Israel and Syria

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Imperialism?  I hardly think ousting a despot who everybody and I mean EVERYBODY hated and that did have an active WMD program or removing a regime that had blood all over its hands from 9-11 is imperialism. 

 

Isreal, Imperialistic?  These people have been fighting for their lives for 55 years totally surrounded by enemies.  What kind of imperialism is that?

Imperialism? Yes. The Iraqi Council wanting power and we won't give it up? Why would we? Halliburton has a $680 million contract AND they get reimbursed for costs. So they have no incentive to do the job efficiently, do the job well or even do the job fast because they get guaranteed that money.

 

This paired with the documents from March 2001 of Cheney's energy council meeting where they show the oil fields of Iraq carved up between Halliburton, Bechtel and the other companies receiving no compete contracts right now in Iraq. Then, we can calculate in Rumsfeld drawing out plans for an invasion/bombing campaign of Iraq the day of 9/11 despite their being no evidence showing that. [And hey let's not get into the FBI and BBC's investigation showing that at leats 4 of the men who were named as 9/11 hijackers are actually alive and have no connection to Al Qaeda]

 

The war was brought to us in September, right near the midterm elections, because, according to a White House advisor "You don't market new products in August."

 

And since when does the American public care about the Iraqi people? We've endorsed the near daily bombing campaign that the US and UK has committed since the end of the 1st Gulf War and administrations since Bush 1 has fully endorsed the sanctions against the Iraqi people that, at a conservative estimate, killed over a half million children [not even counting adults] And I'm still wondering how toilet paper is a weapon [it was banned by the sanctions amongst combs and other common items like that] The UN received the most resignations of this event because EVERY attempt to condemn or change these was met by a US veto on the Security Council. We fully endorsed Saddam throughout the 80s and recently, Cheney and Halliburton tried to lobby the US to cut down on the sanctions against Iraq solely for the purpose of getting Halliburton better deals...downplaying the "evildoer" status and making him look like a lovely guy so his pockets could get lined just a little bit more. Then after elected, Saddam is a "horrible despot" in Cheney's eyes? Yeah, that's a good chuckle.

 

The first things we fixed in Iraq were not refigeration plants or water pumps...the f***ing oil pumps. Kinda shows where our priorities are.

 

And Saddam was involved in 9/11??? BWHAHAHAHAHAHA That's rich. That was really funny. Let's not forget that even the CIA is saying that they have no evidence showing that which has been confirmed by lots of other intelligence services. And if you are referring to the story that Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in the Prague, that story has been debunked as lies. And an active WMD program? Most people like to cite Hussein Kamal for proof that Iraq has WMD as he was heavily involved in Iraqi politics and the regime there, but unfortunately for the pro-war people, if you read his testimony, it actually shows that all the weapons were destroyed and there is no weapons program. Even the new weapons inspectors can't find anything. And the drones that Bush railed about in rallying support for the war have been found and they do not deliver nerve agents or chemical weapons. Oops? The nuclear materials from Africa? Whoops that was a lie too. The evidence for going to war has more holes than swiss cheese because it is based on lies and using incomplete evidence from men like Hussein Kamal. And this isn't even discussing the over 95% rate of disassembly that Iraq had after Gulf War I in destroying their weapons. And just a question...let's say that Saddam did have WMD. Don't you think that a full scale invasion of his country where he could very well be killed and lose all power is a dire enough situation for him to use WMD if he had them?

 

As for Israel, imperialism is the new wall that they are putting up. Oh yeah, I forgot the media name is "security fence" but it's over 20 ft. tall and concrete. Some fence. And Nuke if you want to talk about violators of international law that need to be dealt with like you said about Saddam, did you know that Israel is #1 in violating UN resolutions yet every time they are condemned, the US stops it with a veto vote? The facts are that both sides are committing atrocities for the simple fact that 55 years ago, the Palestinian's land was in effect, stolen and the world put the Jews there. But then the invasions into Palestinian territories and occupying them, the wall, etc. that is imperialism that people are objecting to. Think of the Palestinians too. As my good friend Adam [i posted his column in here] says "Think of the Palestinians. They needed a Gandhi and all they got was an Arafat." It's a sad state of affairs because both Israel and Palestine have war criminals running their countries and I think that has a lot to do with the knee-jerk reaction to violence on both sides. Read the column I posted in here and you'll have a much better idea of where I stand on the issue. [although I dunno how feasible the concrete monument idea he has would work, ]

 

And Saddam a threat to other countries? HAHAHA. Yeah too bad other countries that bordered with him and were in the nearby area didn't consider him a threat at all. Please, don't try to make a 3rd world dictator into some huge military power.

 

"There were the Elite Republican Guard and the military talked about them in all these hushed tones like they were f***ing boogeymen. 12 foot tall desert warriors that s*** bullets. Well after 2 months of continuous carpet bombing and not one peep out of them, they became simply the Republican guard...not nearly as Elite as we first led you to believe. Then after we rolled over Iraq, they went from the Elite Republican Guard to the Republican Guard to the Republicans are making s*** s*** up about there being a guard in the first place."

--Bill Hicks on Gulf War I

[LowerCaseRepublican]

And BTW, Nuke...the reason I am so critical is that I don't like seeing 323+ American troops getting murdered when our government based everything off of lies and distortions. And let's not forget the 1400+ wounded and the unofficial body counts of Iraqi civilians that are into the thousands now.

[Rex Kickass]

Any opinions on Isreal's attack on Syria?

 

PA PreEmption doctrine would have been exercised by Israel in the early 1980s by a bombing of an Iraqi Nuclear reactor.

Thank god they did that or Saddam Hussein would have destroyed Isreal, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia would be provinces of Iraq and we would be paying 10 bucks a gallon for regular unleaded.

A little history lesson Nuke.

 

The invasion of Kuwait was the only "invading" maneuver that Hussein actually made. His 1980 attack on Iran was of a "pre-emptive" nature because he viewed the state of Iran as a grave threat to Iraqi security. Sound familiar? He didn't want to control Iran, just create a buffer zone, not dissimilar to what Israel did in Lebanon slightly later in the decade.

 

Also, although Kuwait controls a lot of oil reserves, the US does not buy oil from Kuwait. It did, however, have an interest in protecting Saudi Arabia. Whether Hussein had his eye on that state, I couldn't answer.

 

And Israel would not have been destroyed by Iraq... at least not before Iraq was dust too. Most political scientists agree that Israel has a sizable and undeclared Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons capacity.

 

Ain't noone with clean hands in that region. They all a bit touched in the head.