On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 12:24:07 -0400, "gonefishiing"
wrote:

felton,
first i should say i did not support this war at its being.

assuming i buy your agrument for a few minutes
which, by the way, i don't.
....what would you propose as an alternative?

Not go off on unrelated snipe hunts when we should be hunting for
bears. Our issue was terrorism. If you have been paying attention at
all, you would know that terrorists are primarily muslim extremists,
or jihadists if you prefer that term. Iraq was run by a ruthless
secular dictator who was Muslim in name only. He and the terrorists
were natural enemies. He wasn't a sponsor of terrorism. There was NO
connection between Iraq and 9/11 and Iraq was NO threat to us, or even
his neighbors when we attacked. We had destroyed his military in the
first Gulf War.

Don't believe me? How about Colin Powell in 2001

"One aspect of Michael Moore's documentary film, "Fahrenheit 9/11,"
that you won't hear Republicans denouncing is a 2001 video clip of
Colin Powell calling Saddam Hussein no threat.

Audiences react with shocked murmurs. The film doesn't explain the
context, a Feb. 24, 2001, diplomatic meeting in Cairo. Pressed by
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak about the Iraqi people's suffering
under U.S. economic sanctions, Powell reminded his audience that they
existed to check Saddam's ambitions.

"And frankly," he added, "they have worked. He has not developed any
significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He
is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

Not only was Iraq no danger to the United States, it had no capacity
to menace such powerhouses as Jordan and Kuwait. So why are we reading
news accounts like this in July 2004: "Saddam's army posed little
threat, Senate panel says" and "Panel describes long weakening of
Hussein army."



impotent dictator?
this impotent dictator has supported the very culture that these terrorists
live in and thrive on.
they didn't just materialize out of thin air with grenade launchers strapped
to their backs.

Actually you may have confused Iraq with Iran, Syria, Yemen or Saudi
Arabia. Iraq has never been linked to the death of one American
through terrorist attack. If it is your attitude that "all them Arabs
look alike to me", then there isn't much reason for you not to vote
for Bush.

"gonefishiing" wrote in message
...


impotent dictator?
this impotent dictator has supported the very culture that these
terrorists
live in and thrive on.

You have no evidence to back up your point of view.



they didn't just materialize out of thin air with grenade launchers
strapped
to their backs.

Correct! They appeared AFTER the Allies took over.

You cannot cite a single example of Al Q'aeda activity in Iraq when Saddam
was in charge. I bet that you are too stupid to realise why Saddam didn't
tolerate Al Q'aeda. [Hint] ... Iraq was a *secular* state.


when reduced to it base issues - i see 2 possiblities (offer another)
damned if we do
Correct.
damned if we don't
Incorrect.






i also disagree with the idea that we have done nothing to lessen the
threat.
the installation of a ( hopefully) more reasonable governing body, counter
to the culture that spawned terror is how it will happen, if at all.
and this is being done.


the threat is here forever.

Nah. Once Bush is gone the threat will begin to recede. I can't believe
that you will elect such an imbecile again.

the difference now is that it is recognized and can be adressed. (see 9/11
commission report for one example)

ok....how do we confront this problem to "lessen the threat"?
raffle humvees off in iraq?
food stamps?
welfare programs?
rock concerts for world peace?
give them ganz?

oh ......change our culture.

Yes.

get rid of our sailboats?

No.
get rid of our suv's?

Yes.
get rid of our need for oil?
Reduce it.

live in abject poverty?

No.
and buy swords?

Guns are better.

the points above are deliberate in their obvious absurdity
neither work.

Invading the wrong country doesn't work, either.


the first relies on american arrogance/ignorance to buy our way. (its
happened before)
the second relies on changing american culture and trusting the
terrorists.
(not likely)
a the third possiblity is we leave the middle east all together and
hide--it was impossible to do in the 20th century--still impossible in the
21st century.(which also means abandoning israel--do you really believe
that
is possible?)

It's possible - but I don't think that you should do it.

Regards




Donal
--

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 12:48:06 -0300, "Capt. Mooron"
wrote this crap:


"Horvath" wrote in message
| You're finally making some sense. Do we asked to be loved? Do we
| care if we hurt France's feelings?

YES!

No. You are whacked.

Yes you do or it wouldn't matter as much to you... all you seem to be doing
is asking why everyone hates you while stealing their candy.

I don't care what France thinks of us. Most Americans don't give a
rat's ass what France thinks of us.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Most Americans think you're stoopid.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 12:48:06 -0300, "Capt. Mooron"
wrote this crap:


"Horvath" wrote in message
| You're finally making some sense. Do we asked to be loved? Do we
| care if we hurt France's feelings?

YES!

No. You are whacked.

Yes you do or it wouldn't matter as much to you... all you seem to be
doing
is asking why everyone hates you while stealing their candy.

I don't care what France thinks of us. Most Americans don't give a
rat's ass what France thinks of us.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Donal, on behalf of all Americans, I apologize for our government's
mistake. I can offer no reasonable excuse, since those in power
clearly knew what they were doing. They lied to us as well. Please
accept my apology. Unfortunately, there's not a damn thing I can
do about it, except attempt to throw out the slimy *******s this
coming November.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"gonefishiing" wrote in message
...


impotent dictator?
this impotent dictator has supported the very culture that these
terrorists
live in and thrive on.

You have no evidence to back up your point of view.



they didn't just materialize out of thin air with grenade launchers
strapped
to their backs.

Correct! They appeared AFTER the Allies took over.

You cannot cite a single example of Al Q'aeda activity in Iraq when Saddam
was in charge. I bet that you are too stupid to realise why Saddam didn't
tolerate Al Q'aeda. [Hint] ... Iraq was a *secular* state.


when reduced to it base issues - i see 2 possiblities (offer another)
damned if we do
Correct.
damned if we don't
Incorrect.






i also disagree with the idea that we have done nothing to lessen the
threat.
the installation of a ( hopefully) more reasonable governing body,
counter
to the culture that spawned terror is how it will happen, if at all.
and this is being done.


the threat is here forever.

Nah. Once Bush is gone the threat will begin to recede. I can't believe
that you will elect such an imbecile again.

the difference now is that it is recognized and can be adressed. (see
9/11
commission report for one example)

ok....how do we confront this problem to "lessen the threat"?
raffle humvees off in iraq?
food stamps?
welfare programs?
rock concerts for world peace?
give them ganz?

oh ......change our culture.

Yes.

get rid of our sailboats?

No.
get rid of our suv's?

Yes.
get rid of our need for oil?
Reduce it.

live in abject poverty?

No.
and buy swords?

Guns are better.

the points above are deliberate in their obvious absurdity
neither work.

Invading the wrong country doesn't work, either.


the first relies on american arrogance/ignorance to buy our way. (its
happened before)
the second relies on changing american culture and trusting the
terrorists.
(not likely)
a the third possiblity is we leave the middle east all together and
hide--it was impossible to do in the 20th century--still impossible in
the
21st century.(which also means abandoning israel--do you really believe
that
is possible?)

It's possible - but I don't think that you should do it.

Regards




Donal
--

On Behalf of ME! ... I can't believe you are apologizing to a Brit.....
they were your war time buddies.... most substantial ally.... the best ally
you had..... they backed your government's misrepresentations and abetted
your invasion of a sovereign nation that posed you no direct threat... for
the sole purpose of a misguided and ill planned strategy at eliminating
terrorism! The direct result of your also ill conceived sponsorship of
Osama in the first place.

I once discussed a problem with a friend regarding a rude and unruly
neighbour. I told my friend to build an ugly fence... a very ugly fence.....
that would force his neighbour to build an expensive new fence on his side
to maintain property value. He could then remove his ugly fence and
effectively have his rude neighbor fence himself in.

Enjoy your Orange Alert!

Freedom...Phf-f-f-t-t-t!!!

CM






"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
| Donal, on behalf of all Americans, I apologize for our government's
| mistake. I can offer no reasonable excuse, since those in power
| clearly knew what they were doing. They lied to us as well. Please
| accept my apology. Unfortunately, there's not a damn thing I can
| do about it, except attempt to throw out the slimy *******s this
| coming November.

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...
"Horvath" wrote in message
| You are whacked. This is nothing like Vietnam. We couldn't attack
| Hanoi. We couldn't cut the Ho Chi Mihn trail.
|
| Today, our troops occupy Baghdad. Saddam is in our jail. His son's
| are dead, and we occupy his palaces. The government we set up rules
| Iraq. We are the superpower. We rule, not the United Nations. Deal
| with reality.

...and that my ignorant dipstick sums up nicely how the rest of the world
sees the USA.
Heh... that attitude is why you guys are so well loved globally!

CM


Mooran, You just do not get it.
1st we could give a rats ass what the spitting Nazi'x and the Smelly
Frogs think about us.

2nd Were we loved globely before bringing democracy to Itan?

Were we loved on 911, on the Cole, lebanon, Iraq hostages, first trade
center bombing, ect. All took place before we decided to stop giving a
hoot about what you' and the rest of the world thinks. We are going to
start loving ourselfs. And we are going to kill those that want to
kill us before they get the chance.

We are mad as hell and we are not going to take the worlds radical
**** anymore. Wanna hate us... go ahead we could care less, wanna kill
us, got news for you.... we are going to kill you first or lock you up
and throw away the key.

Joe

Man do you have things backwards... if we started giving a ****,
we wouldn't have the problems we're having. You said it yourself,
and then contradicted yourself.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Joe" wrote in message
m...
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
"Horvath" wrote in message
| You are whacked. This is nothing like Vietnam. We couldn't attack
| Hanoi. We couldn't cut the Ho Chi Mihn trail.
|
| Today, our troops occupy Baghdad. Saddam is in our jail. His son's
| are dead, and we occupy his palaces. The government we set up rules
| Iraq. We are the superpower. We rule, not the United Nations. Deal
| with reality.

...and that my ignorant dipstick sums up nicely how the rest of the
world
sees the USA.
Heh... that attitude is why you guys are so well loved globally!

CM


Mooran, You just do not get it.
1st we could give a rats ass what the spitting Nazi'x and the Smelly
Frogs think about us.

2nd Were we loved globely before bringing democracy to Itan?

Were we loved on 911, on the Cole, lebanon, Iraq hostages, first trade
center bombing, ect. All took place before we decided to stop giving a
hoot about what you' and the rest of the world thinks. We are going to
start loving ourselfs. And we are going to kill those that want to
kill us before they get the chance.

We are mad as hell and we are not going to take the worlds radical
**** anymore. Wanna hate us... go ahead we could care less, wanna kill
us, got news for you.... we are going to kill you first or lock you up
and throw away the key.

Joe

"Joe" wrote in message
m...
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
"Horvath" wrote in message
| You are whacked. This is nothing like Vietnam. We couldn't attack
| Hanoi. We couldn't cut the Ho Chi Mihn trail.
|
| Today, our troops occupy Baghdad. Saddam is in our jail. His son's
| are dead, and we occupy his palaces. The government we set up rules
| Iraq. We are the superpower. We rule, not the United Nations. Deal
| with reality.

...and that my ignorant dipstick sums up nicely how the rest of the
world
sees the USA.
Heh... that attitude is why you guys are so well loved globally!

CM


Mooran, You just do not get it.
1st we could give a rats ass what the spitting Nazi'x and the Smelly
Frogs think about us.

2nd Were we loved globely before bringing democracy to Itan?

Were we loved on 911, on the Cole, lebanon, Iraq hostages,

Uh - Oh! Joe shares his leader's geographical awareness.

Iraq ?? Iran?? Who cares? Let's bomb 'em,... eh?


Regards


Donal
--

ok i'll agree with you for the moment.
we had no business in iraq.
now can you respond to my post?

the question was:
....what would you propose as an alternative?
------------------------------------------------------

further: (disagree)
obviously either i was not clear or you did not read my post.
i never stated a direct connection between iraq and taliban, or 9/11

first you state: "muslim in name only" (???????)
and than

"If it is your attitude that "all them Arabs
look alike to me"""

do you see any contradiction here?

no i did not "confuse" iraq and iran.

we did not destroy his military in the gulf war, and this was made evident
by the force used to repell the allied forces.
no threat to iraq's neighbors?
really.
let's see what countries iraq is popular with
iran?........... nah
jordan........ppppppppppp
saudi..........doubtful
united arab emirates.............laugh out loud
kuwait.........sure
israel.....yeah right
egypt..........guess again

no ......no threat to iraq's nieghbors.
perhaps ....syria!
now there's an interesting thought to ponder.

what do you call the guys with grenade launchers and bombs?
or the gentlemen with big swords on video?
politicans
freedom fighters
what?

are you trying to tell us they are foreign fighters?
(i am especially looking forward to your answer to this one)

" Iraq has never been linked to the death of one American
through terrorist attack. "

if you are speaking of pre IRAQ/USA, i agree.
if you believe the hotbed of anti american sentiment in places like
fallujah, is because of bush and is not dangerous..............i'm
impressed.

i see, they just "found" weapons to combat the americans with. nothing to do
with saddam, terrorism or anything else.
just protecting they're homes......still.

if some foreign force entered your hometown, usa tomorrow, what kind of fire
power would you have available, being just a citizen protecting your home?
a pistol is possible
a shotgun or rifle maybe
a bow and arrow

how about a couple of rockets!
now we're talking!

fair winds
gf.



"felton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 12:24:07 -0400, "gonefishiing"
wrote:

felton,
first i should say i did not support this war at its being.

assuming i buy your agrument for a few minutes
which, by the way, i don't.
....what would you propose as an alternative?

Not go off on unrelated snipe hunts when we should be hunting for
bears. Our issue was terrorism. If you have been paying attention at
all, you would know that terrorists are primarily muslim extremists,
or jihadists if you prefer that term. Iraq was run by a ruthless
secular dictator who was Muslim in name only. He and the terrorists
were natural enemies. He wasn't a sponsor of terrorism. There was NO
connection between Iraq and 9/11 and Iraq was NO threat to us, or even
his neighbors when we attacked. We had destroyed his military in the
first Gulf War.

Don't believe me? How about Colin Powell in 2001

"One aspect of Michael Moore's documentary film, "Fahrenheit 9/11,"
that you won't hear Republicans denouncing is a 2001 video clip of
Colin Powell calling Saddam Hussein no threat.

Audiences react with shocked murmurs. The film doesn't explain the
context, a Feb. 24, 2001, diplomatic meeting in Cairo. Pressed by
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak about the Iraqi people's suffering
under U.S. economic sanctions, Powell reminded his audience that they
existed to check Saddam's ambitions.

"And frankly," he added, "they have worked. He has not developed any
significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He
is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

Not only was Iraq no danger to the United States, it had no capacity
to menace such powerhouses as Jordan and Kuwait. So why are we reading
news accounts like this in July 2004: "Saddam's army posed little
threat, Senate panel says" and "Panel describes long weakening of
Hussein army."



impotent dictator?
this impotent dictator has supported the very culture that these
terrorists
live in and thrive on.
they didn't just materialize out of thin air with grenade launchers
strapped
to their backs.

If it is your attitude that "all them Arabs
look alike to me", then there isn't much reason for you not to vote
for Bush.