-happy career HAWKS.
Why? because this conversation is among friends whom I respect. Although I am sure there are many hate filled pro-war extremists in the world, whose skewed logic (or lack thereof), & purely ego-driven destructiveness has been documented, ready for my own cut & paste propoganda, they are not here in Letterville, & they are not in this conversation.
This letterville topic is not about US & them it's about US. And I don't mean U.S., I mean all of us on the planet. Sure, Amir's extremists are out there, being part of the problem, & my afore-mentioned extremists are also out there muddying the waters of our global efforts to sift through the conflicts of the world looking for the most humane solution. I just don't think muddying the waters here unnecessarily will serve any purpose. Except maybe to divide us.
posted
I went back to finish reading Amir's words, to make sure I was not out of line in being offended by them.
In fact to clarify my intent above, I am not so much offended by Amir's words as embarrassed by them, as I am sure they are reasonably accurate reporting of some of the less credible qualities of a "movement" when millions of voices are being distilled by a hierarchy of public speakers, & march organizers. The offense taken was in my interpretation that posting Amir's comments was lumping the entire "Anti-war" voice into that of the protest march organizers "thugs" that censored SH's attrocities, to buffer their "anti Blair & Bush" views.
Here is the last line from Amir's story:
quote:Let us hope that when Iraq is liberated, as it soon will be, the world will remember that it was not done in the name of Rev. Jackson, Glenda Jackson, Tony Benn and their companions in a march of shame.
I may be an optimist, & compared to the degree to which many have done their homework, I may be a blind optimist with my head in the sand, but I reserve the right to "hope that when Iraq is liberated, as it soon will be" that it will be done through either a peaceful process, or some lessor form of deadly process then an all-out full scale U.S. led war.
posted
Hey Joe, if you want the same health care congressmen and senators have, at the same cost, here's a suggestion - run for Congress. You certainly would be no less qualified than some current members, and I'm sure your unquestioning loyalty would mean that you'd get along famously with Democratic party leadership.
Just a suggestion.
-------------------- "A wise man concerns himself with the truth, not with what people believe." - Aristotle
Cam Bortz Finest Kind Signs Pondside Iron works 256 S. Broad St. Pawcatuck, Ct. 06379 "Award winning Signs since 1988" Posts: 3051 | From: Pawcatuck,Connecticut USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
You have me at a disadvantage. How is the story a slap in the face? I don't understand.
The purpose of link was to illustrate a comment made earlier.
I question the true intent of the protest organizers. Were they truly "anti-war' or were they "anti-bush/blair".
There are a couple reasons why I question it.
1) If they were anti-war, why didn't they also protest Saddam?
2) If they were anti-war, why didn't they protest Clinton's Operation: Desert Fox?
I also have to look at the organizations who have put together these protests. The primary organizer is InternationalANSWER, an extention of the WWP.
I also have to ask why the same people didn't protest against Saddam when he invaded Kuwait. There has to be a reason. Upon doing some nosing around, I've found that a large majority of "local" protest organizations are extentions of InternationalAnswer. I.A. is a product of the WWP, a pro-Stalinist organization.
So,then I did a little research on the history of Saddam.
At the age of 10, Saddam was raised by his uncle, Khayrallah Tulfa. Tulfa, and Iraqi officer, was arrested and jailed in 1941 for his part in a Nazi-sponsored insurrection. He was a staunch supporter of Nazi Germany and revered Hitler. He was released five years later.
In 1947, Saddam moved in and was raised by Tulfa. At 19, Saddam joined the socialist/nationalist movement Baath party.
I bring all of these things up because I think it is important that if someone is going to be part of the Anti-War or Pro-War groups, they need to know who it is that they are supporting.
It bothers me that few people take the time to learn about what it is they support or the "facts" behind it.
One of the things constantly mentioned was the "huge" number of protesters marching against the war. In San Francisco, we were being told that over 200,000 people were there protesting. Now we find out that the number was closer to 65,000 - 1/3rd the size originally reported. It makes me wonder what the "real" numbers are around the world. We are told that "millions protested." In light of the actual numbers in San Francisco, I have to question the other protests. And if the numbers were intentionally bloated to make the protests seem larger than what they really were, then someone is being dishonest and I have to question what else have they lied about.
quote:How is the story a slap in the face? I don't understand.
The purpose of link was to illustrate a comment made earlier.
I question the true intent of the protest organizers. Were they truly "anti-war' or were they "anti-bush/blair".
Questioning the intent of weather they were truly "anti-war" is no slap, but again theyare not here. Are you questioning my intent?, or numerous other fellow letterheads who are here?
quote: 1) If they were anti-war, why didn't they also protest Saddam?
2) If they were anti-war, why didn't they protest Clinton's Operation: Desert Fox?
I attempted to give you my thoughts on that, but I really think you need to go ask THEM.
quote: I also have to look at the organizations who have put together these protests
Search "Maui Peace Action" to learn who brought 1000 people together last sunday in my neighborhood. (One report said 1500, but I didn't count them) I can tell you they are not commies, & their motives are as pure as the folks here wishing to avert bloodshed if possible.
quote: I bring all of these things up because I think it is important that if someone is going to be part of the Anti-War or Pro-War groups, they need to know who it is that they are supporting.
So, if I hope a solution can be found to disarm SH of WMD's without the "collateral damage" of the lives of a few thousand of America's finest young adult service men & women...
quote: Are you questioning my intent?, or numerous other fellow letterheads who are here?
No, I am not. I specifically said "organizers."
I believe that there are those who have the best of intentions. But, you know what they say about the best of intentions.
----
I know that you believe you are doing the right thing. I know that you believe in what you are supporting just as I believe I know what I'm supporting.
I also know that Saddam has openly thanked everyone in the anti-war protests. Since these protestors did not protest both sides in the looming war, I ask you to consider that, however good your intentions, is it not feesable that these one-sided protests give comfort to Saddam? Is it not possible that this is causing more harm than good?
What I am about to say is not in any way directed at you. It is an attempt to explain my view concerning these protests......
Have you ever heard of the term "useful idiots"? It was a term used by Lenin to describe clueless westerners who aided and abetted his cause. I think that Neville Chamberlain would fit that definition where Hitler is concerned. I believe that groups like InternationalANSWER and Saddam rely on such people.
Since the protestors have been inconsistant in who and what they protest, I have to wonder if the term applies to those individuals who in their hearts are truly against war regardless and blindly follow the organizers.
Again, let me be clear. I am not calling you or anyone else an "idiot". I consider you a friend.
If the protests had been against both sides, I'd have no problem. But, they haven't been.
Please don't misunderstand me. I know that in your heart, you are supporting the US. My fear is that the "action" is having a different effect.
[ February 23, 2003, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: Glenn Taylor ]
I am not a total passivist, in fact I would like Saddam dead! But, at what cost? this is where I waver. If he likes anti-war protests, so what. He knows he is hated. Criminals (& lawyers) all over America enjoy & exploit the "innocent until proven guilty" quality of our justice system, & the long, drawn out, & sometimes unpredictable convicting &/or sentencing process. Criminals may enjoy the fact that even murderers cannot be killed on sight even if caught red-handed. The fact that this "gives comfort" to them does not mean we should change our justice to allow killing them on sight.
posted
Here is another question for my friends in the US. Just who is and how powerful is the group "Global Exchange". From reports I have read they are a far left coalition based in California which has internet links with activist organisations around the world. They are backed by a far more alarming internet coalition of activists led by answer (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism). I find it sad that many innocent people who feel in their heart that by marching they are sending a message to governments when in fact they are propping up far left loony organisations. Has it ever crossed your minds how these marches around the world all coincided on the one weekend. it didn't just happen- it was organised very proffesionally via internet by a nasty gruop working against governments, and they would be very proud of the "Suckers" they drew in.
-------------------- Drane Signs Sunshine Coast Nambour, Qld. dranesigns@bigpond.com Downunder "To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer" Posts: 965 | From: Nambour, Qld. Australia | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
for what it's worth, the 1000 suckers, I mean people in the photo I posted met on Sunday... NOT Saturday, & Not connected to ANSWER.
On the topic of "organizations" we should be aware of here is a link to a writing by William Cooper. Before being assisinated by our government for his outspoken truth-telling of behind the scenes activities of our government, William wrote some very enlightening books. "Behold a pale horse ", is the one that I read & it contains not only many interesting "stories" but much "evidence" & "credentials" to make the stories he tells believable. Enough so, that he was killed to keep him from telling any more
quote: ...most modern secret societies and especially those that practice degrees of initiation, and that is the key, are really one society with one purpose. You may call them whatever you wish--the Order of the Quest, the JASON Society, the Roshaniya, the Qabbalah, the Knights Templar, the Knights of Malta, the Knights of Columbus, the Jesuits, the Masons, the Ancient and Mystical Order of Rosae Crucis, the Illuminati, the Nazi Party, the Communist Party, the Executive Members of the Council on Foreign Relations, The Group, the Brotherhood of the Dragon, the Rosicrucians, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the Open Friendly Secret Society (the Vatican), the Russell Trust, the Skull & Bones, the Scroll & Key, the Order--they are all the same and all work toward the same ultimate goal, a New World Order.
posted
Doug, I think this whole issue is way too broad for the average man in the street to comprehend, myself included. We can only be guided by what we see on TV and read in the papers and then make up our own minds.
[ February 25, 2003, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: david drane ]
-------------------- Drane Signs Sunshine Coast Nambour, Qld. dranesigns@bigpond.com Downunder "To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer" Posts: 965 | From: Nambour, Qld. Australia | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
glenn....as for how you choose to answer my questions....just told me how much like the president you are. if you cant debate an issue then you make me IRRELEVANT.....hehehehehe ok with me. "I'm not interested in you telling me what you think you know parroting something you've heard someone say." your still doing this statement. the future will unfold and we all will have to live with the choices we make glenn. and.....thank you cam.....but my past would make CLINTON look more moral then the pope!!!!!!!
[ February 24, 2003, 01:36 AM: Message edited by: old paint ]
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Don't change horses in midstream, unless you spot one with longer legs" bronzeo oti Jack Davis 1410 Main St Joplin, MO 64801 www.imagemakerart.com jack@imagemakerart.com Posts: 1549 | From: Joplin, MO | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Joe, remember the good old days, before we all agreed not to let these kinds of threads get personal? You've been called FAR worse things than irrelevant!
As for becoming a Congressman, you won't get much scrutiny of past indiscretions at that level. You could always move to Massachusetts and change your name. The fine liberal and progressive intellectual citizens of the Bay State would elect a convicted ax-murdering pedophile if his last name was Kennedy.
-------------------- "A wise man concerns himself with the truth, not with what people believe." - Aristotle
Cam Bortz Finest Kind Signs Pondside Iron works 256 S. Broad St. Pawcatuck, Ct. 06379 "Award winning Signs since 1988" Posts: 3051 | From: Pawcatuck,Connecticut USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
me too jack.....cam thats funny.....also i got comprimizing pictures out there somewhere(if she didnt throw them away).....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've been in the winter wonderland of Pennsylvania at the Edge Heads meet. I am finding a few still butting heads here on this thread - and staying civil.
This link is to a screen saver of quotes I have had rolling on my PC for years. Every now and then I change to something else, and then go back to it; it never takes long and I miss it. One can set the language in which the quotes roll by, for Glenn I suggest to set it to French
The idea to show that I too can post a link came to me when I turned from my plotter and on my screen it said:
" Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof." John Kenneth Galbraith
We have been busy, haven't we!
-------------------- Myra A. Grozinger Signs Limited Winston-Salem, NC
signslimited@triad.rr.com Posts: 1244 | From: Winston-Salem, NC USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
wonder if this will make the 200 POST? and on politics....gee.........
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
200? not unless we got something to say, I don't think.
But since Steve has allowed this thread, & I'm not sure we should expect him to make any kind of new policy opening up any & all political topics posted, I am moving my reply to Cam's post over here:
to Cam's points, my thoughts are:
1. I agree! especially the last sentance: " One way or another ,this has got to be stopped." the implication that there may be more then one way is something I haven't heard from our President lately.
2. I agree again, but to the comment "We...have allowed our government to create a monster...This means we have a moral obligation to correct that mistake." The mistake & the correction lies in how much we allow our government to do, & right now I fear we are on a path to having less influence, not more.
3. To me, this point, made no point. Generalizations will never have much meaning for me. Of the large number of proponants for a peaceful solution, does Cam suggest that there is no satisfactory decision for any of them? or for all of them simultanously? Why so much emphasis on the organizers anyway. Bill Gates helped organize this letterhead meet, are we all politically aligned with him now?
IMO, to imply that any opposition to declaring war on Iraq, constitutes support of a "regime which murders its citizens..." makes an otherwise well thought out & articulate opinion lose all credability.
America's leaders are "protesting" Iraq's proven inability to play nice in the global sandbox.
I feel that... "The motivation of the (Presidential)protest leaders is far deeper than the current situation, the Iraq crisis is an opportunity, not a cause, for these (Presidential)protests. Further, the nature of (America's Presidential administration) and its actions are an established fact. This is a (administration) which... wars with its neighbors, in violation of the moral standards of every enlightened human being."
4.Again I agree. Particularly this comment "The sad fact is, sooner or later there will be a war over Iraq." Even sadder is that there will most likely be further acts of terrorism against America, & there may be possibly preventable attrocities committed by SH, before the world joins to stop "tolerating" Saddam's "increasingly dangerous level of confrontation and instability..."
If a greater majority of the world worked together (with sanctions & witholding trade of chemicals & arms etc.)to disarm or overthrow Saddam, then I believe this could be acomplished with less risk of escalating worldwide terror, as opposed to reducing it. Unfortunantly, it may take more disasters to bring the world together on this. If America acts without the support of much of the world, I fear more harm then good may result.
What do I know? I may be way off on that fear, but right now, thats my fear. If 007 or Jason Bourne, or one of Robert Ludlum's protagonists could rappel under cover of darkness, & wrap a garrote around Saddam's neck, & somehow insert a more ethical government, I'd vote now, but America's ground war in Iraq without global support does not yet have my vote.
posted
my opinion of this "clean up war", is close to what doug is saying in that WE the united states created this dictator, supplied him with CHEMICAL,BIO, AND hard arms to help us gain some control in that region. this all goes back to the 60's -70's. once he became powerful on his own and decided to be the dictator he is....and then thumbed his nose at the u.s. well thats not why we helped set him up. now he needs to be takin out and someone else(who will respect the u.s and their help)will take his place. its called "puppet govt."
look at PAMAMA same story.....its happening in afganastan, boznia, south vietnam...etc etc. yes the u.s is responsible...and the idea of going over and removing sadam TO HELP HIS PEOPLE...is the last thing on the U.S. SHOPPING LIST. also turkey got what they wanted....they will let u.s. troops on their land for 6 months. boy they got paid well.....on the other hand n.korea, firing missels....and this administraion WONT EVEN TALK TO THEM. some great foreign policy that is....
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Win Without War' Releases New Talking Points
(2003-02-25) -- Win Without War, the coalition of organizations planning a "virtual march" on Washington, D.C., this week released a new list of talking points to guide people who call the capitol to protest disarming Iraq through threat-of-force.
The group encourages callers to use their own "heartfelt" words instead of compelling, thought-out reasons. Here is an excerpt from the talking points list:
We can disarm Saddam Hussein without invading Iraq. Despite 12 years of failing to do so, I just feel that we can.
A U.S.-led invasion of Iraq would be the greatest terrorist recruitment tool that Osama bin Laden could imagine. We feel afraid of terrorists and should never do anything that might make them angry.
We can't control war. Experts warn that an attack on Iraq could seriously undermine and destabilize regimes in the region, upsetting monarchs and dictators who also don't like us.
What happens after war? Are we prepared to occupy Iraq for years to come? Think of how long it will take just to de-toxify the WMD landfills, and to give medical treatment to the Iraqi people who have been exposed to chemical and biological agents. Then there's the trials for crimes against humanity. We don't have time for all that.
The administration hasn't convinced our allies or the American public. According to a recent poll: - 59 % of Americans believe the president should give the United Nations more time; - 63% said Washington should not act without the support of its allies; - 87% think 'Joe Millionaire' should have picked the other woman.
Many innocents will be killed or injured, and Saddam doesn't need any help doing that. So let's just allow him to continue killing his own people?
Young Americans will die in battle...War should be the very last resort. First we should pass at least 18 resolutions in the U.N. Security Council, spend almost a year trying to build an international coalition to pressure Saddam to disarm, and continue to take no action even if he doesn't comply with our U.N. resolutions.
posted
well since were on the dumb things.....check this out it was on NBC NIGHTLY NEWS. ST. LOUIS (AP) — The new head of the Southern Baptist Convention has defended and endorsed comments highly critical of Islam by one of the convention's past presidents. The Rev. Jack Graham, elected the convention's president on Tuesday, said the Rev. Jerry Vines' comments about Islam were "accurate." "Islam was founded by Muhammad, a demon-possessed pedophile who had 12 wives — and his last one was a 9-year-old girl. And I will tell you, Allah is not Jehovah either. Jehovah's not going to turn you into a terrorist that'll try to bomb people and take the lives of thousands and thousands of people," Mr. Vines, pastor of First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla., said at a pastors' conference here on Monday. Mr. Graham, of Plano, Texas, said that Mr. Vines' statement "is an accurate statement," and that he would not condemn his colleague. "I will not respond to Dr. Vines' statement, other than to say that anyone who follows any path, who wants to go to heaven, should look carefully at who they're following and what they believe," he said. Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the comments were outrageous. "It's really unfortunate that a top leader in a mainstream Christian church would use such hate-filled and bigoted language in describing the faith of one-fifth of the world's population," Mr. Hooper said. "This is the level of bigotry that requires a clear statement from the top leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention." William Merrell, a spokesman for the SBC Executive Committee, said the comments were made outside the actual meeting, and that it was not the SBC's place to comment. Ingrid Mattson, vice president of the Islamic Society of North America and a professor of Islamic studies at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut, called the comments "medieval." She said statements like this from such high-placed religious leaders can lead to violence against Muslims. Mr. Vines, a former convention president, said on Monday that many of this country's problems can be blamed on the moral relativism championed by proponents of religious pluralism. Pluralists "would have us to believe that Islam is just as good as Christianity, but I'm here to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that Islam is not just as good as Christianity," he said. now this is not ALL RELIGIONS.....your post about the anti war protestors.....doesnt represent them ALL.
-------------------- joe pribish-A SIGN MINT 2811 longleaf Dr. pensacola, fl 32526 850-637-1519 BEWARE THE TRUTH.....YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND Posts: 11582 | From: pensacola, fl. usa | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol...now Glenn, your news item was all hot air..ya know how I know? Everyone knows that the real polls showed that 93% of all Americans thought Joe Millionaire made the RIGHT choice in ZORA
[A letter to the London Observer from Terry Jones Letter to the Observer Sunday January 26, 2003 The Observer
I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really ****ed off with Mr. Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street. Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far I haven't been able to discover what.
I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one.
Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours. They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.
Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.
That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way. Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it?
How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves. Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.
Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come. It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in contrast to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street. ]
I know...simplistic reasoning...but the fact is, charging into a war without world support sets a very (IMHO) dangerous precedent...not to mention I think that it puts America in violation of UN Resolutions (surely there is one in there somewhere that states that member nations may not make war on other countries without the blessing of a majority of member nations)...so then what? will we let UN inspectors in to disarm us if a resolution is passed against our war making? Yup Cam, the nasty worms are really gonna come squirming out of the can now.
-------------------- Karen Sartain,'Pisel' on chat 11699 E Hwy 181 Willcox, Arizona 85643
We are not human beings on a spiritual journey.We are spiritual beings on a human journey."-Stephen Covey Posts: 336 | From: Chiricahua National Monument, Az | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
Remain in Light 2 'Remain In Light' was generally regarded by music critics as being the best Talking Heads album, Remain in light 2 was released today in an effort to, well... remain in the limelight of contemporary thought, without the inconvenience of generating any new thought.
new 'head Glenn was given sole production credit, and also co-wrote (re-wrote) all the words; Today's re-issue featured the new Talking Heads - a multi-personnel group with added parroting, backing vocalists and paste-up artists, who put the "Reply " button to its most tasteful use since earlier today. The difference was noticeable immediately. Talking Heads work had always been monologues in the past, but now there were ten or twelve different supporting vocalists rehashing perspectives on the same issues.
The message was funkier, with more embellishments than before, and 'Remain in Light 2' represented a completely new rehashing approach, rather than an alteration of the old rehashing approach.
The album's most striking track was 'Win Without War' which - with the help of a dramatically simple and effective paste-up work, became the new band's first work.
The single, 'Win Without War' flopped upon release, but may in time become an audience favorite if a striking video is added.
Even without a single new thought, Remain in Light 2 was posted, indicating that Talking Heads felt they were connecting with an audience ready to follow their evolution, and the work was so inventive and influential, it was no wonder.
posted
Your right. Bush shouldn't go to war without support. We all know for a fact that to go to war, He must have 19 European countries supporting him, not 18.
Bush should know that Russia, France and Belgium make for a majority.
Topic Closed
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic