Ok. I'm back.

Yes we are but think about this, how come the Washington D.C. isn't a crater right now? Because since the attacks we have upped the active military and intelligence personal in our own country. That's why. How many terrorist plots have been foiled so far? One big one is the "Dirty Bomb" plot that was recently foiled. And how many more have they stopped that we don't know, and never will know about. There is way more going on behind the scenes than you or I will ever know.

-Lesson learned: Just because everything looks fine, doesn't mean that someone isn't planning an attack.

Now even a witress in Georgia (or Alabama, not exactly sure on the state) can trigger a massive response to the slightest lead. Even though it turned out to be nothing, what if it was a plan for an attack.

The difference between the Bush administration and the Clinton one, Clinton waited until everything happened before he acted, Bush is trying to prevent things from happening now.

As for the 5-8 buff guys taking over a plane, unarmed, 130 passengers (fighting for their lives mind you) versus 8, thoses odds tend to favor the passengers don't you think?

Why Sometimes Evidence Can't Be Revealed
 

Bill G. (and others),

I have read all the posts here and respect everyone's opinion about the situation in the Middle East. I will not debate the "should we attack / not attack", because it is too long a debate to do via this forum. If anyone wants to debate it in person with me; I will be at Great Lakes, Arizona, Midwest, and Nationals. I will make one comment. I served as an officer in the USAF after attending the US Air Force Academy and have witnessed many covert operations. You may not trust GW, but if we have information then it was most likely obtained covertly and revealing the information could put very brave US service persons in grave danger. Many individuals not too much older than you are putting their life on the lines right now for you and for me. Please do not minimize the importance of their job just because you do not like who our President is.

-Paul

Argh.
 

Where shall I begin?

First, I want to say that I <3 Bill. My general observations regarding this thread have been that, almost entirely, those who oppose action against Iraq, or oppose the United States’ aggressive foreign policy regarding this matter have written considerably more thorough, detailed posts than those who do not. I’d really like to see that people who agree with the nation’s actions and intent provided explanations at length, especially rather than spewing forth any further cursory appraisals of the situation. To put it bluntly, explain yourselves better. You’re doing an awful job so far.

Now, onto the bigger fish.

Tjrage_25 writes, “And ‘for the record,’ everything bad so far that has happened to the Bush administration was set in place during the Clinton administration (i.e.: Enron, 9/11, economic recession). Clinton screwed up this country big time, it's just now showing the effects.”

Aside from the general consensus that any statement that begins ‘everything bad’ is categorically false, and the pitfalls that lie within your choice of words, your example show a myopic view of history. To suggest that the world, or even the United States, was peachy keen until the moment Bill Clinton took office is ludicrous, and that’s not based on historical fact, world political events, or economic factors; it’s based on common sense. September 11, 2001’s events may have been in planning during the years of the Clinton administration, for example, but that means little. Similarly, they were also in planning during Dubya’s administration, yet you seem unwilling to place any blame on him and his administration for their horrible oversight. The ‘economic recession,’ is, whether you like it or not, a symptom of a capitalist economy. It’s cyclical by nature, and happens sooner or later. It’s unrealistic to expect continued rising and expanding prosperity in our economic system. It’s impossible, even. If you want to blame Clinton, go right ahead, but I think that it’s a case of bad timing coupled with the unfortunate events of last year.

Weedie replied, “I couldn't of said it better, and that is exactly what I meant by saying, "We have been sitting around watching for too long,” and I’m no longer certain how this relates to American foreign policy with regard to Iraq. If you want to debate how corporate leaders take advantage of the system, or, if you’d like to hypothesize about the four hundred million different things that might’ve happened differently to prevent crazed lunatics from flying planes into building, go right ahead. Don’t do it here.

Weedie continues, “Beginning with Bush Sr., we did not take action,” seemingly negating her previous assertion that the ills of the world are the sole responsibility of Bill Clinton. “The U.S. has just sat around and 'observed',” she continues. “We have been taken advantage of. Then the Clinton Administration just caused more problems, and we are now seeing the effects of them. It's time for America to stand up for itself, and take action!”

Take action against whom, precisely? It seems to me that your dissatisfaction lies with Bill Clinton, and not with the Iraqi people. I also do not see when or how the United States had been taken advantage of, either. It’s our fault for not arranging treatises in the time after the Gulf War that established an accepted and internationally recognized protocol for curbing aggressive actions or rearmament on the part of Iraq. Who’s responsible for that? Your beloved Bush Sr., I’m afraid. Kristina hit this right on the head.

Wysiwyg later wrote, “I'm saying appeasement sucks. Why would anyone even want to have him in power makes no sense to me.” Well, appeasement generally does suck. Appeasement strategies have, on the whole, been largely unsuccessful. However, more often than not, such strategies are adopted by nation’s who are in no real position to wage war. They buy time for mobilization and a ramp up of a production, and little else.

As this relates to Iraq, I don’t see inaction as appeasement at all. Rather, the United States is suffering the consequences of its own inaction in the time after the Gulf War, as I stated previously. If there was serious concern regarding Iraq’s military potential, steps should’ve been taken previously to ensure that it could be kept in check. Now, however, I think that it’s politically important that the United States be humble and maintain accordance with the wishes of the global bodies represented in the United Nations. As others have already mentioned, to strike out on our own sets a dangerous precedent that, in my opinion, many people have not given enough thought.

He continues, “There is something called the news. There job is to coroborate the information from the government and make sure its true. There has been credible news stories that are trickling in that show that he needs to been booted.” What news organizations do you patronize, exactly? Media conglomerates such as Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc., report very little actual ‘news.’ Their programming is driven by advertising dollars, just like any other television network, and their success depends entirely on maintaining viewership. It’s all nothing more than a clever deception that, sadly, has many people fooled. They provide you with an overwhelmingly pro-American visage of world politics, feed you one or two dissenters on occasion to legitimize themselves, and bow down to the almighty power of popular opinion. There are, of course, some news organizations that still maintain a reputation for fair, unbiased reporting, such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, but, by and large, television and internet news organizations do very, very little to find the truth. The truth is often unpopular and popularity sells soft drinks.

As an experiment, find something that you’re unusually knowledgeable about, and research related news articles. I’m certain that you’ll find more than a handful of inaccuracies. For example, in my case, I know a great deal about amusement parks and roller coasters, and both have been in the news quite a bit this summer. The data presented in these stories is often 100% false, fabricated, or not at all related to the story. There is very, very little that is truth in these instances. Sometimes, it’s as simple as naming rides that don’t exist at the parks that are the focus of investigation. Other times, it’s blatant misuse of statistics to further a solely political agenda. It’s a fun home game. Give it a try.

Finally, Joel Glidden writes, “Saddam has a gun pointed at our collective heads, people.”

Saddam Hussein is a megalomaniacal dictator. I don’t think that anyone, anywhere is arguing that he should remain in power. Rather, I think that some have the humility to question their place in determining the fate of others. Some, obviously, don’t, and possess a frightening propensity to force their will upon others.

Given Hussein’s hunger for power, I have very little that makes me believe he has a gun pointed at my head. See, people like that get off on the power. They live for it. They want immortality, and they want absolute control over everything.

Should Hussein decide one day that the most recent episode of the PowerPuff Girls really pissed him off, and now would be a good time to destroy America, as you seem to paint the picture, there’s a very obvious reason why he wouldn’t do it. If he does, the entire world will, as some of you have so eloquently put it, make Iraq into little more than a crater. Hussein, and the rest of the world, for that matter, knows that to attack America is a suicide pact. Why would someone who loves power so much relinquish it, and his life, so easily?

Now, imagine a more probable scenario in which the United States takes action against Iraq because, the arrogant, ignorant President of the United States views their distaste of Big Macs and Elvis Presley as a direct threat on his male privilege. What you have, in reality, is nothing more than an international pissing contest, to put it bluntly; and it’s a contest I’d rather not be involved in.

One day, when the United States bombs Iraq, especially without the support of the United Nations, Hussein will retaliate. Right now, the world agrees that there is no legitimacy in the existence of Iraq’s military arsenal. However, the moment someone takes action against Iraq, it sends the message to Hussein that he is viewed as a viable and deadly threat, and it legitimizes his military by giving him a fair opportunity to use it. Without our attack, Iraq will continue to stockpile weapons of mass destruction. With our attack, Iraq will use them, and it will get away with it because the actions of the United States will create a rift within the United Nations. On one hand, they will recognize the importance of stopping Iraq from further attacking the United States and other nations. On the other hand, to step in and take action against Iraq in response to whatever situation develops after an American attack would sanction our actions in violation of global desire, and further stroke George W. Bush’s ego.

Honestly, I don’t understand why anyone would trust the fate of a nation to someone who can’t speak English, but that’s just me.

Continued. . .

Argh Strikes Back
 

. . . Part 2.


Joel Glidden goes on, “You may not feel 'served' by GW's actions. But you had better be thankful that he's protecting you. You give me the impression you'd be unwilling to do that for yourself.”

First, do not dare tell me how to exercise my rights as an American. George W. Bush is not protecting me by any means. In fact, I’m utterly terrified that he’s going to get me killed. If it’s not Iraq, I’m sure I could line up dozens of other nations, religious groups, and individuals who’d jump at the chance to kill me – George W. Bush included. Our government, in all of its infallible glory, does nothing to protect me. I have to protect myself from domestic attackers – in the form of bigots, fanatics, and court justices – so forgive me if I am a bit skeptical about my government’s ability to protect me from foreign invaders.

Like I stated previously, my knowledge of Middle Eastern politics is limited, and so my reactions to this thread reflect upon my growing distaste for the ignorant masses of Americans who, in my opinion, are getting too comfortable with their lives. They don’t know what it’s like to be persecuted, hated, or discriminated against. They don’t understand what it means to have your views ignored, your life devalued, and your culture destroyed. Eventually, this lack of respect for the past, for other human beings, and for different belief system (social, political, or religious) will destroy this country. It’s just a matter of time.

This thread, sadly, has given me little hope that things are going to change. Again, people have given me very little evidence that shows they’re doing anything more than following the party line, and the evidence that people continue to feel entitled to their way of life is staggering. The United States has many virtues, and I don’t mean to paint a wholly negative picture of this country, but I work with what I am given. I would very much appreciate that anyone who takes the time to reply to this also take the time thoroughly explain your feelings and provide documents and examples that give credit to your point of view. All those who’re only going to reply with the “Blow the bastards up ‘cause it’s my God given right to drive an 18 cylinder gas-guzzling, soccer team hauling SUV” fodder need not bother, thanks. You’re wasting my time.

but how can you say it was foiled when it never happened? remember those three muslim men in florida who were "foiled", even though they were just driving to a medical school to get more training? i hardly call that a terrorist plot that has been foiled. just because everyone says someone was going to make a dirty bomb and blow it up doesn't mean they actually were going to.

also, to bill -

no, you're not putting words in my mouth. yes, i dislike war, you could even say i loathe it. but, if america was attacked, i would do what i could to help. i doubt i could make it through boot camp, mostly because i think too much. but then again, i'm not the personality type that could go and shoot a gun and kill someone. i don't mind blood, i love camping out (hell, i'm a boy scout), but i seriously doubt my ability to go and shoot someone who is the same as me, only different in ideology. oh well, i'm rambling again.

Re: Argh.
 

Awww...Michael and Bill are defintely my boys in this thread, even if they beat me to all the points I want to make. Could it be the liberalizing affect of college? who knows...their arguments just make sense to me.

Re: Re: Argh.
 

On the record, I would like to second that motion.

By the way, Michael, Ian, Bill (sometimes), and myself can be found in Tigerbolt.

We'll be here all week. *rimshot*

shush jim, dont' give away our secret hideout! :D

If Saddam were to attack Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Israel, or any other country for that matter it would only be a matter of days before American/British/etc. airpower leveled the power structure of Iraq, along with quite a few Iraqi civilians. No doubt about it. The only lives we’d be risking would be the lives of the pilots flying through the air. If Iraq were to fire missiles into Israel (biological/nuclear/or otherwise), I wouldn’t be surprised if Israel unilaterally unleashed its arsenal against Iraq in response. Israel has a history of striking back at foreign aggression with two or more times the initial force of its foe.

Your ignorance is painful to witness. You are correct, we don’t like to ruin our environment here in California, Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. We love our beautiful land out here. But not building power plants, nuclear reactors, or drilling for oil didn’t lead California into its fake “electricity shortage.” It was the work of former Republican Governor, Pete Wilson as well as companies like Enron and the lack of aid from President Bush. Former Governor Pete Wilson helped push a deregulation bill through CA legislature in the early 1990’s. This bill paved the way for private companies like Enron to charge whatever they deemed “market value” was, without any governmental oversight. Enron and others began to constrict their supplies and choke off our electricity causing rolling blackouts while raising the prices of electricity by up to 800% (yes, eight hundred percent) in some places, and caused quite a bit of damage to the high tech industry, as well as other industries in CA. There was no shortage of electricity, Enron was just bending the hose like a kid would do while his/her parents would be trying to water the lawn. President Bush had the ability to call off his buddies at Enron, and force them to back off of the price gouging. Instead, he (Bush) decided to let capitalism run its course. The masses were swindled, as is what often happens in capitalist societies, but I’ll refrain from going any farther with this train of thought. If you want to continue this conversation, start another thread. But I’m offended that a person ~3,000 miles away is trying to tell me that he knows more about CA than I do. How dare you, sir.

Not all flights are full. I’ve been on quite a few Southwest flights which have only had a handful of people. Some with maybe only 30 people maximum, and quite a few being elderly. I think that it’s still very easy to take over a plane if someone wanted to do it. Even if there were 130 passengers on a flight… what’s stopping Al Queda from putting 50 terrorists on a flight? It’s not like they lack the funds or the people to do it.

Thanks Michael. You make some wonderful points in your posts. /me applauds

Thanks, once again, for the kind words Kristina.

On another note… huge sigh of relief finding out that I didn’t misinterpret Ian’s comments. A tout a l’heure.

-Bill

Your right, our air power would crush anything that moves, unfortunately even our military has not designed a better weapon than the GI. Anyway you look at it if Iraq invades or trys anything with their military it will not end until American ground troops take it house by house. Even in Afghanistan we needed the Northern Alliance on the ground to take back the country and those special forces men to guide those bombs. Then those ground troops are vulnerable to all those weapons that you seem not to care if he has.

So, production stays the same, but demand increases several fold and that doesn't cause a shortage?

Sorry Im getting a weeeee bit off topic. Im sorry but these statement makes me laugh out loud. You can take two or three guys that know how to fight and take 5-8 buff guys out very quickly.Errr.. 50 muslim dudes on an airplane???? Doesn't that scream out terrorist attack? Guys can we stop making up stupid scenerios.Just a little fact there is money the kurds and the iraqi's are getting in equal amounts. The kurds have the higher state of living than the Iraqis yet each part gets the same amount of money. It isn't the money its whats being done with it. Dam it I wish I could source all of this stuff but all I remeber it is from tv news stations.Using your logic I can no longer source anything and make a valid arguement.

Here I go nitpicking at people's words again (mmm, love being devil's advocate). Let's just be more careful about what we say though, 50 muslim people on a play no way screams out terrorist attack. You're judging a whole entire muslim religion on extremists.

Yes, I know that it was only 4 or 5...but numbers aren't really what I'm talking about.

I'm just a little sensitive about this subject because I do have an Arab friend (he's catholic, not muslim, but anyway) who whenever he flies, doesn't go to the bathroom in fear that people will think that he'll do something while he's up.

i wasn't implying that the kurds manage their money better. all i'm saying is that the US, and all the other countries, should help iraq, not punish it. the cold war is over. america isn't trying to stop the spread of "communism" (the fact that the USSR was nothing close to communism is a whole other debate). if anything, i'd say america should be out there, helping everyone around the world. what ever happened to "all men are created equal"? are the iraqis less equal then us? there is no reason to punish a nation, even more so, a nation ruled by a dictator, for the actions of a few. for that reason alone, i say we should help the iraqis. of course, your average american has been brainwashed by now into thinking that anyone who says "praise allah" or wears a turban is a terrorist, so i doubt anything will happen to help the iraqi people. :/

Gahh! I hate the fact that we are the policemen of the world. I also think that we should further analyze why these people don't like us. I wish I wish there was a peaceful solution. I really think that the US should never have gotten so deeply involved in other countries business in the first place. But then, (im contradicting myself) where the heck would kuwait be? Up a certain creek, no doubt. No matter which path we take, it is no doubt going to get heated from here on out. A holy war is not entirely out of the question (its been proposed to the muslim leaders), and that might rip the world apart. It drives me insane to think that people like Bin Laden and Hussein can still have power in today's world. But, I'm being slightly ethnocentric when I say this b/c I have no idea what the heck their culture is like over there(except from movies, we all know how accurate those are). Perhaps isolation is the best move. I know that there are some people in this world who I will never get along with, and they will never get along with me. We don't really hate each other, but we know that being around each other just hurts each other. Maybe this is the case with some countries and the US?

I don't really have a point, this is just my thoughts(pretty literally) on this. As usual, I try to take a larger view of things.