"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 15:40:28 +1100, K Smith wrote:

Gould 0738 wrote:
Yup, Saddam sure fooled a lot of people!


It's a good thing Saddam is gone.

But if ever we decide that a noble end justifies any conceivable means,
we will
become a rogue nation.



Chuck saddam could have just opened the place up to free proper
inspection & none of it would have happened. The reason you the UK (&
little us, don't forget us:-)) went in was because we were trying to
protect our citizens from terrorist attacks.


Naw. The reason we "went in" was to prop up a failing president and
his failing presidency.

If it was just to prop up the Presidency, we would of just fired a bunch of
Cruise missiles at some tents and a factory or two.

Calif Bill wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 15:40:28 +1100, K Smith wrote:

Gould 0738 wrote:
Yup, Saddam sure fooled a lot of people!


It's a good thing Saddam is gone.

But if ever we decide that a noble end justifies any conceivable means,
we will
become a rogue nation.



Chuck saddam could have just opened the place up to free proper
inspection & none of it would have happened. The reason you the UK (&
little us, don't forget us:-)) went in was because we were trying to
protect our citizens from terrorist attacks.


Naw. The reason we "went in" was to prop up a failing president and
his failing presidency.

If it was just to prop up the Presidency, we would of just fired a bunch of
Cruise missiles at some tents and a factory or two.




Sorry, Bill, but the bloom of post-9/11 was fading off your boy, and he
needed something big to distract Americans from his domestic and foreign
policy failures, so...The BIG invasion of another little country. Bush's
puppetmasters thought that would do it for their boy. So far, it hasn't.

How many body bags do you think will be coming home by elections next
year, Bill?

On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:36:40 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

How many body bags do you think will be coming home by elections next
year, Bill?

It's very unfortunate for those serving right now, but the locals know
more body bags equals trouble for Bush. It's hard to imagine every
leader in the region, other than Isreal, doesn't want to see Bush
fail. Heck, if I was a leader over there, I'd want that mad man out
of office in the worst way. I'm sure they are doing their best to
funnel support to the opposition and will increase that effort as the
election approaches. It looks like were up to about two body bags a
day now. Next summer should be a rough time to be hanging around
Iraq.

bb

bb wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:36:40 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

How many body bags do you think will be coming home by elections next
year, Bill?

It's very unfortunate for those serving right now, but the locals know
more body bags equals trouble for Bush. It's hard to imagine every
leader in the region, other than Isreal, doesn't want to see Bush
fail. Heck, if I was a leader over there, I'd want that mad man out
of office in the worst way. I'm sure they are doing their best to
funnel support to the opposition and will increase that effort as the
election approaches. It looks like were up to about two body bags a
day now. Next summer should be a rough time to be hanging around
Iraq.

bb

Sadly, I don't believe that a handful of U.S. soldier deaths each day
has much of an impact on Boobus Americanus. The Iraqi opposition forces
know this, too, and since they have far better intelligence in the area
than we do, I would be saddened but not surprised to hear the daily
death toll rising as larger targets are selected.

I just love the way the idiot in the White House plays the game of
newspeak, don't you? "We're succeeding because the Iraqis are trying
harder."

Reminds me of what our military and political leaders were saying during
the war against the Vietnamese. It was crap then and it is crap now. We
have the weaponry to flatten military forces, but we don't have the
wherewithal to compete against superiority in intel.

Harry Krause wrote in message ...

I just love the way the idiot in the White House plays the game of
newspeak, don't you? "We're succeeding because the Iraqis are trying
harder."

Reminds me of what our military and political leaders were saying during
the war against the Vietnamese.

It does have an eerie ring to it.

It was crap then and it is crap now. We have the weaponry
to flatten military forces, but we don't have the wherewithal
to compete against superiority in intel.

Remember, it was not Viet Minh guerrillas who rolled into Saigon
in '75. It was regular army North Vietnamese troops supported by
tanks.

The Viet Minh had been effectively finished off by the infamous
"Phoenix Program".

http://www.danford.net/phoenix.htm

Something on that order is what needs to get started, right now.

You may have noticed I did not use the term "Viet Cong".

That is because it was just another one the many made up "lies" by the
US Govt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Minh

If you're going to lie about, or worse yet don't even know, who it is
you're really fighting, is it any wonder you do not succeed?
--
SJM

Heck, if I was a leader over there, I'd want that mad man out
of office in the worst way.

S'pose any of those foreign leaders have access to the internet?

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

On 01 Nov 2003 16:00:06 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Heck, if I was a leader over there, I'd want that mad man out
of office in the worst way.

S'pose any of those foreign leaders have access to the internet?

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

I can't imagine they do. Aren't they all just a half step above
animals? They just don't seem to understand it's unpatriotic not to
support Bush's agenda.

bb

"bb" wrote in message
...
On 01 Nov 2003 16:00:06 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Heck, if I was a leader over there, I'd want that mad man out
of office in the worst way.

S'pose any of those foreign leaders have access to the internet?

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

I can't imagine they do. Aren't they all just a half step above
animals? They just don't seem to understand it's unpatriotic not to
support Bush's agenda.

bb

OPEC is making sure Bush doesn't get an economic boost from lower oil
prices. I think we can depend on them to keep the economy from really
taking off.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 15:40:28 +1100, K Smith wrote:

Gould 0738 wrote:
Yup, Saddam sure fooled a lot of people!


It's a good thing Saddam is gone.

But if ever we decide that a noble end justifies any conceivable
means,
we will
become a rogue nation.



Chuck saddam could have just opened the place up to free proper
inspection & none of it would have happened. The reason you the UK (&
little us, don't forget us:-)) went in was because we were trying to
protect our citizens from terrorist attacks.


Naw. The reason we "went in" was to prop up a failing president and
his failing presidency.

If it was just to prop up the Presidency, we would of just fired a bunch
of
Cruise missiles at some tents and a factory or two.




Sorry, Bill, but the bloom of post-9/11 was fading off your boy, and he
needed something big to distract Americans from his domestic and foreign
policy failures, so...The BIG invasion of another little country. Bush's
puppetmasters thought that would do it for their boy. So far, it hasn't.

How many body bags do you think will be coming home by elections next
year, Bill?



If he just wanted to prop up his numbers, just had to charge HK under the
Patriot act. You boy showed the way in Wag The Dog. How many people still
engage in Bosnia?

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

If he just wanted to prop up his numbers, just had to charge HK under the
Patriot act. You boy showed the way in Wag The Dog. How many people
still
engage in Bosnia?


How many were killed in Bosnia and how much did it cost.

Stupid comparison for you to bring up.