[biggins]

now there is the possibility of george bush getting re-elected. if this happens then canada here i come. like george bush even had anything to do with it. just like all the politics though his supporters are not going to do anything but say " he caught saddam hussein". Woo Hoo we caught a disempowered dictator that had been living in a hole for 9 months and was really not a threat to begin with.Yeah go America. now they are trying to figure out what they are going to do with. like the dog that chases cars, what would he do with it if he actually caught it anyway.

 

[fasterTHANyou]

Originally posted by biggins
like george bush even had anything to do with it.

um... someone had to order the troops to get him?

Woo Hoo we caught a disempowered dictator that had been living in a hole for 9 months and was really not a threat to begin with.

not a threat? lets ask the iraqui people what they thought of him... maybe the some 60,000 at least that he killed for no reason?

 

[biggins]

yeah we've made it so much better for them after blowing up their homes, killing their power, their water sources have been PERMANENTLY contaminated there are no jobs, the streets still are not safe and over half the population still supports saddam. now we have even completely forgotten the people of iraq becuase we are to concerned about the money to be made rebuilding the place. yeah they wanted it let me tell you. you know the problem with america is that we think that everyone has the same ideals as us and they dont. dont get me wrong i love this country but what it all boils down to is george bucsh should burn in hell and i hope he does.

 

[fasterTHANyou]

well... i didnt sign up for this forum to get in to political debates... so we can leave it at this... but i think that the iraqui population is vastly better off than they were before. we are working on a rebuilding program and the people now can experience the freedom that we take for granted...

i fully respect your opinion, i just think its way off base

lets get back to riding

 

[HippieKai]

Originally posted by fasterTHANyou
well... i didnt sign up for this forum to get in to political debates...

OH MY DEAR GOD the forum is called political "debate"

are you mental

and biggins i am with you! Bush is a dumb a$$ and it doesn't take a whole lot to say "send them troops in"

Plus if anyone ever read anything about this "war" they that this solves NOTHING!

 

[fasterTHANyou]

Originally posted by Mag204
OH MY DEAR GOD the forum is called political "debate"

are you mental

ok... appologies for that one, i just clicked on the link from the homepage. and no, i'm not mental... real mature....


Plus if anyone ever read anything about this "war" they that this solves NOTHING!

and i'm stealing this from someone elses signature... the policeman guy... war solves nothing? try tyranny, communism, oppresion...

 

[drt_jumper]

first of all why dont you ask the familys of the hundreds of thousands of iraqi's whos families have been torn apart thanks to one saddam, how about him gasing his own people, funding terrorisim (maybe not al queda) but has been linked to funding other organizations, and before you say no way, not only did bush's people find this to be true, Clinton's did also and it is partially Clinton's fault that we are in this war now, granted if Bush Sr. hadnt dropped the ball in the first gulf war then this wouldnt be happening, but it has and it has for good reason, not oil, not money, not to push our beliefs on another nation, but to rid the world of a tyrant who would have loved to see the U.S. suffer, I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but make sure your facts are straight before going off at the mouth!

 

[biggins]

just a side note to all that i as well do find everyones opinion helpfull in deciding my own beleifs about things. without as much in put as possible we do not see all sides of the story. either way i think this is just what george bush needed to solidify his campaign for next year and i hope that the american voters look at other factors besides this when they go to the polls.

 

[biggins]

Originally posted by drt_jumper
first of all why dont you ask the familys of the hundreds of thousands of iraqi's whos families have been torn apart thanks to one saddam, how about him gasing his own people, funding terrorisim (maybe not al queda) but has been linked to funding other organizations, and before you say no way, not only did bush's people find this to be true, Clinton's did also and it is partially Clinton's fault that we are in this war now, granted if Bush Sr. hadnt dropped the ball in the first gulf war then this wouldnt be happening, but it has and it has for good reason, not oil, not money, not to push our beliefs on another nation, but to rid the world of a tyrant who would have loved to see the U.S. suffer, I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but make sure your facts are straight before going off at the mouth!

you have got to be kidding me! do ya really think its all gonna become sunshine and flowers now that he is caught? accusing me of not knowing my facts?!? you dont know me or my back ground and i will go toe to toe with you anyday in a political debate about both the bush and the clinton administration. please refrain from passing judgement and insulting people you dont know.

 

[fasterTHANyou]

Originally posted by biggins
\i hope that the american voters look at other factors besides this when they go to the polls.

like how the economy is turning around?

 

[drt_jumper]

first of all i was not passing judgement, second of all your right I dont know you, but I was not trying to insult you nor was I even responding to what you had said. If you were insulted then apparently you have not debated too many political issues becuase if you had you wouldnt be personalizing my opinion, my point was simply that anyone can write something on here and have no idea what they are talking about....and one thing that you are mistaken about is that their water supply was temporarily tainted...not permantently, I know this because I am in contact with someone who has been and will be working on that problem specifically, true alot of work has still to be done but alot has already started, and whether or not you like bush the iraqi people themselves say that they are much better off without saddam...later

 

[Toshi]

i must say that it also really pisses me off that this will help bush's reelection chances. americans (and i am one of them) are a bunch of sheep, apparently, believing whatever the govt tells them to, see the opinion poll flip-flop about afghanistan behind 9/11 or iraq behind 9/11 for a prime example.

and now a bunch of drunken rednecks are going to be all proud and even more close-minded about the rest of the world, because WE captured saddam.

(i think it's a good thing that he was brought in, but the media extravaganza this surely is going to be made into makes me SICK)

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by biggins
now there is the possibility of george bush getting re-elected. if this happens then canada here i come. like

I didn't read anything you said after that. Saying you'll move to Canada is the dumbest fvcking thing anyone could say and pretty much invalidates whatever you say afterwards.

 

[drt_jumper]

why did you put rednecks? what is that all about?

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by Toshi
i must say that it also really pisses me off that this will help bush's reelection chances. americans (and i am one of them) are a bunch of sheep, apparently, believing whatever the govt tells them to, see the opinion poll flip-flop about afghanistan behind 9/11 or iraq behind 9/11 for a prime example.

and now a bunch of drunken rednecks are going to be all proud and even more close-minded about the rest of the world, because WE captured saddam.

(i think it's a good thing that he was brought in, but the media extravaganza this surely is going to be made into makes me SICK)

Bush supporter = drunken redneck
Bush detractor = intelligent and erudite people like you

 

[Toshi]

no, not bush supporter = drunken redneck. america in general today in my warped view of the world = drunken rednecks.

truth be told, i don't see a lot of my "erudite and intelligent" compadres whooping for joy today. but my impression is that americans in general (see above definition) will be doing just that. care to contest that?


also, for a clearer-headed statement of my position, here's a post i just made to my own mailing list of fellow ivory tower geeks "

" [comment about a previous quote deleted]

anyway, my two cents is that i pretty much agree with the argument's sentiment. mass hysteria, or in this case, mass jubilation, is a powerful thing. furthermore, a sense of accomplishment (whether warranted or not) is something i bet the public is grasping for now, in the face of the economy, the daily and sobering newsflashes from iraq, and the unresolved nature of the whole why-are-people-so-mad-at-us thing. so people will cling to this, they'll fly flags on their suvs, they'll put bumper stickers of saddam in jail on while they're at it. and that accomplishes no good.

that said, it's good that he was captured. that it will serve to further the above isn't."

 

[ummbikes]

All one has to to do is spend some time with some drunken rednecks and they will know exactly what Toshi was saying.

I live in the redneck capitol of the Pacific Northwest and despite my education, acceptance of gays, blacks and a desire for America to stop a march towards imperialism I am a Copenhagen chewing, cheap beer drinking, offroad mudding, gun owning, church going, deer killing redneck.

Most of my friends and neighbors are drunk with hate and a desire to kick some "towelhead" ass. They are so drunk they don't seem to care that their government is becoming fascist and the companies they work for are killing the environment and stealing there retirement funds.

So, woo-who they captured Hussein.

I just hope there is some remenent of America left to fight for when Bush gets done running us into the pockets of corporate America.

 

[N8 v2.0]

What is our alternative to Pres Bush?

What if the Dem's canidate..ummm... say, Dean, wins the election? What will be different? Will the muslim fundamentalists suddenly LOVE America? Remember that under the lib's fav president, Bill Clinton, the terrorists saw fit to bomb the WTC the first time, plan the second WTC strike, bomb the US embassys in Africa, etc... They sensed that the US was weak under Clinton and they were right. Clinton didn't do anything to activily hunt down those plotting against the US nor did he do much to hold terrorist supporting nation's feet to the fire. Clinton drew down our military strength in order to make govenment 'appear' smaller and Clinton gutted our intelligence community.

I shudder to think where we'd be today if Algore was president. We'd probably be in a full retreat, Jimmy Carter, style from the middle east, Saddam would still be in control of Iraq, and the Taliban in control if Afganistan and the terrorists would be openly supported/supplied/financed by all the governments that resent the US and our way of life. And Algore and company would be 'enguaged in active dialogue' the entire way.... solving nothing, doing nothing...

No, it takes a President like Bush who doesn't care what direction the political wind is blowing at the moment to stick to the mission... something his dad didn't do during the Gulf War I.

In short, if we'd have listened to all the nay sayers and pulled our troops out of Iraq following the Saddam's fall, it wouldn't have take long for him to regroup and reinstate himself in power... perhaps strong than before.

 

[Toshi]

ok nate, so you object to it on the grander scale. and, assuming your thoughts on what would have happened under a different president are correct, this would be the correct thing to do. however, i think that the pansy "active dialogue" or however you portrayed it IS the right thing to do. we can't fight the whole world. therefore we must figure out what we're doing that's pissing them off so (supporting israel in all of their actions both acceptable and outrageous, like the wall) and change. i would rather compromise and not have a fascist-leaning govt than live in a secure state where true freedom of speech (since when has dissent become illegal? oh wait.) is nowhere to be found.

 

[rbx]

Capturing saddam has a certain symbolism and iraq IS starting a new chapter BUT as powerful as a "symbol of power saddam was" hes only a part of a bigger terrorist machine and that machine will continue running without him...The real blow to the terrosrist would be to raise the poverty line thus cutting there supplies and reason for being

No one is born with a hatred towards america it is taught and will continue to be taught until fundamental changes are made.

But for now the people of iraq are breathing a little better and for that the coalition forces have to be praised.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by biggins
yeah we've made it so much better for them after blowing up their homes, killing their power, their water sources have been PERMANENTLY contaminated there are no jobs, the streets still are not safe and over half the population still supports saddam.

Well, first off, Id like to know where you got the facts about Saddam supporters being half the population. Please cite a source for that one.
Second, even you must admit that a brief war is infinitely better than having Saddam hussein in power right? I mean, combatants and civilian casualites combined didnt even come close to the number Saddam has murdered over a bad weekend. You gotta be sick if you cant agree with that. So your problem really only lies with Bush's reelection...which would have happened regardless due to the mess that is the democratic party...and for someone who can "go toe to toe in any political debate" its pretty funny you dont see that to begin with.

 

[Westy]

Originally posted by N8
What is our alternative to Pres Bush?

What if the Dem's canidate..ummm... say, Dean, wins the election? What will be different? Will the muslim fundamentalists suddenly LOVE America? Remember that under the lib's fav president, Bill Clinton, the terrorists saw fit to bomb the WTC the first time, plan the second WTC strike, bomb the US embassys in Africa, etc... They sensed that the US was weak under Clinton and they were right. Clinton didn't do anything to activily hunt down those plotting against the US nor did he do much to hold terrorist supporting nation's feet to the fire. Clinton drew down our military strength in order to make govenment 'appear' smaller and Clinton gutted our intelligence community.

I shudder to think where we'd be today if Algore was president. We'd probably be in a full retreat, Jimmy Carter, style from the middle east, Saddam would still be in control of Iraq, and the Taliban in control if Afganistan and the terrorists would be openly supported/supplied/financed by all the governments that resent the US and our way of life. And Algore and company would be 'enguaged in active dialogue' the entire way.... solving nothing, doing nothing...

You do realize that there was more than two presidential candidate who ran in the last election. There were even other Republicans who wanted to be president. Try to imagine a world where the Republican party nominated an intelligent candidate who was concerned with the wellbeing of the American people and not his little corporate buddies.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Toshi
ok nate, so you object to it on the grander scale. and, assuming your thoughts on what would have happened under a different president are correct, this would be the correct thing to do. however, i think that the pansy "active dialogue" or however you portrayed it IS the right thing to do. we can't fight the whole world. therefore we must figure out what we're doing that's pissing them off so (supporting israel in all of their actions both acceptable and outrageous, like the wall) and change. i would rather compromise and not have a fascist-leaning govt than live in a secure state where true freedom of speech (since when has dissent become illegal? oh wait.) is nowhere to be found.

And thanks to what we have done recently in the Middle East and Kosovo we don't have to fight the entire world.

The good thing about standing up to a bully like Saddam/The Taliban is that all the other lil' would be Saddam's take notice. We haven't been hearing much out of N Korea since we sent cruise missiles into Baghdad now have we? Especially since the Bush administration indicated that it would not be any more difficult to send them into downtown Pyongyang. These types of people do not respect nor do they have any interest in "active dialogue"... heck a decade of that didn't get us anywhere with Saddam now did it. Nope... took puttin' the smackdown on him to get his attention.

The best thing we can do is bring good ol' American capitolism to the middle east where a man can earn a good wage and have the opportunity to build a business and to profit from it if he is so motivated.

What's all this about Evil Corporate America?
Aside from an effort to promote class envy? Corporate America is what make us the country we are. It is what funds our way of life (keeps disgruntled Gen X'ers in Whoppers and Old Navy jeans). Every American has the opportunity to become a business owner. And it is possible in the US to make that business hugely sucessful. There less than a handful of countries where you can start off with 10-cents in your pocket and through hard work and determination, become a multi-millionaire...

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Westy
You do realize that there was more than two presidential candidate who ran in the last election. There were even other Republicans who wanted to be president. Try to imagine a world where the Republican party nominated an intelligent candidate who was concerned with the wellbeing of the American people and not his little corporate buddies.

As long as the Left potrays Pres Bush as an unintelligent bafoon they will never beat him...

Nope.

Never.

 

[Damn True]

Since it would be political suicide for the Dem. candidates to attack Bush today they have taken to going after each other.

Joe Leibermann went after Dean today basicly saying that if Dean had his way Hussein would not have been captured today and would still be in power and the world would be in a much more dangerous position than it is today.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Damn True
Since it would be political suicide for the Dem. candidates to attack Bush today they have taken to going after each other.

Joe Leibermann went after Dean today basicly saying that if Dean had his way Hussein would not have been captured today and would still be in power and the world would be in a much more dangerous position than it is today.

..now that's the pot calling the kettle black...

 

[Jeremy R]

I do not think there is one other subject out there that can make an otherwise intelligent person sound more retarded than politics.
The way most people pick a side and then blindly follow it is downright mind-boggling. The only thing I know for sure is that if EITHER of our two parties had total control of our country we would all be screwed.
And for anybody to see the capture of Saddam as a bad thing is blind devotion as its very worst. This man is one of the most despicable to ever walk the earth.
Even the democratic candidates (John Kerry in particular) said this should not be a political issue, and that it is a great thing for the world. He also voted to go get him.
Yeah it is true that his capture to us is mostly just symbolic, but think about the Iraqi people. They have had to live in a CONSTANT fear of him for 30 years. That fear has been ingrained into them for so long and his status to them was so great that many of them truely feared that he would return to power. Those smiles you saw on their faces today were relief that none of us have ever known. We are allowed to sit on the internet here and b1tch about our leaders, where in Iraq, you would be tortured and killed.
So some of you hate Bush so much that you wish Saddam was still on the loose because it benefited Bush? I never have understood the hatred people have for the "other" party's president. People hated Clinton the exact same way, and they sounded just as ridiculous.
The government is not out to get you. Their job is actually to work to protect you.
You may not agree with his methods, but Bush is doing what HE THINKS is best to protect us, the same way any dem. in power would be doing. I am not saying these guys don't make alot of mistakes, but it should not make you so bitter that you care less about humanity than you do for a setback to the political party
that you vote against. That other party is still in your country after all.

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by N8

The good thing about standing up to a bully like Saddam/The Taliban is that all the other lil' would be Saddam's take notice. We haven't been hearing much out of N Korea since we sent cruise missiles into Baghdad now have we?

Yeah like the leaders of Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Saudi Aradia all come to mind...

Oh wait, we're cozying up to those guys as we speak. Maybe human rights aren't as important to politicians as they claim they are?

North Korea got the message allright. Get nuclear weapons. Get them fast, because you never know where a cowboy with an itchy trigger finger is going to look next.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Silver

Originally posted by N8


Yeah like the leaders of Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Saudi Aradia all come to mind...

Oh wait, we're cozying up to those guys as we speak. Maybe human rights aren't as important to politicians as they claim they are?

North Korea got the message allright. Get nuclear weapons. Get them fast, because you never know where a cowboy with an itchy trigger finger is going to look next.

Like Pres Bush had anything to with the N Korea's nuke weapons program...

I think the Saudi's are getting the message... we'll have to see how that plays out. The US is now the power broker in the Middle East a role the Saudi's want for themselves. Look for some changes in the Saudi government over the next few years.

Human rights are important but, in my opinion, not as important as the security of the US. We'll deal with those countries as they come. You seem to imply that 21st century US represses human rights... what have you been smoking?

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by biggins
now there is the possibility of george bush getting re-elected. if this happens then canada here i come. like george bush even had anything to do with it. just like all the politics though his supporters are not going to do anything but say " he caught saddam hussein". Woo Hoo we caught a disempowered dictator that had been living in a hole for 9 months and was really not a threat to begin with.Yeah go America. now they are trying to figure out what they are going to do with. like the dog that chases cases, what would he do with it if he actually caught it anyway.

I bet you a $100, you'll still be in US if Bush was elected president.

 

[biggins]

Originally posted by LordOpie
I didn't read anything you said after that. Saying you'll move to Canada is the dumbest fvcking thing anyone could say and pretty much invalidates whatever you say afterwards.

well hell then you are not allowed to ever enter this thread again cause you are just way to open minded for it


as for fasterthanyou yeah if you look at every year except for major depressions the economy always jumps around christmas and no matter who is president they always take the credit for it. or were you joking with that comment.

i am just saying that before we deal with all this other bs i think maybe for just a split friggin second it would be nice if the president would watch out for the very country he is supposed to guide and lead.

now i would also appreciate it if people did not try to insult me either i am an adult and can be talked to without bashing. you dont like my opinion then dont listen to it

 

[biggins]

i am also very disappointed in saddam after all the money,support, and weapons and tanks we gave him and he turns out to be a horrible dictator. guess ya cant buy love can ya.

 

[Jorvik]

Originally posted by biggins

as for fasterthanyou yeah if you look at every year except for major depressions the economy always jumps around christmas and no matter who is president they always take the credit for it. or were you joking with that comment.

Ummm, the economy isn't a "jump" right now. There's been a steady upward trend for the last couple months.

And don't give me any crap about former President Clinton being good for the economy, he rode the tech boom. Our current President was left with the wake of it.

EDIT:

Economy link:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2003-12/12/content_1228280.htm

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by N8
Like Pres Bush had anything to with the N Korea's nuke weapons program...

I think the Saudi's are getting the message... we'll have to see how that plays out. The US is now the power broker in the Middle East a role the Saudi's want for themselves. Look for some changes in the Saudi government over the next few years.

Human rights are important but, in my opinion, not as important as the security of the US. We'll deal with those countries as they come. You seem to imply that 21st century US represses human rights... what have you been smoking?

Bush didn't have anything to do with the origination of North Korea's nuclear program, but if we look back 10 years from now, I'll bet the consensus is that Bush had a lot to do with accelerating the pace and urgency of it.

The Saudis didn't get a message at all. 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, and when the INS started their special registration program last year, the Saudis weren't even on the original list. As long as the oil keeps flowing and the Saudis are generating enough revenue to keep thier princes in luxury, nothing will change. The princes will skip around the globe acting like the degenerates that they are, and the common Saudi will suffer for it, and continue to be educated in the Wahhabist tradition. I think your trust in the sincerity of the Saudis is greatly misplaced.

I did not mean to imply that the US represses human rights. I do think that human rights as a priority have suffered since Bush has become president, for a variety of reasons. I really doubt the sincerity of his convictions when he slams Saddam for the torture chambers but cuddles up to Uzbekistan because they happen to be in a strategically important place. Much like hearing Clinton profess his devotion to his wife, it wears thin quickly. We spent a lot of time cozying up to Saddam in the 80's, and that didn't work out that well, did it?

 

[Jorvik]

Originally posted by Silver
Bush didn't have anything to do with the origination of North Korea's nuclear program, but if we look back 10 years from now, I'll bet the consensus is that Bush had a lot to do with accelerating the pace and urgency of it.

The Saudis didn't get a message at all. 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, and when the INS started their special registration program last year, the Saudis weren't even on the original list. As long as the oil keeps flowing and the Saudis are generating enough revenue to keep thier princes in luxury, nothing will change. The princes will skip around the globe acting like the degenerates that they are, and the common Saudi will suffer for it, and continue to be educated in the Wahhabist tradition. I think your trust in the sincerity of the Saudis is greatly misplaced.

I did not mean to imply that the US represses human rights. I do think that human rights as a priority have suffered since Bush has become president, for a variety of reasons. I really doubt the sincerity of his convictions when he slams Saddam for the torture chambers but cuddles up to Uzbekistan because they happen to be in a strategically important place. Much like hearing Clinton profess his devotion to his wife, it wears thin quickly. We spent a lot of time cozying up to Saddam in the 80's, and that didn't work out that well, did it?

I don't agree at all with having cordial relations with dictators and nations who oppress human rights, but there is no possible way we can deal with them all at the same time. We don't want to get them all pissed off at us all at once either. Thats why being PotUS is hard.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by biggins
i am also very disappointed in saddam after all the money,support, and weapons and tanks we gave him and he turns out to be a horrible dictator. guess ya cant buy love can ya.

Humm... Iraq was fully armed with Russian military technology... tanks, aircarft etc... what weapons and tanks are you talking about?

We did back him in his war against Iran twenty five years ago. That was the doings of good ol' President Jimmy Carter (D-Ga). At the time Iran was holding US citizens as hostages and we had a horribily failed rescue attempt smoldering the the middle of the desert Iranian.... or did you forget that fact?

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by Silver
Bush didn't have anything to do with the origination of North Korea's nuclear program, but if we look back 10 years from now, I'll bet the consensus is that Bush had a lot to do with accelerating the pace and urgency of it.

The Saudis didn't get a message at all. 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, and when the INS started their special registration program last year, the Saudis weren't even on the original list. As long as the oil keeps flowing and the Saudis are generating enough revenue to keep thier princes in luxury, nothing will change. The princes will skip around the globe acting like the degenerates that they are, and the common Saudi will suffer for it, and continue to be educated in the Wahhabist tradition. I think your trust in the sincerity of the Saudis is greatly misplaced.

I did not mean to imply that the US represses human rights. I do think that human rights as a priority have suffered since Bush has become president, for a variety of reasons. I really doubt the sincerity of his convictions when he slams Saddam for the torture chambers but cuddles up to Uzbekistan because they happen to be in a strategically important place. Much like hearing Clinton profess his devotion to his wife, it wears thin quickly. We spent a lot of time cozying up to Saddam in the 80's, and that didn't work out that well, did it?

Our relationship with the Saudis pre 9/11 is far different than post 9/11. I think they are getting the message... slowly.

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by N8
Humm... Iraq was fully armed with Russian military technology... tanks, aircarft etc... what weapons and tanks are you talking about?

We did back him in his war against Iran twenty five years ago. That was the doings of good ol' President Jimmy Carter (D-Ga). At the time Iran was holding US citizens as hostages and we had a horribily failed rescue attempt smoldering the the middle of the desert Iranian.... or did you forget that fact?

The Iran-Iraq war was 1980-1988.

I never knew Carter was a two term president, especially during the years Reagan was president.

The fact that we aided Saddam for many years is common knowledge (although I'm not sure what common knowledge is worth nowadays, look how many Americans believe that Saddam was behind 9/11.)


Recognize the Guy on the Left?

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by N8
Our relationship with the Saudis pre 9/11 is far different than post 9/11. I think they are getting the message... slowly.

How? Have they started to embrace democracy? Stopped exporting Wahibbism? Stopped funding fundamentalist muslim schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan? What exactly are they doing different right now?

 

[biggins]

well then how did we support iraq? well get ready!
1994 us senate report
bacillus anthracis: Anthrax
Botulinum
histoplasma capsulatem:much like tuberculosis
clostridium perfringens
these are somke chemical agents sold to iraq between 1985 and 1990
oh dont let us forget E coli either.

some little know companies that sold a few things to help with nuclear ( or as bush would say nuculer) facilities and well, war. hewlett-packard lots of computers and radar equipment, at&t , caterpillar, dupont ( which guess what they sold them, oil for their nuclear program), kodak and hughes helicopters. 60 helicopters that were then modified for military use.
i know that right now your saying that i said the government did it as well. well here comes that part:
1985-1990- Department of commerce approves 1.5 billion in sales to iraq of wah tthey call dual use technologies. these technologies could be used for good things, or warfare.
1985-1990 -$308 million dollars ( thats this many zeros ,000,000.00) worth of aircraft and helicopters and parts were transfered to iraq.

theres one more thing that may help clarify