28.03.2024, 17:23 UhrDeutsch | English
Hallo Gast [ Registrierung | Anmelden ]

Neues Thema eröffnen   Neue Antwort erstellen
Vorheriges Thema anzeigen Druckerfreundliche Version Einloggen, um private Nachrichten zu lesen Nächstes Thema anzeigen
Autor Nachricht
Gowator
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 15.07.2006, 16:02 Uhr



Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2004
Beiträge: 275
Wohnort: Paris-France
piper: your analysis seems to be missing one fact.
If the Iraqi's had WMD why didn't they use them?
Given the large numbers of Iraqi's willing to die to remove Americans and the coalition the vast armaments that you say are hidden why didn't a single Baathist republican guard use a single one.

Having spent a fair amount of time in Iraq in more peaceful times (and mostly travelling with the Republican guard as an 'escort') I find it hard to imagine not a single until firing a missile, rocket or shell with a WMD warhead if they were so readily available.

Zitat:
first, you werent there to witness ANYTHING, Kill anything, watch people die in your arms or watch lunchtime crowd get fragged, You weren't there PERIOD, and the biggest people that complain about the "scene" the most are people who have NO CLUE, because they weren't there.


Again this only opens more questions. We are told that most Iraqi's want the Americans yet a considerable number seem intent on killing them.
Its not possible to walk round a city like Bhagdad with an RPG or SAM and not be seen so many people most at least sympathise enough to not say anything.
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen Yahoo Messenger  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
piper
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 15.07.2006, 16:27 Uhr
Team Member
Team Member


Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
Gowator hat folgendes geschrieben::
piper: your analysis seems to be missing one fact.
If the Iraqi's had WMD why didn't they use them?
Given the large numbers of Iraqi's willing to die to remove Americans and the coalition the vast armaments that you say are hidden why didn't a single Baathist republican guard use a single one.

Having spent a fair amount of time in Iraq in more peaceful times (and mostly travelling with the Republican guard as an 'escort') I find it hard to imagine not a single until firing a missile, rocket or shell with a WMD warhead if they were so readily available.

Zitat:
first, you werent there to witness ANYTHING, Kill anything, watch people die in your arms or watch lunchtime crowd get fragged, You weren't there PERIOD, and the biggest people that complain about the "scene" the most are people who have NO CLUE, because they weren't there.


Again this only opens more questions. We are told that most Iraqi's want the Americans yet a considerable number seem intent on killing them.
Its not possible to walk round a city like Bhagdad with an RPG or SAM and not be seen so many people most at least sympathise enough to not say anything.


I may ask, WHY would you use a WMD of that "type" in a WAR in your homeland ?????

"Its not possible to walk round a city like Bhagdad with an RPG or SAM and not be seen so many people most at least sympathise enough to not say anything"

Really, (I assume you are talking "green" or better known as international zone) can you please tell me more on "Ontime Charlie" which happens everyday at the same time (hence the name) and maybe tell me How many times a day.


"Again this only opens more questions. We are told that most Iraqi's want the Americans yet a considerable number seem intent on killing them".

Yeah, well, that usually does happen when a war goes on and the empire is forced out, I can't believe that question came up, I know around 4th grade social studies text book you can find the answer to that, and much more. I really don't think many people understand or try to understand what a war is. It certainly ain't all about oil, which actually makes me laugh outloud.

_________________
h2's d-u script
h2's rdiff-backup script
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
michael7
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 15.07.2006, 19:18 Uhr



Anmeldung: 24. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 354
Wohnort: Nashville
While I find this thread disturbing (like watching good friends beat each other up), I feel compelled to make this point. I do not believe that the Bush Administration invaded Iraq because of oil, at least not directly. Here's an article written by E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post which sums up my opinion of their intent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01666.html

This theory of changing the political dynamic in the Middle East by creating a democracy in its midst comes from Dr. Bernard Lewis, noted author and professor. A number of Bush's policy wonks are a great admirers of Dr. Lewis.

Having ready access to the oil of a friendly democracy would have been a welcome consequence and of course, if there were no oil fields in the Middle East, it would have never happened anyway. Still, I don't think it's correct to view Bush's motives in a purely cynical fashion, although some is certainly warranted.

_________________
Debian Social Contract
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Gowator
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 15.07.2006, 23:33 Uhr



Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2004
Beiträge: 275
Wohnort: Paris-France
piper hat folgendes geschrieben::
WHY would you use a WMD of that "type" in a WAR in your homeland ?????

Ok a bit pedantic but why would I use it?
To escape, to create a diversion .....?
However the question is not so much why I would use it, I don't have any
and i would have moral qualms about using it anyway and I rather suppose you would too.
.
but why would Sadaam and the Baathist loyalists use it?

Same reason they used it in the past in their homeland.
Which is already demonstrated in many instances.

Which is the poiunt at which we go full circle again .... do we believe the republican guard all hated Saadam? etc. etc. I know for a fact that many did not and would die for the regime. Nor did significant numbers have any compunction of genocide of the marsh arabs or other dissident groups which is not to say they were all bad people but that enough of them had no problem massacring a viliage or using chemical weapons.

Zitat:

It certainly ain't all about oil, which actually makes me laugh outloud.

Oil is simply a currency. Whereby it might not be all about oil it is all about what oil buys which is power. Nearly 2000 yrs ago Giaus Julius Caesar invaded Gaul and then Britian while sending back proclamations about bringing civilisation to them when the currency was gold and he owed a lot to Crassus and Pompey in both gold and loyalty for support for his election as consul. 2000 yrs later Bush invades Iraq on the same pretext while bringing oil and commerce to those who backed him.

Crassus wanted the rights to the mint and Pompey the rights to his daughter. Both did well and both received excluisive contracts.

Cheyney amongst others (to numerous to mention) has also done quite well and received exclusive contracts .. though obviously his chairmanship of Halliburton is suspended.

Cheyney deals in oil field services, Crassus dealt in markets ...
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen Yahoo Messenger  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Swynndla
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 04:56 Uhr



Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
I just watched another Noam Chomsky documentary :
"On Just War Theory and the Invasion of Iraq" - video recording of a talk delivered at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, C-SPAN2 (April 20, 2006).

The 78 year old professor talked about the theory and was pretty light on them, but then at the question and answer session, he shocked them by saying (and I'm mostly quoting ... and sorry about any spelling mistakes etc):

Zitat:
Right now Saddam Hussein is on trail for human rights violations he committed in 1982 (ie he was behind the killing of 150 or so Shiites). But 1982 was also the year that Ronald Reagan dropped Iraq from the list of states supporting terrorism so that the US could start providing him with extensive aid - including military aid - including means to develop biological and chemical weapons and missiles and nuclear weapons, and Donald Rumsfeld shortly after went to Iraq to firm up the agreement with Saddam.

The Next charge against Saddam Hussein - the next one that's going to come along - it's been announced - it's a much more serious crime - the atrocities against the Kurds in 1987/1988 killing probably 100,000 people - the US didn't object - in fact the Reagan administration blocked efforts in congress even to protest against it. Furthermore, the the support for Saddam by the US increased and continued. In fact Saddam was given an extra-ordinary privilege - remarkable - he got away with attacking a US navel vessel killing 37 US soldiers/seamen in 1987.

In 1989 Iraqi nuclear engineers were invited to the United States to take part in a conference in Portland Oregon in which they were trained in how to develop weapons of mass destruction.
[...]
Yes the human rights violations were horrendous, but does that have anything to do with the invasion of Iraq? No, nothing.


Noam Chomsky says this is all in the literature if anyone wants to look these things up.

I think it's ironic that the US is charging Saddam for these things when the US was supporting Saddam at the time.
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
jackiebrown
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 05:04 Uhr



Anmeldung: 13. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 732
Wohnort: Texas
It's amazing how famous Noam Chomsky has become.

And lets say this is true. What would this change about us being in the war now?

Plenty of countries have gone to war against a country they build or supplied.

_________________
Always acknowledge a fault. This will throw those in authority off their guard and give you an opportunity to commit more.
Mark Twain
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
eco2geek
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 06:18 Uhr



Anmeldung: 02. Mai 2004
Beiträge: 471
Wohnort: Portland, OR, USA
michael7 hat folgendes geschrieben::
While I find this thread disturbing (like watching good friends beat each other up), I feel compelled to make this point. I do not believe that the Bush Administration invaded Iraq because of oil, at least not directly.

Sorry to make you uncomfortable. The tone of this argument is about like what goes on all the time in the blogosphere. Sometimes nastier, sometimes friendlier.

In any case, I agree with you. I think Bush's number one priority, that he couldn't but wanted to do the very day he stepped into the White House, was to get rid of Hussein. The 9/11 attack gave him the opportunity, even though he still had to cherry-pick the intelligence to "sell" it to the public. (Link: Intelligence, Policy,and the War in Iraq, Foreign Affairs magazine)

He was looking for an easy military victory (which he largely got) and a chance to say, "Look, I established a pro-US democracy in the Middle East." (Pro-US being the important part.) Bush won the war, but he's having a really hard time winning the peace -- in fact, he's fucked it up completely -- which is precisely the reason why the war in Iraq was a bad idea in the first place.

"Armchair quarterback" or "been there," doesn't matter: There is no debate over whether there were WMDs in Iraq. There weren't:

David Kay, first leader of the "Iraq Survey Group" (ISG), the group tasked with finding WMDs (Link):
Zitat:
I don't think they existed. What everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War, and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the nineties.


The findings of the ISG itself (Link):
Zitat:
While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.


Statement from President Bush, 10/7/04 (Charles Duelfer took over the ISG after David Kay resigned) (Link):
Zitat:
The chief weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, has now issued a comprehensive report that confirms the earlier conclusion of David Kay that Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there.


Here's a page full of links to articles and commentary about the search for WMDs.

The statement that "I was in Iraq, therefore I know there were WMDs; you weren't, so how would you know" is a fallacy. Probably more than one, in fact.
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Cathbard
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 06:42 Uhr
Artist
Artist


Anmeldung: 11. Aug 2005
Beiträge: 451
Wohnort: Australia
Why argue about whether Iraq had WMD's or not? Why is America allowed to have them but nobody else? How can they condemn somebody for having a small proportion of the same thing they have? I don't understand.

_________________
Cathbard.com
The real pirates by Courtney Love
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
bluewater
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 07:06 Uhr
Team Member
Team Member


Anmeldung: 04. Apr 2006
Beiträge: 153
Wohnort: Melbourne, Australia
I could've sworn thar this Topic was about MS and the Fine the EU imposed..

Slash Dot for all this other stuff maybe a better Forum

_________________
Kanotix Easter RC4 on a dual boot P4 and a production box Desktop KDE::
Kanotix 2006 Easter RC4 on a P2 and Production Box , Desktop KDE::
Kanotix EasterRC4 on a MMX 199Mhz lappy
and a Production Box, Desktop ICEWM::
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Cathbard
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 16.07.2006, 07:18 Uhr
Artist
Artist


Anmeldung: 11. Aug 2005
Beiträge: 451
Wohnort: Australia
The two are related Bluewater. They are both about world domination by the US. Both have the same agenda and that is forcing their way upon the world and the two work hand in glove.
However I don't want to say much more because it is causing too much friction between Kanotix comrades and it is starting to disturb me also.

_________________
Cathbard.com
The real pirates by Courtney Love
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
jackiebrown
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 23.07.2006, 01:01 Uhr



Anmeldung: 13. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 732
Wohnort: Texas
I am confused. After watching, reading and listening all week to various middle eastern ambassadors, embassy officials, scholars, etc--all seem to be clamoring for the US to come and broker some sort of peace between Israel and Hezbala. Lots of criticism for us not being there in the middle of this most recent but never ending hate scenario immediately--at the same time not wanting us to interfere and criticising every thing we do. I for one would prefer to stay out of it and let the middle east take care of its own problem. Iraq is what it is and we must stay but we really don't need to take on any more. It costs us lives, money, reputation and only buys us hatred and ridicule. I am tired of reading and hearing people say that they hate the US but not the "people" of the US--what a cop out! The people are what makes this country what it is.
PS. The US publicly asked the Europeans and the UN to manage the Darfur refugee and genocide problem over a year ago and it seems that they are still "taking care" of it with their never ending and mostly impotent "diplomacy" route. I am pretty sure that the hundreds of thousands of refugees pray daily for the "talking" to end and the help to start.

_________________
Always acknowledge a fault. This will throw those in authority off their guard and give you an opportunity to commit more.
Mark Twain
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
monkymind
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 23.07.2006, 01:36 Uhr



Anmeldung: 21. Aug 2004
Beiträge: 123

jackiebrown hat folgendes geschrieben::
I am confused. After watching, reading and listening all week to various middle eastern ambassadors, embassy officials, scholars, etc--all seem to be clamoring for the US to come and broker some sort of peace between Israel and Hezbala. Lots of criticism for us not being there in the middle of this most recent but never ending hate scenario immediately--at the same time not wanting us to interfere and criticising every thing we do. I for one would prefer to stay out of it and let the middle east take care of its own problem.


Well ........ it looks like the US is not staying out of it or trying to find a peaceful solution. Instead:

U.S. Speeds Up Bomb Delivery for the Israelis
WASHINGTON, July 21 — The Bush administration is rushing a delivery of precision-guided bombs to Israel, which requested the expedited shipment last week after beginning its air campaign against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, American officials said Friday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/world ... r=homepage


Zuletzt bearbeitet von monkymind am 23.07.2006, 06:24 Uhr, insgesamt ein Mal bearbeitet
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
h2
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 23.07.2006, 05:34 Uhr



Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005

The us play a major role in funding israel us assistance to israel.

So they have more influence, or should. I found a nice heavily pro israeli site so you wouldn't think that I was posting leftist propaganda or anything.

Knowing at least some of the facts isn't a bad idea. Reading what the other side has to say is also not a bad idea.

The administration here did not want that nyc story to come out by the way, that does not make them happy campers, but it's out, nothing they can do about it.

However, I think it's safe to say that this is way too far off topic of this thread, best to let this one die, there's lots of information out there on the web, anyone who wants to learn about this stuff can easily do so, so if they don't want to learn about it that's their own choice.
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
bluewater
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 23.07.2006, 12:00 Uhr
Team Member
Team Member


Anmeldung: 04. Apr 2006
Beiträge: 153
Wohnort: Melbourne, Australia
the topic is


Microsoft fine announced

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5171126.stm

all this geopolitical war discusion is for slashdot/blogs/letters to the editor/your member of parliament/your congress person/your senator/

In case any of you have forgotten this is "Kanotix Linux" not 'The Ministry of Geopolitical War - Discussion Forum- of the Year 2006"

_________________
Kanotix Easter RC4 on a dual boot P4 and a production box Desktop KDE::
Kanotix 2006 Easter RC4 on a P2 and Production Box , Desktop KDE::
Kanotix EasterRC4 on a MMX 199Mhz lappy
and a Production Box, Desktop ICEWM::
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Swynndla
Titel:   BeitragVerfasst am: 23.07.2006, 21:49 Uhr



Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
slam hat folgendes geschrieben::
Politics and Economics have a massive impact on what we do here, so I would say "Anything Goes" ist the right place to talk about it. We try to protect this place as a free haven for free speech - as long as it does not lead to substantial problems for the Kanotix project.

Exactly!
 
 Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden  
Antworten mit Zitat Nach oben
Beiträge vom vorherigen Thema anzeigen:     
Gehe zu:  
Alle Zeiten sind GMT + 1 Stunde
Neues Thema eröffnen   Neue Antwort erstellen
Vorheriges Thema anzeigen Druckerfreundliche Version Einloggen, um private Nachrichten zu lesen Nächstes Thema anzeigen
PNphpBB2 © 2003-2007 
 
Deutsch | English
Logos and trademarks are the property of their respective owners, comments are property of their posters, the rest is © 2004 - 2006 by Jörg Schirottke (Kano).
Consult Impressum and Legal Terms for details. Kanotix is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
This CMS is powered by PostNuke, all themes used at this site are released under the GNU/GPL license. designed and hosted by w3you. Our web server is running on Kanotix64-2006.