'Bush's Illegal War' Questionnaire

[Deleted member 2452]

part of what pianist says is true

not the part about president bush being stupid, but some of the rest is good stuff.

first i don't trust anything out of the german, or french "inteligence" apparatus. and arab countries saying anything good about america??? please! no one could be that gullible.

it's true about the u.s. being offered the likes of bin-laden. back in the clinton second term, 3 different times bin-laden was offered up on a plater (somalia, yemin, united arab emerates), and all 3 times clinton himself said no, we don't want him.
this was verified by clintons secretary of state madalen albright on an interview about 3 weeks ago. she "claimes" even her self, and janet reno told clinton to grab the s.o.b., but clinton said no everytime.

so once again our present situation is the fault of a democrat populost president.

steve

 

[ShiningIce]

Uh no, Its Bush Sr's fault when he FUNDED Bin Laden.

 

[BigJim]

And partly junior's fault when he was business partners with his brother.

 

[Strelnikov]

Quoting Hal:

1. "I have no idea for how long anthrax bacteria can survive. Do you?"

2. "Imagine the public howl if the UN would demand to inspect the US production of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons!"

Answers:

1. Encysted anthrax bacteria can last in dormant form for many years, then become active again when growth conditions are right. Don't know whether anyone has made a definitive study of exactly how long, but it's known to be in excess of 25 years. So the products of Saddam's anthrax program from 1985, say, would still be dangerous today. And it doesen't take much anthrax to do considerable damage.

2. The US is currently downloading nuclear weapons to non-operational status, in accordance with a treaty with Russia. We are also destroying our stockpile of obsolete chemical weapons (the modern ones were destroyed 10 yrs ago) in accordance with an international treaty to which Germany is also signatory. Both of these treaties have provisions for onsite verification by the other parties to the treaty. As for bioweapons, to the best of my knowledge the US has not had an offensive bioweapon program since the 1960's.

Strelnikov

 

[BigJim]

Not outside of black projects anyway. Actually, given the extent of technology used by organisations like MI6, NORAD and the NSA, I expect biological and chemical weapons are considered very primitive. sort of like comparing the weapons used by the humans in the novel The War Of The Worlds, to the ones used by the martians.

 

[The Pianist]

Just thinking... I'm guessing this thread didn't exactly go the way the thread maker wanted it to go... anyone reacon they've actually looked at this thread for a while?

 

[natural tickler]

If any of you thought this war was about weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, then you are as gullable as the Florida voters who voted Bush in!!! This whole conflict was about oil, and the United States greediness reared its ugly head again. In that region the 48% of the oil produced there comes to us, and the prices were getting too high. So, if we take them over, and own it ourselves, the money and everything else with it we can control. The problem here is that America is a big bully who wants the world to see things through our own eyes and if they don't we'll go to war with them. Like England way back then trying to get other countries to change to their religion. just like that. Honestly, if you really thought they were looking for weapons don't you think they would have found them by now? come on really. Hate to tell ya, the enemy is not Iraq, the real enemy is North Korea. they're the country we better worry about.


btw for all the French people, just to let ya know, I really do love French Fries!!!

 

[BigJim]

There was a UN resolution today that dealt with the future of Iraq. Rather unsurprisingly (to me at any rate) it did not include anything about turning back control of Iraq to Iraqis elected by Iraqi voters. For the time being Iraq will remain effectively under martial law at the behest of the United states and very partially, the UK.


I do not see this changing for a long time to come. I imagine that if any chicanery about setting up oil advantages were going to be taking place, then externally imposed martial law would be the way that most easilly facilitated such an arrangement. Being the sort of person that I am, you can bet that this will be something that I'll find out more about in the future. Till then, anything said about it will just be guesswork.

 

[Deleted member 2452]

france, and seria voted for it!

the u.n. resolution that was voted on, was a re-building plan proposed by the u.s., and britian. it met with highly favorable response. so i think it is a legitimate rebuilding plan. it was not supposed to contain provisions for a new iraqi government. that is in another resolution.
steve

 

[drew70]

Re: Thanks, Hal

after reading the initial post, I could do nothing but laugh in disbelief (which admittedly is better than gibbering and tearing my hair in frustration).

This is a perfect example of an unwillingness or inability to respect alternative opinions. Instead of "laughing in disbelief" how about some analysis as to why you disagree with it? Oh that's right, I forgot. Your only other alternative was gibbering and tearing your hair in frustration.🙄

 

[BigJim]

Re: france, and seria voted for it!

the u.n. resolution that was voted on, was a re-building plan proposed by the u.s., and britian. it met with highly favorable response. so i think it is a legitimate rebuilding plan. it was not supposed to contain provisions for a new iraqi government. that is in another resolution.
steve

I'm amazed that so many nations managed to co-operate over it. That's more of an achievement than any war. Heh heh.

My personal view Steve, is that the period of occupation will extend for some time to come. I think it will drag on and drag on ad infinitum. I would however, be a very happy eater of my own words should I be proven wrong. 🙂