GameTavern

GameTavern (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/index.php)
-   Happy Hour (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Let's Talk Politics (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4520)

gekko 01-28-2003 03:14 PM

Hmm... let's see. The US defeaed the Taliban, and the al Qaeda members ran into Pakistan and are hiding. Now Afghanistan has a new government in place, and we're just around for mostly humanitarian crap. Not something to put in the news, just someone for the damn liberals to ramble on about.

You know, the war with Germany isn't on TV either. Oh ya, we helped establish new governments, and now the country can operate just fine on its own.

Almansurah 01-28-2003 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
Hmm... let's see. The US defeaed the Taliban, and the al Qaeda members ran into Pakistan and are hiding. Now Afghanistan has a new government in place, and we're just around for mostly humanitarian crap. Not something to put in the news, just someone for the damn liberals to ramble on about.

You know, the war with Germany isn't on TV either. Oh ya, we helped establish new governments, and now the country can operate just fine on its own.

You forgot to mention one thing, Guerilla warfare, Afghans aren't that soft a group to allow Americans to roam about, just look at the history of the country. Read the news about what really is happening there, and not just the censored news you listen to.

:rolleyes:

Even in the Jang newspaper [Pakistani newspaper] which is normally censored to a large extent carried many reports of what is really happening in Afghanistan. But it's funny, these reports never tend to be reported out here.

gekko 01-28-2003 03:49 PM

Oh no, there's still armed people in Afghanistan. Please, cry me a river.

The US fought against the Taliban, the Afghan government. They took them out of power, and they established a new government. Afghanistan has guerillas, oh no, whoopie! Welcome to the middle east!

Pakistan covers Afghanistan news, I never would've guessed. I mean, they're only right next to each other, and terrorists must get their news. I mean, what would bin Laden do without his trusty Jang? He would feel so out of touch.

Guess what? News on Pakistan's economy and crime doesn't make it over here either. You know why? IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO ANYONE OUTSIDE THE REGION! But I guess it's asking too much to expect you, of all people, to understand that.

Almansurah 01-28-2003 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
Oh no, there's still armed people in Afghanistan. Please, cry me a river.

The US fought against the Taliban, the Afghan government. They took them out of power, and they established a new government. Afghanistan has guerillas, oh no, whoopie! Welcome to the middle east!

Pakistan covers Afghanistan news, I never would've guessed. I mean, they're only right next to each other, and terrorists must get their news. I mean, what would bin Laden do without his trusty Jang? He would feel so out of touch.

Guess what? News on Pakistan's economy and crime doesn't make it over here either. You know why? IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO ANYONE OUTSIDE THE REGION! But I guess it's asking too much to expect you, of all people, to understand that.


Poor Soul, Another victim of American propaganda.

Please read up on the issues, and if you dont believe in them, up to you.

The Duggler 01-28-2003 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
Shut up, go back to Canada you damn communist.

:sneaky:

hehe

capitalism all the way huh?

North American lifestyle is certainly not an example of living for the rest of the planet. If the entire world population would be living like we are doing here in north america, it would take 5 planet earth to supply us. Yes we might be better than some others, but we are far from perfect, and we should try to fix our own problems before solving everybody else's problems.

gekko 01-28-2003 04:26 PM

You know what the problem is? You're a complete idiot, reading news from Pakistan, now running your little terrorist cell from Europe.

Do the world a favor, shut up.

Rndm_Perfection 01-28-2003 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
You know what the problem is? You're a complete idiot, reading news from Pakistan, now running your little terrorist cell from Europe.

Do the world a favor, shut up.

Calm down...

You're getting completely off-topic and turning a debate into a "My display of the various reasons why many hate the 'average American citizen', parade".


To utilize the timeline:

First, Ranzid gave naive, but appropriate opinion. Then, Joeiss returned with a reasonable reply using a bit of facts and some opinion. Buuut, then came Gekko with his off-topic outburst toward an opposing opinion.

Come on now, debates are supposed to get heated, but all respect and validity seem to be lost when one steps over that line.


But, to give my own replies:

1)
Quote:

Originally posted by Ranzid
Oh and it was a real act of honnor to bomb civilians twice with nukes after a military base was attacked.
Joiess' response was quite true, but I originally was thinking of... the irrelivance. It's not like the statement I highlighted was claiming that any act of war is honorable. Rather, it was showing how; before Hitler was "too big of a threat"; Europe chose not to act upon the actions of the Nazis immediately, and therefor received a dishonorable aura surrounding their nations for a period of time in exchange.

The United States too, however, chose the dishonor of remaining in isolationism. That is, until they were bombed and ol' Roosevelt dropped the bomb in retaliation. Did he think about it? I'd assume so... Why, the threat was immediate. No longer could the States hide from the rest of the world... and he felt they had to act fast.

I think the decision could have been better... but I can't blame the President; it got the job done. Civilians died, women and children too... but not much more happened afterward. While it was not an honorable choice (he definatley wouldn't be a candidate of mine for a medale), I would not see it as a dishonorable act.


2)
Quote:

Originally posted by Almansurah
I wonder what happened to the War in Afghanistan. It suddenly dissapeared of our TV screens, infact it was never much on the news after the initial months.

There is more that meets the eye.


Y'know... I was wondering the same thing. According to what us Americans saw, we just went over, blasted a few rocks and "accidently" a few Canadians, and then all was over and Taliban was crushed under the iron fist of justice. Bah, it couldn't have been that easy. I can't tell why the media is spilling too many plans over the radio waves at one moment... and not willing to share the rest at another.

The media goes crazy with this new "War". It's not just a "war on terrorism"... no, it's a true war this time. I guess it just produces higher ratings than what really happened over in the land of Afghan. *scratches his head* And why, oh why are they reporting such information as the weaponry we plan on using, the location of assumed hidden Iraqi armory, and the alleged attack coordination. I've read up and heard the term "Freedom of the Press" time and time again, but this is a wee bit much.

Then, on the contrary, very little information is given about what happened in the past. Heh, I never thought it'd happen, but the name "bin Laden" has vanished from American Broadcast. I dunno, maybe to find the truth, one must order Al-Jazeera (or the many other translated names of it).


and

Quote:

You forgot to mention one thing, Guerilla warfare, Afghans aren't that soft a group to allow Americans to roam about, just look at the history of the country. Read the news about what really is happening there, and not just the censored news you listen to.

:rolleyes:

Even in the Jang newspaper [Pakistani newspaper] which is normally censored to a large extent carried many reports of what is really happening in Afghanistan. But it's funny, these reports never tend to be reported out here.


Yes... there's already plenty negative thoughts toward American military and politics. Whether or not the States "saved" Afghanistan from the Taliban, I'm sure less than half (and yes, I'm being generous in my assumptions) would want an American militant anywhere near his or her home over in the Middle-East. More reason why I want more than just the Yuppies over at CNN... I want real news that I can "use"!


3) And finally... I know, this is a long post O_o.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ranzid
North American lifestyle is certainly not an example of living for the rest of the planet. If the entire world population would be living like we are doing here in north america, it would take 5 planet earth to supply us. Yes we might be better than some others, but we are far from perfect, and we should try to fix our own problems before solving everybody else's problems.
If everyone in the world was taking up as much space and raw materials as the average Northern American? Yeah, I can see how Earth would be depleted before Pee Wee Herman could think up an original word of the day ("G-rated", that is). "AAaaaaah"

Anywho, if the population of the world STARTED in North America... expanded, and kept the "culture" (or lack-thereof) of Northern American lifestyle, then I think Earth could handle us. First off, technology would be spitting out plenty of new ways to handle resources. The only problem, of course, would be seeing the technology put to use (take, for example, the "fabled" Electric Car). However, I believe that the world population would be small enough to live a comfortable life in the world; families comprised mostly of the annoyingly "cozy" 2.5 children.

Buuut, that's not the case, so let's not dream about it. Equally, the world does not live like North America, so let's not worry about it.


OK, if you had noticed, I underlined my favorite little part in that statement. The old "Me before you" idealism. Personally, I think that's how the world's cogs should turn. "Let the working man earn his pay," I say. But, y'see, it's that attitude that gets so many negative... anti-American attitudes. Because there are many "unfortunate" humans out there born into poor families in Third World Countries, it is a natural act to assume help from those more fortunate.

My basic instinct is to say "Go find a job..." but it's not that easy.


Meh, since I have nowhere else to go with this thought, I'll end this post here. Beware though... if you catch my attention with a comment, I might dare reply again! *gasps*


AFTER EDIT:
Oh, I just needed to add this last bit in... food for thought, y'know.

Quote:

"He has poisoned our water for ever. Nixon will be remembered as a classic case of a smart man ****ting in his own nest, but he also **** in our nest and that was the crime that history will burn on his memory as a brand. By disgracing and degrading the presidency of the United States, by fleeing the White House like a diseased cur, Richard Nixon broke the heart of the American Dream..."
Kinda irrelivant... but I just liked it.

gekko 01-28-2003 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rndm_Perfection
Buuut, then came Gekko with his off-topic outburst toward an opposing opinion.
Want to explain how it was off-topic? Wait, don't bother, it wasn't. Of all things, inappropriate, not called for, etc., it was hardly off-topic. I choose to "speak" about him, rather than ban him.

The WWII thing was not dishonorable, be careful how you use that word. The United States, and even Europe were not wrong in their decision to wait things out. Looking back on it, it may have been a bad decision. But looking back on it, we know of everything that Nazi Germany did. At that time, they had no clue, they couldn't see the future. They didn't want war, and Germany wasn't this big superpower who was killing off entire races of people and trying to take over the world. And we weren't alive back then, we don't know what it was like. It may have turned out to be the wrong decision, but it wasn't dishonorable.

Just don't make the same mistake twice.

And on Afghanistan, they kinda handed over Kabul. It wasn't a long, drawn-out war. This wasn't WWII, and a lot of our attacks were done from the air. And recently, not much has happened. Battle happened very recently, one happened last spring, and there hasn't been too much for a while now. You guys are expecting 24/7 coverage from the front lines.

Quote:

The media goes crazy with this new "War". It's not just a "war on terrorism"... no, it's a true war this time. I guess it just produces higher ratings than what really happened over in the land of Afghan.
We have troops in Afghanistan, if anything breaks out, they fight, its over. A war with Iraq currently has 92,000 troops deployed, and is currently a huge issue in the US, and it's having a major effect on the economy. Major issue, with new information coming regularely, versus Afghanistan war which has small battles happening, nothing really ground breaking, just doing the dirty work. Which do you think Americans want to hear?

Quote:

And why, oh why are they reporting such information as the weaponry we plan on using, the location of assumed hidden Iraqi armory, and the alleged attack coordination.
Because the media is too ****ing stupid to realize that lives are comprimised by their ****ing ratings.

Quote:

"Freedom of the Press"
That's relating to publishing what you want, of course, there are some restrictions. I think part of the blame should be put on our government for revealing this information to the greedy journalists. Unless that is, they're feeding them lies like they have before. I find that funny :)

Quote:

but the name "bin Laden" has vanished from American Broadcast.
The man has vanished too. Hope he dies in that cave.

Quote:

I dunno, maybe to find the truth, one must order Al-Jazeera (or the many other translated names of it).
Al-Jazeera? Truth? ROFLMGDMFAO! :lol: Good one.

Quote:

Yes... there's already plenty negative thoughts toward American military and politics.
You're right, we need more pro-America movements.

Quote:

Whether or not the States "saved" Afghanistan from the Taliban
No man (or woman may be more appropriate) in their right mind would want to live under Taliban rule. Then again, look how many over there are brainwashed.

Professor S 01-28-2003 08:19 PM

Almansurah, you constantly talk about the "real" news that all of us poor Americans never get to see because it is constantly filtered through the propaganda that is the American media. Yeah... RIGHT. Have you ever listened to the American media? Do you realize that if any major outlet was to find out about attrocities committed in Afghanistan OUR media would be the first to report it. Why? It equals ratings and we have the right of free speech, unlike most of the countries that you are so quick to defend. You speak out against America without realizing that if you were to reverse your opinions and put yourself in Iraq, you would most likely be DEAD now. Yes, America truly is the great satan. :rolleyes:

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Please enlighten us with the "truth".

As for the crack about dropping 2 nuclear weapons against Japan... DAMN STRAIGHT. A ground war against Japan would have cost us far toom much in the way of American blood, we warned Japan and even showed them what would happen if they didn't surrender, they didn't and we dropped the bomb.

The fact that we had to drop another bomb more than justifies that action in my mind. And Ranzid, I alsoi notice you failed to mention the Japanese torture camps during the war where hundreds of American soldeirs were uthlessly killed. But I wouldn't expect you to, its not in your character.

gekko 01-28-2003 10:13 PM

Damn, someone give this guy a medal!

Strangler for President! :usa:

The Duggler 01-29-2003 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rndm_Perfection
Buuut, that's not the case, so let's not dream about it. Equally, the world does not live like North America, so let's not worry about it.
But isn't that what you want? Look, if a country is communist, or doesn't want to do things YOUR way then you won't do business with it or you will try to convert it to capitalism.

Quote:

Originally posted by Rndm_Perfection
First off, technology would be spitting out plenty of new ways to handle resources
Why aren't we doing it now? You see, our way of living don't give a **** about ressources, it's all about money. We'll do something allright but that's when there will be no more ressources. And then you can use all the technology you want to handle it, but if there is none to handle then we're ****ed.

Quote:

Originally posted by Rndm_Perfection
Because there are many "unfortunate" humans out there born into poor families in Third World Countries, it is a natural act to assume help from those more fortunate.
And what do we do with them? We exploit them as cheap labor and say that we are helping them by giving them jobs.


And The Stangler, I won't start arguing with you for "who has done the worst to whom" because it will never end. But here's a few things that Americans should be proud of:

Source: www.bowlingforcolumbine.com

1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator.

1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians killed.

1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem.

1963-1975: American military kills 4 million civilians in Southeast Asia.

September 11, 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered.

1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed.

1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion.

1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras". 30,000 Nicaraguans die.

1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians.

1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to help them kill Iraqis.

1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as President of Panama) disobeys orders from Washington. U.S. invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3,000 Panamanian civilian casualties

1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from U.S.

1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait.

1998: Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan. Factory turns out to be making aspirin.

1991 to present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. estimates 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.

2000-01: U.S. gives Taliban-ruled Afghanistan $245 million in "aid".

September 11, 2001: Osama Bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to murder 3,000 people.

Joeiss 01-29-2003 10:18 AM

Is that all true?

Professor S 01-29-2003 01:08 PM

Ranzid, the fact that you would quote Michal Moore as legitimate mews says it all. He is the next coming of Leni Reifenstahl. He pushes one libera view without ever attemping to show an alternative view or extenuating circumstances withour making sure he has the last word through commentary or creative editing. He has an agenda and makes sure that his agenda is completed no matter what information or opinions he conveniently omits from his propoganda. Its called yellow journalism and its very obvious.

The facts you mentioned may be true in his eyes, but don't think that they tell the whole story.

The Duggler 01-29-2003 01:32 PM

Quote:

The facts you mentioned may be true in his eyes, but don't think that they tell the whole story
The same could be said for everything you said about Iraq and the other US oppenents in this thread, don't you think?

Joeiss 01-29-2003 01:40 PM

Oh, Miacheal Moore... That guy is funny.

Almansurah 01-29-2003 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
You know what the problem is? You're a complete idiot, reading news from Pakistan, now running your little terrorist cell from Europe.

Do the world a favor, shut up.

When I stated I read the Pakistani newspapers, that was when I visited there, and the news I saw there was very different from the news I saw here in UK. It never stated that everything was peaceful as it seems to you, and if you think it's gonna be all peaceful in Afghanistan, then you're very wrong, research the history of Afghanistan, and you will find out what kind of people they are. The news was far from complete, infact it was only dedicated a minute little space in the newspaper [around the back pages] to try prevent people from seeing it, but at the end the truth always comes out anyways.......

Rndm_Perfection, thanks for your reply. You made good points.

Quote:

Then, on the contrary, very little information is given about what happened in the past. Heh, I never thought it'd happen, but the name "bin Laden" has vanished from American Broadcast. I dunno, maybe to find the truth, one must order Al-Jazeera (or the many other translated names of it).
lol. First the aim was to find Bin Laden, and 'smoke him out of his cave', but then it was stated it doesn't matter even if the leadership isn't caught. Quite a strange turn of events.

Quote:

And on Afghanistan, they kinda handed over Kabul. It wasn't a long, drawn-out war. This wasn't WWII, and a lot of our attacks were done from the air. And recently, not much has happened. Battle happened very recently, one happened last spring, and there hasn't been too much for a while now. You guys are expecting 24/7 coverage from the front lines.
Yes they handed over Kabul, and the other areas. The Soviets also had quick control over the whole of Afghanistan, i.e. occupied it fully, but look at what happened to them. And yes, you're right a lot of attacks were done from the air, but you're wrong about one thing, that nothing is happening, a guerilla war is going on, with hit and run tactics, read up on reliable news.

The Russians are keenly following the America progress in Afghanistan, and well they're finding that more or less, Americans are doing the same or worse as the Russians were during their initial years of the invasion.

Quote:

Originally posted by The Strangler
Almansurah, you constantly talk about the "real" news that all of us poor Americans never get to see because it is constantly filtered through the propaganda that is the American media. Yeah... RIGHT. Have you ever listened to the American media? Do you realize that if any major outlet was to find out about attrocities committed in Afghanistan OUR media would be the first to report it. Why? It equals ratings and we have the right of free speech, unlike most of the countries that you are so quick to defend. You speak out against America without realizing that if you were to reverse your opinions and put yourself in Iraq, you would most likely be DEAD now. Yes, America truly is the great satan. :rolleyes:

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Please enlighten us with the "truth".


Yes, I do listen to the American media.

Down here in UK, we get to watch Fox News, CNN, and sometimes NBC. And there's also CNBC available.

Yeh Yeh about free speech, that is just a joke. If only the world cares about free speech that much. There is so much propaganda on your news stations, and even on many news stations, I could just keep on listing it.

Professor S 01-29-2003 05:37 PM

Well lets see... CNN leans to the left, MSNBC is basically liberal, and Fox leans to the right. Oh yes, propoganda abounds. Please try and make valid points and back them up with facts and example.

Just saying our news is all propoganda doesn't do much to prove your case. Using Pakistani news and the like does even less. Why not try the Daily Babel in Iraq ( I LOVE the play on words with that name). I mean its only run by Saddam's kid, so it must be true.

Calling free speech a joke? LOL!! Your logic skills, or lack there of, continue to astound me. Do you even realize that you are using your rights to free speech right now? Do you realize that in other countries you would be put to death for merely mentioning a dissenting opinion? The contradictions between your actions and rhetoric are mind boggling. Free speec a joke? No.

You are the joke.

Joeiss 01-29-2003 05:49 PM

After September 11th, I remember reading in the paper that a couple writers in America got fired because of some negative things that they said about America in the newspapers a couple days after the attacks. I know this is a little example, but when times get rough, some of us have to watch what we say, unless we want to get fired.

gekko 01-29-2003 06:04 PM

Free speech doesn't mean you can write whatever you want, for whatever you want. If you're from Pakistan and thinks the US is the cause of all evil in this world, you can freely say that in the US. If you're Iraq and say Saddam is a fool, you will be killed.

In a job, you are restricted in what you can say. You think a journalist can just say what he wants? Think again, the reputation of the entire company is not going to be lost because someone chooses to go anti-America. He has rules to follow, if he breaks them, he gets fired. That has nothing to do with free speech. No one is stopping them from starting their own newspaper and writing whatever they want.

ZebraRampage 01-29-2003 06:30 PM

You people are so funny sometimes. This debate is so crazy.

Joeiss 01-29-2003 07:35 PM

OK gekko.


And did you guys see the briefing today? There was some combat in Afganistan. No US soldiers died, and they captured a Taliban guy too.

gekko 01-29-2003 07:41 PM

That was actually yesterday :p

Professor S 01-29-2003 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeiss
OK gekko.


And did you guys see the briefing today? There was some combat in Afganistan. No US soldiers died, and they captured a Taliban guy too.

So are you saying that report was propoganda or something? I'm not accusing you, I'm just not sure what you're getting at.

Rndm_Perfection 01-29-2003 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeiss
OK gekko.


And did you guys see the briefing today? There was some combat in Afganistan. No US soldiers died, and they captured a Taliban guy too.

That was mentioned, eh? *thinks* There truly must not be much going on there, if that's the best the media could dig up for ratings.

Joeiss 01-29-2003 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Strangler
So are you saying that report was propoganda or something? I'm not accusing you, I'm just not sure what you're getting at.

LOL. No man, I just thought that was new news, and you guys are talking about war and stuff, so I said it. LOL./



AND IT IS PROPOGANDA!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH... RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!









;)

Professor S 01-29-2003 10:29 PM

LOL! Ok, I just wanted to make sure. If that was propoganda, its the worst I've ever seen. I mean, at least the Daily Babel talks about "rivers of blood" and such. NOW THATS SOME GOOD PROPOGANDA!

gekko 01-29-2003 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rndm_Perfection
That was mentioned, eh? *thinks* There truly must not be much going on there, if that's the best the media could dig up for ratings.
It's the biggest battle since Operation Anaconda last spring.

Almansurah 02-01-2003 08:57 AM

Many things are happening in Afghanistan....things which dont get discussed openly in the media here.

Infact, there was a Black down which 'fell down' due to mechanical reasons stated on CNN on the 30th, a day before this, islamic news stated a helicopter was down....and this came out.

Its an amazing wonder how, after USA invaded Afghanistan, all of a sudden the rate of aircraft crashes due to reasons like weather conditions, or malfunctioining equipment, huan error, all of a sudden the rate has skyrocketed and gone high.

What happened? Did all the US Army engineers and maintenance crews go on vacation or what?

gekko 02-02-2003 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Almansurah
What happened? Did all the US Army engineers and maintenance crews go on vacation or what?
The beauty of unintelligence.

To continue out Iraq topic. Iraq now threatens to use suicide bombers in the US if we attack.

Quote:

Iraq threatens U.S. with 'suicide attackers'

Iraqi vice president predicts 'a fire in the whole region'

BERLIN, Germany (CNN) -- Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan told a German newsmagazine published Saturday that Iraq is prepared to deploy "thousands of suicide attackers" against the United States if Iraq is bombed.

That report came one day after President Bush said a new United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing war would be welcome, but not necessary if Iraq fails to prove it has disarmed itself of weapons of mass destruction. He also said the issue needs to be solved in "weeks, not months."

In an interview published Saturday on the Web site of Der Spiegel, Ramadan was asked how long Iraq would be able "to fight the biggest military machine in the world."

"As long as it takes," he responded, "but why don't you ask the other side how long they will be able to endure. We will be happy when they start their air bombardments against our ground troops. They will meet hard resistance everywhere.

"We don't have long-distance missiles or many bombers, but we will deploy thousands of suicide attackers ... the martyrs," Ramadan said. "... Those are our new weapons and they will not only be deployed within Iraq.

"The Arab people will stand by the people of Iraq in the fight for its independence and freedom. This will be a fire in the whole region."

On Friday, Bush addressed the threat of attacks against the United States after meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Bush said the attacks of September 11, 2001 showed that containment of terrorism was not an appropriate policy "because we now recognize that oceans no longer protect us; that we're vulnerable to attack.

"And the worst form of attack could come through somebody acquiring weapons of mass destruction and using them on the American people [or] on our friends in Great Britain."

Bush said U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell will present evidence to the Security Council on Wednesday that the Iraqi regime has ties to al Qaeda.

"Saddam Hussein would like nothing more than to use a terrorist network to attack and to kill and leave no fingerprints behind," Bush said.

Before the meeting with Bush, Blair told CNN that he supported a second U.N. resolution before launching military action. Bush said he would agree if it would put additional pressure on Iraq.

"It would be welcomed if it is yet another signal that we are intent upon disarming Saddam Hussein," Bush said.

The Bush administration is debating how much intelligence from electronic intercepts the secretary of state should disclose Wednesday when he tries to convince the Security Council that Iraq is not complying with disarmament resolutions.

U.S. officials had said previously that Powell was to present such information. The debate centers on how to reveal enough information to make the U.S. case while still protecting methods and sources of intelligence.
Only a terrorist nation would threaten to use terrorism against another country. And we found the checks Iraq wrote to Suicide Bombers in Palestine.

Best way to get rid of our nuclear weapons? Use them on Iraq! :usa:

Bond 02-02-2003 12:27 PM

I'm kind of wondering why Mr. Almansurah lives in the UK, rather than other countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia that he seems so connected to. Maybe it has something to do with how they treat their citizens? Their form of government? Your rights in those countries? Just food for thought...

gekko 02-03-2003 09:23 AM

Saddam bodyguard fled. Good man!
 
Quote:

?Inside? details about Iraq

by Gordon Thomas
globe-intel.net

Saddam's senior bodyguard has fled from Iraq with details of Saddam's secret arsenal. His revelations come the day the UN inspectors report to the Security Council whether they have found a smoking gun that will trigger war. Abu Hamdi Mahmoud has provided a list of sites that so far the UN inspectors have not visited.

They include:

An underground chemical weapons facility at the southern end of the Jadray Peninsula in Baghdad.

A Scud assembly area near Ramadi. The missiles come from North Korea.

Two underground bunkers in Iraq's Western desert. These contain bio weapons.

William Tierney, a former UN weapons inspector who has continued to gather information on Saddam's arsenal, described Mahmoud's information as "the smoking gun. Once the inspectors go to where Mahmoud has pointed them, then it's all over for Saddam".

Tierney still has high level contacts in Washington that reach into the White House. He said that the information we publish today on Mahmoud's revelations "checks out, absolutely checks out".

Tierney believes it is "inevitable" that we will go to war. Globe-Intel has independently obtained documents smuggled out of Iraq which show he goes have weapons of mass destruction that have eluded discovery by UN inspectors.

The weapons include motorized underwater mines capable of creeping along the sea bed and then surfacing beneath a battleship or carrier. Each mine is filled with chemicals that upon explosion can envelop the ship in a deadly cloud of poison. The documents show that the mines and other weapons of mass destruction have been secretly developed at sites the UN inspectors have also not visited.

These are:

Al-Qaqa's State Establishment. Sixty miles south of Baghdad, it has produced what the documents describe as "self-detonating precise guided missiles". Near State Establishment. It is on the western side of the Baghdad-Mosul road. It has produced "artillery rounds and other machined metal parts" for the mines. The mines have been m achine-finished at Hateen State Establishment, to the north of Baghdad. In the past weeks, they have been moved to Basra - ready to be launched against the naval armada assembling in the Gulf.

One document reveals:

"The mines use a special camera to distinguish the target above it. The mines then stop under the target. Once in place they produce chemical materials which generates huge amounts of oxygen that guides the mine to the surface. When the amount of oxygen reaches a specific level, the pressure of the oxygen triggers the detonator which results in a tremendous explosion".

The documents reveal that test firings of the mine were carried out on Lake Tharthar on June 5 last year. The tests are described as "completely successful". Mahmoud's revelations have also enabled both George Bush and Tony Blair to take an even stronger stand against antiwar protesters when they meet in Washington this week.

Mahmoud was a member of the elitist unit charged with protecting Saddam. It is called the Murasiq Qun - the "Inner Circle". He was known as "The Gatekeeper". Mahmoud is the muscular Saddam lookalike who is always photographed standing either behind Saddam when he is seated - or to his left when on the move. He was trained to spot the slightest threat to Saddam. To deal with it, he had a throwing knife up his right sleeve.

"In any threat my first job was to throw myself over Saddam to protect his body and then use my knife", he has told his Mossad debriefers.

Now he's at the top of Saddam's kill list. But there is no way Saddam's own assassination unit - the Hamaya Khasa - can get to Mahmoud. He is now protected by a team of Israeli agents. For weeks he was in secret negotiation with a Mossad agent in Baghdad. With the promise he could not be charged with any crimes he committed on behalf of Saddam, and he would be given a new identity - including having his appearance changed by surgery - Mahmoud agreed to desert. Last week he was being debriefed in a high security base in Israel's Negev Desert.

Ariel Sharon, the country's hard-line prime minister has so far only allowed snippets of Mahmoud's sensational claims to be shared with the CIA and MI6. But a source close to Sharon says he wants to use the revelations when, as expected, he returns to power after the country's election (tomorrow, Monday). "Sharon intends to shatter the growing anti-war movement. He plans to call all those European leaders who are wavering to let them know how Saddam has continued to fool Hans Blix and his inspectors", said the source.

Mahmoud's revelations include:

Locations of five bunkers buried beneath purposely made sand dunes.

Stockpiled in the bunkers are warheads identical to the empty shell cases found two weeks ago by the UN inspectors. Mahmoud has claimed those shells were on their way to be refilled and stored in the bunkers.

A portion of a transcript from his debriefing includes:

"Saddam's weapons of mass destruction are also concealed in a tunnel complex deep beneath the sewers of Baghdad and in an underground complex in Ouja, to the north of Tikrit. The complex was build five years ago with help from Chinese engineers.

"The actual entrance to the site is through a house in Tikrit. It is the home of one of Saddam's cousins. The entrance is over half a mile from where the weapons are stored". Mahmoud has also provided the first really detailed insights into how Saddam lives and is protected. Mahmoud says since the Gulf War there have been nine assassination attempts on Saddam. The most recent was in February last year.

(Let's not search houses :rolleyes: )

Mahmoud has described how he was selected. "I was on gate duty at one of Saddam's palaces. One night he arrived in a 10-car convoy. I checked all the vehicles and Saddam stepped out of one car and asked why I inspected them all and not just his. I told him I was not sure in which car he was travelling and that it was in his honour that I checked all the cars. He replied, 'from now on you will be at my side all the time'. He also doubled my salary".

Joining the "Inner Circle", Mahmoud found himself in a world far removed from the life of the starving population of Iraq. He received the finest food and had the best weapons. He had access to top level intelligence - so that he could help to plan Saddam's protection.

In another excerpt from his debriefing, Mahmoud boasts: "I was inside the innermost circle where Saddam eats and sleeps. I was among the handful of bodyguards closest to him". The bodyguard has given a rare glimpse of what life is like with Saddam.

"Very few people are allowed close to Saddam. Many of the TV images you see of him were taken years ago. Most people now only speak to him over the phone. He usually calls them. If they have to call him back with information he wants, it is passed through his sons, Quasy or Tariq Aziz.

"All those close to him have codes, which they use to access the outer circle. But even they can only come so close to Saddam before there is a cut-off point - the Inner Circle. Even Tariq Aziz is checked to see if he is carrying weapons. Saddam knows fortunes are being offered to have him assassinated", Mahmoud has revealed.

The most protected of all Saddam's palaces is the Qesser al-Quwwa Sitta'shar in Tikrit - close to his birthplace. Mahmoud has described how the palace has four main entrances - and has the latest Chinese-manufactured surveillance equipment.

"There are sensors and matchbox sized cameras everywhere. There are doors which can only be opened by placing your face on a key pad.

"The palace has a number of escape routes that are outside the palace walls. At each escape point there are cars. A car is always parked at each exit. No one knows what exit Saddam will use. On the way to one he can change his mind and go to another. I have know him change his mind several times over thirty feet.

"Saddam's own living quarters in the palace are a labyrinth of doors. To even enter the private sanctum requires having the separate codes to open four doors. On the reverse side of each door is a monitor which shows the Special Guard on duty who is entering".

Saddam's paranoia has increased after his son, Uday, narrowly escaped assassination. He is now wheelchair bound.

To avoid even his own bodyguards being tempted to kill him, Saddam himself is, according to Mahmoud, a walking arsenal. "He has concealed guns all over his body. He also has panic buttons to press if he even suspects somebody is about to attack him", the former bodyguard has said.

Israeli intelligence sources have hinted that part of the deal with Mahmoud was to smuggle out his family from Iraq. Mossad have done this before. At the start of Saddam's reign of terror they persuaded an Iraqi pilot to fly his Russian Mirage to Israel - after Mossad had spirited his wife and children there.

manasecret 02-03-2003 03:42 PM

Re: Saddam bodyguard fled. Good man!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by gekko
?Inside? details about Iraq

by Gordon Thomas
globe-intel.net

...

Can we trust this source, gekko? Nothing about this has appeared on CNN.com or FoxNews.com.

Professor S 02-03-2003 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bond
I'm kind of wondering why Mr. Almansurah lives in the UK, rather than other countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia that he seems so connected to. Maybe it has something to do with how they treat their citizens? Their form of government? Your rights in those countries? Just food for thought...
The impression that I have is that if a nation is run by Islam or those who are Islamic, Almansurah will defend them no matter what their policies. Thats just my impression, though.

The Duggler 02-03-2003 04:10 PM

The Strangler just made me realize something. It's very obvious that I was standing against the US in this thread, but you have to understand that I'm in no way defending Islam or any other country (Irak) I'm neutral. I'm just against the way the US is trying to control (at least economically) the rest of the world.

gekko 02-03-2003 04:13 PM

Re: Re: Saddam bodyguard fled. Good man!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by manasecret
Can we trust this source, gekko? Nothing about this has appeared on CNN.com or FoxNews.com.
It's appeared a couple places today.

Professor S 02-03-2003 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ranzid
The Strangler just made me realize something. It's very obvious that I was standing against the US in this thread, but you have to understand that I'm in no way defending Islam or any other country (Irak) I'm neutral. I'm just against the way the US is trying to control (at least economically) the rest of the world.
There is no problem with defending Islam as 99% of Muslims are most likely wonderful people, but defending horrific people and regimes merely because they are Islamic is flawed reasoning. This is what I believe is Almansurah's leaning.

The Germanator 02-03-2003 06:38 PM

well, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) gave a speech at my school today. He claimed he spent the most time with the president of any other senator, and I basically agreed with his stance on the war. He said that we need support from the rest of the world, otherwise the backlash will be more than we can handle. When we try to re-build the government of Iraq, we don't just want American soldiers there, we want Turkish soldiers, German soliders, etc. He also disagreed with the idea of a pre-emptive strike, as other countries may take advantage of a doctrine like that i.e India nuking Pakistan for what they think would be future harm)...I don't know much about politics, so I probably don't remember all of the important things he said, but he had some good things to say...And is there some big deal on Thursday? He said that some more evidence of Iraq hiding weapons was going to come out on Thursday, some taped phone messages or something...anyway, this probably doesn't even make sense, it was an assembly at 8:00 on Monday! It's hard to pay attention!

He also told an amusing anecdote about president Bush, apparently Bush didn't even know that Sweden had an army recently, despite them having the 2nd most powerful in Europe...He continued to argue that Bush wasn't untintelligent...just uninformed, which not many of us bought. ha...this isn't trying to diss Bush, just Biden's argument wasn't all that endearing.

Bond 02-03-2003 06:52 PM

And look what Sadaam Hussein has done against Muslims:
Quote:

The Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988) resulted in an estimated 1 million Muslim casualties, dead and wounded. Iranian casualties were estimated at between 450,000 and 730,00. Iraqi casualties were estimated at between 150,000 and 340,000.

During the 1988 Anfal campaign in Iraqi Kurdistan, Iraqi troops were responsible for the death or disappearance of up to 100,000 Muslim Kurds.

On March 16, 1988, Iraqi troops killed up to 5,000 and injured some 10,000 Muslim Kurds in a single day in a chemical weapon attack on the town of Halabja in northern Iraq.

The 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait led to the death of some 1,000 Kuwaiti Muslim nationals.

605 prisoners of war remain unaccounted for since 1991, including nationals of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, India, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Bahrain, and Oman.

Between 3 and 4 million Muslim Iraqis have abandoned their homes and sought refuge outside of Iraq.

Many hundreds of thousands of Iraq's Muslims have been displaced internally. Estimates of 900,000 may be conservative. In the north, towns and villages were systematically destroyed by the regime during the war with Iran. Further south, non-Arabs in the region of Kirkuk have been relocated to other parts of the Iraq and Arabs induced to occupy their homes and lands. And in the south, between 300,000 and 500,000 Muslim citizens have been forced from their traditional homes in Iraq's marsh lands.

Thousands of Muslims have been arbitrarily arrested, ill-treated, tortured and executed in Iraq in recent years. Because of their suspected opposition political activities, or because they are relatives of people sought by the authorities.

Sources: US Committee for Refugees Report 2002
Also, if you were wondering of some of the forms of torture that Iraq uses, here you go:
Quote:

Eye gouging

Piercing of hands with electric drill

Suspension from the ceiling

Electric shock

Sexual abuse
Victims, particularly women, have been raped and sexually abused, including reports of broken bottles being forced into the victim's anus.

"Falaga"
Victims are forced to lie face down and are then beaten on the soles of their feet with a cable, often losing consciousness.

Other physical torture
Extinguishing cigarettes on various parts of the body, extraction of fingernails and toenails and beatings with canes, whips, hose pipes and metal rods are common.

Mock executions

Acid baths

I would also like you to know that male inmates in the Iraqi jails are beaten daily, and women are also raped daily by their guards.

Source: Foreign & Commonwealth Office, London
Now maybe we all know why Almansurah lives in a Democratic country rather than one of the friendly and generous Islamic states.

And I still would like this question answered by Mr. Almansurah:

How does Islam address democracy, women's rights, and people's freedom to choose their own destiny?

gekko 02-03-2003 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Germanator (D-DE)
Problem #1. Oh, thinking out loud, sorry :D

Quote:

He claimed he spent the most time with the president of any other senator, and I basically agreed with his stance on the war.
Great claim, can he back it up? Probably not.

Quote:

He said that we need support from the rest of the world, otherwise the backlash will be more than we can handle.
We have support, leave it to a Democrat to keep forgetting that everytime he opens his mouth.

Quote:

When we try to re-build the government of Iraq, we don't just want American soldiers there, we want Turkish soldiers, German soliders, etc.
You mean, we do the fighting, then afterwards the cowards decide to come in with the hopes to benefit from this new country? If they don't help from now on, I say leave them out of it. Last thing I want to see is France getting an oil deal.

Quote:

He also disagreed with the idea of a pre-emptive strike
Of course, he's a democrat. Unless they're covering their ass because they want to become President, they oppose the idea.

Quote:

as other countries may take advantage of a doctrine like that i.e India nuking Pakistan for what they think would be future harm)
Who said anything about nuking anyone? That's another political debate in itself.

Quote:

I don't know much about politics, so I probably don't remember all of the important things he said
Don't worry, there was none. It was just a democratic anti-war speech, hoping to get some more people marching in the anti-war protests. By the way, many of those are actually set up by people sent here from Iraq. Agree or disagree, but don't march, it only hurts the country.

Quote:

And is there some big deal on Thursday?
Wednesday I believe. Powell will adress the United Nations Security Council and show evidence against Iraq. Satellite photos, and tapes of officials saying "I can't believe they missed that," "don't tell them that," "move that," and other things showing them trying to hide from inspectors.

Quote:

He continued to argue that Bush wasn't untintelligent...
... like Bill Clinton...

Quote:

which not many of us bought.
He graduated from Yale, did he not?

The Germanator 02-03-2003 07:13 PM

Yeah, well I'm not going to argue anything because I'm uninformed (like Bush I guess. ;-) But, he wasn't all that anti-war. He didn't want to rush into to it too quickly I guess, but it's not like he was utterly opposed. Anyway, he may be a presidential candidate, so watch out.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GameTavern