GUNBOAT DIPLOMACY 1700's STYLE

Post by **Steve Gizzi** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 11:25 pm

Thank you Bart for reprinting the statements of the Lt. Colonel. I was very angry the other day as we have been informed here that my son Alex who is a Marine on his second tour of duty will be delayed in coming home once again. His company has taken many casualties. Thats why the harsher than normal post.

We all hate this and any war. My son, my family and I do NOT hate Muslims or Islam. We are a bit pissed off at RADICAL Islam, insurgents, and terrorists though.

The reason Iraq was invaded was because they did not comply with United Nations Directives. That is the "Official" reason. Also the U.S. were accompanied by many nations and for that we are forever gratefull.

roadwarriormfp · Post by **roadwarriormfp** » Sun Apr 22, 2007 11:41 pm

Sorry to inform you Steve.... but the US invaded without permission from the UN.... and that the UN were not convinced about "WMDs".

The 2nd resolution presented by the USA to the UN to get a yay or niegh vote to invade was dropped at the last minute as it did not have enough votes to win.

One important piece of evidence... that of "fissile" material from Nigre... and those "aluminum tubes" were found to be false, just weeks before the invasion occured.

Iraq WAS complying with UN inspection requests due to the troop build up on its borders...

However Cheney decided to invade.... simply because summer was approaching... and that it was argued that going to battle at the start of summer would not be pleasant.

It was stated many times by Bush... that Saddam had the capability to strike the US within "weeks".... this again was false... Iraq had no means or delivery system to strike outside his borders after 10yrs of sanctions....

The use of the term "terrorist" has also been "re-written". According to the government and media.... anyone attacking the "coalition of the willing"... are either terrorists... or insurgents....

People fighting in their OWN land... against an occuping force... are NOT terrorists....

Going by this stupid logic.... the French Resistance of WW2 were also "terrorists"... not freedom fighters....

Tell me again... how is Haliburton doing these days? How much have they got the "overcharging" the US tax payer ? A hundred mill ?? And good old Dick Cheney... how are his shares going?

Former CEO becomes Defence Minister.... and suddenly his former company gets the biggest and greatest contracts in Iraq...... and continues to deal with Iran at the same time.

Oh the hypocracy....

There will never be victory....even blind freddy can see this.... and extending the troops tour of duty will only cause more of them to go awol and desert.... Whats the figure now?? over 3500 who have "left"......

Post by **Steve Gizzi** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:11 am

I said "official reason"... It doesn't matter now. Is what you want to hear? "Bush Jr.finished off Saddam for his Daddy?" Saddam funded terrroist againts the west, whether you or anyone else likes it's any nation that backs terrorist activity against the west and it's allies is subject to invasion and their presidents hanged.

It will get even easier the second and third time.

Post by **Dave_H** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:19 am

roadwarriormfp makes an important point.

If you are in you own country, where you were born - Fighting against an invader from a foreign culture and a foreign land. Are you an "insurgent" or a "terrorist"

No.

You hear the US quote about people giving their lives for their country. guess what, that is exactly what the Iraqis are doing.

If you want to adhere to definiton used at the moment by the US govt, then the American war of independence was fought by cowardly Insurgents and terrorists against the brave british soldiers...

You could also argue the following American civil war was fought by terrorists and insurgents as well.

see how dangerous it is letting your governments propaganda dictate how you think?

The real failure in all of this is the people of the US, Australia and Britain who have allowed the government propaganda to colour their minds with foolish simplistic ideas of Good and Evil, of black and white, of "Freedom" vs arabic culture.

Stop for a second and think., it IS possible to say you "Support the troops" AND want the war to end. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, the two are not mutully exclusive.

It is the job of the average voter to stay informed and know the full story. to understand the history to consider an opinion.

IT is the JOB and the RESPONSIBILITY of the average US/UK/Aus voter to hold these war-criminal terrorist political heads of their country accountable. If not in a court then at least at election time.

Freedom requires eternal vigilance folks. Step up to the plate and take responsibility for your place in the system to stop all the war crimes being committed in your names.

The very fact an illegal war has been undertaken for lies and oil, that troops parents cant seperate a greedy presidents vanity from the honourable yet pointless sacrifice their children make, shows a failure of people to take an interest in questioning the government propaganda that is fed down their throats.

wake up people, your friends and children are dying for nothing but a lie.

roadwarriormfp · Post by **roadwarriormfp** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:31 am

Sorry but Saddam never funded any terrorist organisations... a senate report by the CIA proved this to be so...... that Saddam HAD NO LINKS to terrorism....

Didnt you ever stop to think why the playing field was changed so many times??

Fisrt.... we invade because he has WMDs and plans to use them....

When none are found..... Oh.. we invaded because Saddam sponsoured terrorism....

When reports came out that no proof was found.... Oh... we invaded to instal "democracy"...

When Iraq plunges into civil war because the puppet government cant control the population.... we will stay because Iraq is NOW a terrorist training ground !??!?!

Post by **Dave_H** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:09 am

Quote: Originally posted by roadwarriormfp on 23 April 2007

Tell me again... how is Haliburton doing these days? How much have they got the "overcharging" the US tax payer ? A hundred mill ?? And good old Dick Cheney... how are his shares going?

Former CEO becomes Defence Minister.... and suddenly his former company gets the biggest and greatest contracts in Iraq...... and continues to deal with Iran at the same time.

Oh the hypocracy....

/P

I just had a look at http://costofwar.com...

WOW!! congratulations USA, your pointless war for nothing has managed to cost you $419,000,000,000 of your tax-payer dollars. and still climbing

that figure again? FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETEEN BILLION US TAX-PAYERS DOLLARS.

Next time you cant get a hostpital bed, when your soldier son cant get decent treatment in your decrepit crumbling military hospitals (yes I read your news), when your kid cant get an education, when you cant afford a house, when the education budget is cut for military spending, when you cant get a job due to funding cuts, when HALIBURTON make a billion dollars profit from your tax-payer dollars...

...when all that happens, just think how much FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETEEN BILLION DOLLARS of YOUR TAX PAYER MONEY could have bought for you and your country instead of being squandered on a failed military campaign based on a lie.

Maybe the US govt you should have just got that money out of the bank and burned it in a big hole. They would still be in the same situation today but there would not be 3300 dead americans soldiers and over 100,000 (at least) dead iraquis.

Post by **Dave_H** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:37 am

Quote: Saddam funded terrroist againts the west, whether you or anyone else likes it's any nation that backs terrorist activity against the west and it's allies is subject to invasion and their presidents hanged.

It will get even easier the second and third time.

Guess who funded Saddam with lots of US$ and put him where he is today? Your wonderful US government!

Heres a nice happy snap to remind you of the 1980s. Feel free to check thats its authentic, I think you will find its the real deal.

Rumsfeld and Saddam, Saddam and Rumsfeld. all buddy buddys in the 80s when lots of US cash was being given to Saddam.

Up until the kuwait invasion in 1990, SADDAM was an American puppet government leader. Funded by Americans to do what the americans said.

Those weapons of mass distruction Saddam supposedly had? Bought with nice shiny US dollars my friend. Bought with your parents tax-paying dollars.

Remeber in first 1990 Iraq war? American soldiers were gunned down by iraqi guns, guns which were ultimatley bought by the american tax payer.

Saddam did not fund terrorism. That is a lie given to you by the govt. you swallowed it and you didnt even bother to check your facts.

You know the govt lies to you. yet you still believe them without an ounce of doubt. I wish I could switch off like that and believe any junk that was fed to me.

It must be such a feeling of blissfull ignorance...

roadwarriormfp · Post by **roadwarriormfp** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:19 am

Saddam had no links to al-Qaeda

Jonathan Weisman, Washington

September 10, 2006

[div]
[div]

As violence continues in Iraq, it is revealed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was no friend of Saddam Hussein despite claims by George Bush.

Photo: Reuters[/font][/div]
[div][/font][/div][/div]
[div]

THERE is no evidence of formal links between former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda leaders before the invasion of Iraq by the US in 2003, a long-awaited declassified US Senate report has revealed.

The finding, contained in a 2005 CIA report released by the Senate's Intelligence Committee, is a major embarrassment for President George Bush and casts more doubt on the reasons why the so-called "Coalition of the willing" went to war.

Full story here....

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/sad ... 83981.html

Ronald Regan was quoted as saying about Saddam... "He may be a bastard, but he's OUR bastard"

Dave mate.. its not just the US government which lie.... Ours too.... come to think of it.... all do....!!

Wars are only started by those in the seat of "power"..... people never start wars..... only our "elected" leaders.....[/div]

Post by **Dave_H** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:54 pm

roadwarriormfp

I agree govts start wars, but we the voters are the ones who's job it is to make the govt's accountable every election.

The Aussie, UK and US people are a (largely) educated population with access to news and critical comment in most instances. Yet in Iraq and the "war on Terror", we have let war-crimes, torture, murder, injustice, brutatilty, international kidnapping, violation of international law and human rights all be undertaken by OUR governments and OUR soldiers. WE are the bad guys.

We have destabilised and discarded the UN, the one international structure that was meant to stop any more wars (which it tried to do!).

For all of this, we through our inaction, have condoned the horrendous crimes committed in our name.

Yet we have the arrogance to invate a foreign country, kill their leader (whom we helped put there in the first place), murder their people, steal their OIL and then tell them we are the example they should follow.

the hypocracy is stunning.

Not for a second am I saying that Saddam was good or that international terrorism is not worth addressing. The UN can always be improved.

But

The legacy of all this ignorace and violence will be with us for generations. This is not some little pandoras box we can close back up again.

Post by **Big Bopper Bart** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:17 am

I never said the war was right.I was only trying to make a point that the Soldiers there aren't just killing the precious and innocent insurgents.Thier helping the people too.And the U.N is just as guilty as far as 'war crimes' ect. The U.N is a joke period so please don't make them out to be the Jesus H. Christ's of war.