POLL: The repercussions of a US attack on Iraq

[tradenut]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, I guarantee you that we will find evidence of weapons of mass destruction once we invade Iraq to show the world community, even if we have to plant the evidence to do so.<<<

I would not doubt that.
I feel very bad for Powell because I believe he is one of the very few that actually some character in this group and I think he was mislead.
First the proof given to him by the Brits has been debunct and then 2 days ago this much hailed terrorist camp in the north of Iraq that was the big proof of SH ties to terror was debunct on CNN.
They interviewed the leader of the camp who said that:
1-They have nothing to do with Al -Qaeda
2- They are there actually training to fight Saddam Hussein.

That makes me wonder about all the so called other proffs.
Also First Bush beeps on saying that he does not want war and that if SH desarms all will be OK but now , all he says is for peace ther must be regime change.....
So what gives?

 

[TM_Direct]

This post is what bothers me the most.....I wish a lot of you posters would just start a thread and cal it:

I hate George Bush and no matter what he says or does, Im against it"



This is not about Iraq or anything else....admit it? It is totally designed to take shots at GW, but I wish you would admit it instead of posting these far left stories that amount to nothing....It's ok if you hate BUSH, just say it , but don't take part in an argument under the illusion that you really want to avert a war.....By the way, I wonder where all the posters are who only last month were saying " We are losing the war on terrorism"???

......I'd especially like to hear what DASCHLE and PELOSI have to say because they were leading that chorus...Look at the Al Queda hierarchy from 9-12-01....and look at it today...

 

[TM_Direct]

boy those europeans are a brave lot!!!!!

==========================================



British Human Shields Exit Iraq for Home
Sun Mar 2,11:32 AM ET Add World - AP to My Yahoo!



LONDON - Some of the peace activists who went to Iraq (news - web sites) to serve as human shields in the event of war returned home, fearing for their safety, a spokesman said Sunday.



Latest news:
· Iraq Says It's Destroying More Missiles
AP - 55 minutes ago
· U.N. Faces Lobbying on Iraq Resolution
AP - Mon Mar 3, 1:49 AM ET
· U.S. Says Iraqi Jets Entered No-Fly Zone
AP - Sun Mar 2, 9:03 AM ET
Special Coverage





The human shields are mostly European activists who drove from London to Baghdad in two double-decker buses last month, intending to guard civilian sites from a U.S.-led military attack.


Those who returned home had safety or financial concerns, spokesman Christiaan Briggs said.


"The aim was always a mass migration and if we had had five to ten thousand people here there would never be a war," he said. "We do not have those numbers."


The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported that nine of the 11 British human shields in the bus convoy had left Baghdad. Briggs said about a dozen Britons remained in Iraq alongside several dozens from other countries.


He told Britain's Press Association news agency that Iraq limited the sites that human shields could visit. "Now we are being told we cannot go to certain sites, such as hospitals, so we are reassessing our strategy," he said.


U.S. officials have said that it is a war crime to use civilians as human shields and that there's no way of guaranteeing their safety.


On Friday, the head of Sweden's largest peace organization urged human shields to leave Iraq, saying they were being used for propaganda purposes by Saddam Hussein (news - web sites).


Maria Ermanno, chairwoman of the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society, cited reports that Iraqi officials were arranging transportation, accommodations and news conferences for the human shields.


"To go down to Iraq and live and act there on the regime's expense, then you're supporting a terrible dictator. I think that method is entirely wrong," Ermanno told Swedish Radio.

 

[TM_Direct]

Al-Saadi said 157 of the R-400 bombs contained anthrax, aflotoxin and botulin toxin. He said Iraq has been excavating them and so far has uncovered eight intact bombs, as well as many fragments of destroyed bombs.


On Sunday, U.N. weapons inspectors took samples of the material in the bombs to confirm their composition.


The destruction of the Al Samoud 2 missiles complies with an order from chief weapons inspector Hans Blix, who said they exceeded the 93-mile range set by the United Nations (news - web sites) after the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).


The casting chambers had been banned and destroyed in the 1990s, but Iraq rebuilt them. Blix's deputy, Demetrius Perricos, said this time they are destroying them in a manner in which they can't be rebuilt.

=======================================

OOPS!!!!...we fogot to destroy these when we burried them...my bad!

 

[max401]

Madeline Albright- what a piece of partisan Democrat GARBAGE.

President Clinton attacked Saddam Hussein without first asking approval from the United Nations, the U.S. Congress or even France.

Here's what Albright said when Willy attacked Iraq on the day of his scheduled impeachment.

"Month after month, we have given Iraq chance after chance to move from confrontation to cooperation, and we have explored and exhausted every diplomatic action. We will see now whether force can persuade Iraq's misguided leaders to reverse course and to accept at long last the need to abide by the rule of law and the will of the world."

And here's the softball crap Albright layed out just a few hours ago:

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright urged President Bush on Monday to wait longer before attacking Iraq, saying current pressure was forcing Baghdad to disarm. Albright said her concern about going to war does not mean any support for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "I think Saddam Hussein is a terrible dictator," she said. "There's nothing to defend about him. I pity the Iraqi people."

Here we are, more than four years later, Saddam still hasn't complied with U.N. resolutions, and America has been attacked by Islamic crazies. These same Democrats think Bush is acting impulsively. Democrats are always hawks in the off-season. They're all for war, provided it has nothing to do with America's security.

(Part of the above stolen from an article by Ann Coulter.)

 

[trader556]

Quote from max401:

Madeline Albright- what a piece of partisan Democrat GARBAGE.

President Clinton attacked Saddam Hussein without first asking approval from the United Nations, the U.S. Congress or even France.

Here's what Albright said when Willy attacked Iraq on the day of his scheduled impeachment.

"Month after month, we have given Iraq chance after chance to move from confrontation to cooperation, and we have explored and exhausted every diplomatic action. We will see now whether force can persuade Iraq's misguided leaders to reverse course and to accept at long last the need to abide by the rule of law and the will of the world."

And here's the softball crap Albright layed out just a few hours ago:

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright urged President Bush on Monday to wait longer before attacking Iraq, saying current pressure was forcing Baghdad to disarm. Albright said her concern about going to war does not mean any support for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "I think Saddam Hussein is a terrible dictator," she said. "There's nothing to defend about him. I pity the Iraqi people."

Here we are, more than four years later, Saddam still hasn't complied with U.N. resolutions, and America has been attacked by Islamic crazies. These same Democrats think Bush is acting impulsively. Democrats are always hawks in the off-season. They're all for war, provided it has nothing to do with America's security.

(Part of the above stolen from an article by Ann Coulter.)

Man don't get me started with friggin Albri$%#$ and slick the bubba willy on that subject. She was the same who said, and don't quote me exactly, --who cares about them they are just some arab women and children-- dog and pony show was on high gear back then. Too bad this chit chat wasn't available.

Are the right people in jail?

 

[msfe]

Fresh resolution 'gives no authority for war'

Tony Blair's political dilemmas over a possible military attack on Iraq increased today, with reports that the government's attorney general may resign if Britain goes to war without clear authorisation from the United Nations.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,908157,00.html


UN war doubters unite against resolution

The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Russia today made a joint declaration that they will "not allow" passage of a UN resolution authorising war against Iraq.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,908042,00.html

 

[TM_Direct]

Quote from msfe:

Fresh resolution 'gives no authority for war'

Tony Blair's political dilemmas over a possible military attack on Iraq increased today, with reports that the government's attorney general may resign if Britain goes to war without clear authorization from the United Nations.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,908157,00.html


UN war doubters unite against resolution

The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Russia today made a joint declaration that they will "not allow" passage of a UN resolution authorising war against Iraq.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,908042,00.html

==============================================

Don't you think it's time you started charging "the guardian" advertising rates the same way you would charge some of these other companies? Afterall, Wild and his alter ego mfse use quotes front this site in EVERY other post......They are a public site and it occurred to me that there guys might just be using ET to promote hits on their site...think about it...often times they post nothing but links and articles without offering anything themself....would it be right for somebody to quote 'activetrader' or "futures' magazine in every single thread? Im just curious what you and the other moderators think because I find it odd to believe that there are literally 1000's of links and posts referring to this relatively unknown rag, yet i would bet that there is maybe a handful of links or quotes from the NY times which is just as liberel and is one of the most widely circulated publications in the world.

 

[freealways]

YES, I certainly am fed up with the type of posts Msfe and friends post.

(and, for the sake of a balanced view I would like to include posters like, what is his name again ? Oh, yes, Candletwit, as one of the lunies who should be tarred and feathered as an unbalanced madman).

The conversations show their thinking is screwed up, the posters behaving in a fanatical manner.

They are like madman so desperate to make their point that they do not participate in a conversation and, instead, keep on hammering with twisted facts, they ignore questions directed at them and blatantly ignore other facts brought forward.

They do not belong in a debate between reasonable people and
their actions will eventually destroy this website.

To let lunies continue to participate in such a manner isn't democracy, it is lunacy.

freealways

 

[TM_Direct]

Quote from freealways:

YES, I certainly am fed up with the type of posts Msfe and friends post.

(and, for the sake of a balanced view I would like to include posters like, what is his name again ? Oh, yes, Candletwit, as one of the lunies who should be tarred and feathered as an unbalanced madman).

The conversations show their thinking is screwed up, the posters behaving in a fanatical manner.

They are like madman so desperate to make their point that they do not participate in a conversation and, instead, keep on hammering with twisted facts, they ignore questions directed at them and blatantly ignore other facts brought forward.

They do not belong in a debate between reasonable people and
their actions will eventually destroy this website.

To let lunies continue to participate in such a manner isn't democracy, it is lunacy.

freealways

Im not commenting on their views but i find it odd that in almost every single post there is a link to the same web site....over an over again...go and look at the list of posts by some certain posters and it appears they are doing nothing but eithe a) advertising or b) getting web site hits on their site so they can get higher $$ for advertising because it has " a lot of traffic"

Candle may be out there but he's not promoting a site or talking in 'cut an paste'