| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
 Posted - 01/21/2003 : 16:50:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Stuart
I heard a rumour that they were planning on makinga film about Sept 11th..... I'll have a chat with my mate who's a film buff and see if its true...... by the way, has anyone seen the trailer for Terminator 2? And if you have don't you think it looks crap?
Isn't there already a terminator 2? I thought it was the third one coming out. I don't think i've seen any of the terminator's all the way thru. I prefer not to waste my time with Arnold Schwarzinager (sp? though i don't really care how it's spelled, because as i was saying before i started these parenthesis) movies anymore.
Derek |
 |
|
|
Ebb Vicious
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1162 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 19:21:21
|
yeah it's terminator 3 coming out, and it will be horrible i'm sure. not that the first two were anywhere near as good as some people think they were.
better than titanic... though they lacked naked kate winslet. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 21:24:57
|
'so perhaps, in actuality, you're the one who might need to read a bit more carefully..'
not wanting to start a war of words with Floop, however my comments 'against american people' was merely an example highlighting the fact that people were getting offended when they hadn't read the reply properly.....
Anthony, it is not me that needs to read more carefully. |
|
|
|
floop
= Wannabe Volunteer =
Mexico
15297 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 22:50:36
|
listen China boy,
....
hey, just kidding man. i don't want to start a war either. so i'm going to leave it at that.
i'm a lover, not a fighter.
Floop
i occasionally eat chateaubriand. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 11:48:52
|
Floop.
I like your reply 'I'm a lover not a fighter,' classic 80's McCartney and Jackson (before he turned paedo).....
No offense meant in my reply to you mate....
Regrds
'China Boy'
P.s. I'm here trying to prvent a nuclear war between NK and the US........ obviously for once I'd support the US....... my wife is half North Korean, but luckily she ain't reading this message as she wouldn't be too impressed..... they are a bunch of wankers though, purchasing copious amount of weaponry at the expense of starving their population! |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
|
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 13:50:58
|
Good article. Saddam needs to be ousted from power, but, I'd rather him die of a heart attack or by choking on a piece of fruit or something.
Wouldn't that be a great way to win this war?
"Bush decided today not to strike Iraq, as Saddam Hussein apparently failed to masticate his banana thoroughly. This is Peter Jennings signing off..."
Derek |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 19:19:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by ProverbialCereal
"Bush decided today not to strike Iraq, as Saddam Hussein apparently failed to masticate his banana thoroughly. This is Peter Jennings signing off..."
huh huh uh huuh ....he said, masticate. |
|
|
|
mereubu
= FB QuizMistress =
USA
2677 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 19:47:00
|
Heh-heh. Masticating his banana, no less. Eww.
I hear that if you masticate too much, you'll go blind. And insane. And hair will grow on your palms. . .
: P |
Edited by - mereubu on 01/22/2003 19:49:28 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 21:14:17
|
Oh yeah, well I heard that every time you masticate a kitten dies. (Well, if you put them in your mouth...)
Back to some seriousness, i just wanted to let you American's and Britians know that February is when the attack begins:
http://cbc.ca/stories/2003/01/22/interfax030122
No more kidding around.
Scary thing is by initiating an attack like this, you guys only make yourselves more of a target for attack...now Iraq (and whoever else) really wants to do something nasty.
What's worse - a mean dog, or the same mean dog with a stick poked in her face?
I'm really curious as to why the UK is so hot to trot on Iraq?
I wish Canada could just slide off and merge with the Arctic...luckily Cretien is maintaining that we're sticking with the UN. Man, that takes guts when you live next door to Bush.. |
|
|
|
Chip Away Boy
= Cult of Ray =
914 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 23:13:04
|
I dont pretend that i know alot about politics, cause i'm just another young teenager that doesnt pay enough attention to the world, but I really should be paying more, anyway from what i've heard...the people of Iraq dislike Sadaam for the most part, and therefore wouldn't be lead to start suicide bombing our countries because they want him out of power...
thats just what i've heard, coulda been propaganda, i dont know. |
|
|
|
Chip Away Boy
= Cult of Ray =
914 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 23:31:15
|
| By the way , that is an interesting article, but I think the author is not objective enough. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 00:35:49
|
Good question about the UK Dave, who knows. Many Brits are pissed off with Blair and see him as Bush's lapdog, basically following Bush's every move.... But to be honest, I don't reckon Blair is as crazy as Bush.... I think that Blair is looking at the whole situation with more caution, and possesses less of the gung ho attitude which the US Government has seemed to adopt. And quite rightly put that by following US, the UK is putting itself in the line of fire as far as terrorism is concerned. Literally every week there is a story on the news of a foiled attempt terrorist in Britain, whether that is true or not who knows.
What gets me about the war on terrorism is 2 things:
1) Why hasn't the US attempted to look at the root causes of terrorism, especially Sept 11th. All they have done is declare that they will wage a war wherever in the world terrorism exists. Bush fails to acknowledge the reasons why the US is an unpopular country, instead he is relying on violence and war. It is Britain who is making more of the attempts to gain a better understanding, for example with trips to Syria and with conferences with the Palestinian council.
2) Why should Britian back the US..... weve had our terrorist problems for years with the IRA, and apart from Clinton have made no effort to help us out. In fact, US organisations were giving financial aid to the IRA up until recently. Most Brits question whether US Government will help us out with the situation in Ireland, and that is another factor why most of us feel that we shouldn't support the US.
Sept 11th was the worst thing that I have ever seen, I still struggle to come to terms with what happened in New York..... but in my opinion the way the US is tackling the problem is very very wrong and is leaving itself open to an even more horrific attack. I just hope it doesn't happen again, for the US, Britain or anywhere else or that matter.
|
|
|
|
gary13th
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
632 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 00:50:45
|
amen, stuart !
~you will get used to me, welcome to your new joy
Heloise by FB&TC |
|
|
|
steveplymouthuk
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
639 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 03:56:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
I'm really curious as to why the UK is so hot to trot on Iraq?
It seems to me that Blair is trying to keep both Bush and the British people happy, and not doing too good a job at the latter. Make no mistake that Blair is a pretty clued up on what people actually think about getting involved. As for the people I've spoken to about this, although everyone hates Saddam, over 90% have no wish to join in the war against terror. It all depends on if Blair is more concerned with his alliance with Bush or public opinion.
However I think it's gone so far along the making enemies route that we have to continue with the anti-Iraq theme. As it stands, we're openly saying out intention to go to war, while not having made any actual ground on eliminating terrorism.
The more the UK makes itself a target, the more often you'll be hearing about bomb making equipment being found in a raid on some council house that has been given to an asylum seeker with known terrorist connections and the like.
Rant over. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 06:38:02
|
| Blair certainly is in a shitty situation, but out of him and Bush he is doing the better job. Part of me reckons that he's got a head on his shoulders and maybe he knows alot that we don't about the situation. At least he is making an attempt to look at the root cause and is trying to talk to some of the middle eastern states.... thats alot more than Bush is doing. To me it is scarey that someone like Bush (who's verbal cockups include referring to the Pakistanis as 'Pakis', labelling Iraq, Iran and NK as the Axis of Evil... etc etc) is in charge of the strongest military power in the world. The guy is a moron. |
|
|
|
steveplymouthuk
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
639 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 08:30:02
|
does anyone know any other dumb stuff Bush has said apart from:
"space is still a priority for NASA"
and "most of our imports come from outside the United States"
No wonder he prefers not to negotiate, he might start more trouble! |
|
|
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 11:29:33
|
Oh c'mon, bringing up the dumb stuff Bush has said in the past is like... well, it's like Thomas quoting the Swimmer from other unrelated topics.
Derek |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 11:51:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by ProverbialCereal
Oh c'mon, bringing up the dumb stuff Bush has said in the past is like... well, it's like Thomas quoting the Swimmer from other unrelated topics.
Derek
I love you guys too. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2003 : 16:03:54
|
Reagan came out with some classics as well, but at least he had the excuse of having alzheimers to fall back on, Bush is just plain dumb. Maybe he's comparable in utter stupidity to our very own Prince Phillip - Duke of Edinburgh.... in fact Ive just found a website called 'Prince Phillip Quotes- The UK's very own George W Bush.' Unfortunately the link is dead, but I can remember some of his classics:
1) Referring to Emperor Hirohito in public as a 'Slanty eyed git.'
2) Travelling to China and telling some British students that if they stay in PRC for too long then they will develop slanty eyes.
3) Inspecting dodgy electrics at some kid of factory, and commenting that 'the person who did this was probably Indian.'
There are loads more but my laptop is not letting me open up anymore links at the moment. |
|
|
|
misterwoe
= Cult of Ray =
Greece
675 Posts |
Posted - 01/24/2003 : 09:24:38
|
I can't remember exactly how it was worded, but one time Bush mentioned how neat books can be because sometimes they have pictures in them.
No lie.
Jonathan Richman is awesome. |
|
|
|
Chip Away Boy
= Cult of Ray =
914 Posts |
Posted - 01/24/2003 : 09:42:51
|
| in little bookshops here in NY they have these mini books filled with dumb stuff he's said. |
|
|
|
St. Francis
= Cult of Ray =
Canada
548 Posts |
Posted - 01/24/2003 : 18:30:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
I'm really curious as to why the UK is so hot to trot on Iraq?
I wish Canada could just slide off and merge with the Arctic...luckily Cretien is maintaining that we're sticking with the UN. Man, that takes guts when you live next door to Bush..
Was living in London for Sept 11th and was so happy to see the reporting of the event from a European point of view. The Guardian did a balanced (well in my oppinion) job of expressing several views surrounding the attacks on New York. A lot of scholars were getting colums and it was interesting to switch on CNN after reading the british "left" press.
As for the issue about Britian joining the US. I think it has to do with Britian's standing as a one time world power. In the grand scheme of things one could argue the UK enjoyed as much global dominance as the American's currently have. Also, think a lot of the posturing has to do with trade and restimulating the UK's economy which is not as developed as America's. Being friends is a big infusion into the English market... tourism alone after the pro U.S stance must have helped. Essentially, the Brits have dealt with these "ludites" who want to stop "progress" before why not do it again?
Finally, on a Canadian tip, I really hope we don't get involved without approval of the UN (actually would prefer not to get involved period). With the recent power moves in France and Germany I think moving into the conflict would seriously damage and credability of any nations involved in the conflict. At the end of the day, international law states if there is no consensus in the security council then there is no war and it doesn't look like this will happen so there legally can't be a war. To dodge this the parties involved will play some semionic hide and seek and the excuse to legitmise action with out the UN is something of which I don't want Canada to be a part...
Simply going in without the approval of the UN is a drastic shift in general Canada policy... if Cretian breaks this policy the political fallout will be facinating... could see an extream shift in the nation...
Brothers be on my jock 'cause the way I hold a piece of steel... |
Edited by - St. Francis on 01/24/2003 18:31:52 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2003 : 17:53:05
|
Well, there was some minister (of Defense?) that said several weeks ago that we were going to join the US in the attack, and then a week later Cretien chimed in saying we weren't, and that we were sticking with whatever the UN would decide.
Like you, i hope we don't take any action beyond discussion with Iraq.
With the UK, there's another interesting angle to consider because it's the only European country that's willing to go ahead with this(that i'm aware of), where-as the rest have been quiet or opposed.
I also read that the US is training people in Turkey to help fight 'terrorism'. You think they would have learned from what happened in Afghanistan...i can imagine the discussion now:
US: Okay, so if we train you guys how to destroy stuff, you gotta promise not to do this to the US.
Turkey: That sounds reasonable.
US: Okay, here's your gun. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 06:03:04
|
| When are the US planning to attack???? Has there been a proposed date yet?? Another thing is that with all the shit thats being spouted by the North Korean dictator... why aren't the US kicking up more of a fuss about that???? I'd say that he's more of a nutter than Saddam, afterall he is prepared to starve millions of his countrymen to death whilst spending shitloads on weapons! |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 10:44:51
|
Aye, N. Korea freely admits they have nuclear weapons, and they just pulled out of some serious conventions (UN?) regarding nuclear arms.
I guess if they had oil or had attacked Dubya's pop we might see something different, eh?
I think they're just saving their cards, wait until they attack Iraq, then pop down to N. Korea to keep the war machine alive. No point in trying to do both at once. Or maybe Iraq and N. Korea will team up, and we could have another 'World War'.
Fuck i hope that doesn't happen. |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 13:44:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
Aye, N. Korea freely admits they have nuclear weapons, and they just pulled out of some serious conventions (UN?) regarding nuclear arms.
I guess if they had oil or had attacked Dubya's pop we might see something different, eh?
I think they're just saving their cards, wait until they attack Iraq, then pop down to N. Korea to keep the war machine alive.
The situation with N Korea is much more dangerous, because of the insanity of the enemy and the vulnerability of S Korea. Therefore Korea dictates a response different from that toward Iraq. The comments about lack of oil and George Bush Sr. are simple garbage. The oil is at least as important to France and Germany. The US nears the threshold of action entirely for legitimate reasons of security and not because of oil. Even that bozo Jimmy Carter has said attributing the US stance to oil is "foolish". And the reference to "war machine" is pure propaganda. What war machine? The war machine that has stood between the Koreas for fifty years? The war machine that ended the Cold War? The action in Afghanistan was more than justified, and the US has shown way too much patience with Iraq, and with that joke of a United Nations. This week the senior Senate Dems are talking about Bush's "rush to war." What rush? Just what has the US done that is out of line? We've been way too respectful of the spineless, pseudo-principled drivel being spewed by the anti-war left and our west European "allies". |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 16:48:25
|
Hey Erebus,
Think it's possible France and Germany are opposed because they have deals with Iraq that they don't want the US over-seeing? Oil is definately not to be ignored, simple as that. I was being sarcastic about Bush Sr tho.
The war machine is what, 30,000 troops on their way from the US to Iraq right now? Perhaps you're right, it isn't a machine, it's a monster. And it sure does generate a lot of $$ for the US too. War is profit.
You say the US has shown too much patience, but i ask: why does Iraq need to be attacked?
Thank you for keeping (most) personal insults out of this. =) |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 19:08:43
|
I'd pretty much say that talking of regime change is pretty much out of line.... What would the US say if the rest of the world ( who infact pretty much dislikes George W Bush (including British public, minus Tony Blair (and we are sure that even he thinks that Bush is an incompetent moron)) turned around and said that they are going to overthrow the president and his regime because they were worried that one day he might use his Nuclear capabilities. Regime change should be left to the people who are within the country, not by an outside force whose objectives are questionable.
Finding out about Iraqs capabilities are one thing (and acting in a diplomatic way to disarm), but overthrowning a government that the US previously armed, and failed to punish adequately after the invasion of Kuwait is another.
I work here in China as a teacher.... and it is here where you can experience a strong feeling of resentment for the US due to their belief that US is trying to police the world. I regularly am told that Bin Laden is a hero and that many Chinese people clenched their fists in joy when the Trade Centre was attacked. Of course this angers me, most of the arguments are just uneducated bullshit (in fact, most Chinese claim that 'Bin Laden has never harmed the Chinese people', which is dogturd as Chinese died in the WTC and Bin Laden actually has funded Islamic Militants in the Xinjaing region of China) and completely heartless, nothing short of a disgrace.... but it goes to show the anti US feeling around the world. A war started by the US is not going to lessen this feeling of resentment. |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 20:43:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
The war machine is what, 30,000 troops on their way from the US to Iraq right now? Perhaps you're right, it isn't a machine, it's a monster. And it sure does generate a lot of $$ for the US too. War is profit.
You say the US has shown too much patience, but i ask: why does Iraq need to be attacked?
Right, the US military is a monster for poising to oust a dictator even the yellow rag NY Times estimates has killed one million of his own citizens. And how many innocents have US soldiers killed in the last sixty years? Compared to the millions killed by the commies of every stripe? Monster? I must admit it is difficult to avoid the personal insults. Why attack Iraq? There can be no doubt that Saddam provides haven and support to Al Queda. That alone is reason enough. We must do everything in our power to make sure nothing like 9/11 occurs again. The US is virtually designed for vulnerability to terrorism. What are the chances that there are already in place weapons of mass destruction, possibly even nukes, in American cities? Personally I fear that there will be a massive attack during the 2004 presidential election campaign for the direct purpose of throwing the election to a Dem the likes of which are so friendly to the enemies of the US. Think eight more Clintonista years and eight more years of inattention to US security. The simple fact that we cannot be sure about such possibilities provides all the justification we need to wipe Saddam off the planet, for starters. The 21st century should be committed eliminating ALL dangerous dictatorial regimes. This is a no-brainer, and I can't believe I'm even feeling the need to debate this. If we do nothing, or if we allow the UN to work its magic, i.e., do nothing, we will be doing exactly what allowed the likes of Castro, Qadaffi, Bejing, Kim Il Jong, etc. to persist as they have. These and theirs should be dealt with with extreme prejudice and urgency. Instead our "allies", to include Canada, through trade and express sympathy consistently undercut attempts to isolate and weaken such regimes. There can no longer be any grey area in such matters. I would think the anti-war faction would work to support prophylactic action while it is still possible. What do you think will happen if a mini-nuke does go off in a large American city? I guess your consciences will be clear. You can always blame America, apparently. But you can be sure America will truly go ballistic.
I know America's hands are hardly historically clean, and I know we will always be hated by many. So be it. But when that hate constitutes a true threat America will have to act. That's reality, at least until the next Clinton gets elected. Frankly, it pains me to see the US at such odds with the Islamic world. I have always thought they got a raw deal regarding the creation of Israel. But 9/11 was too much, as is Saddam. The US posture on Iraq has as much to so with the Arab threat to Israel as it does to the threat to America. I wish that were not the case, just as I wish Bush was not so much in the grip of ignorant Christian fundamentalism. But it's too late to do anything about that. The last thing we need is a Gore, Daschle, or Hillary. We're much better off with the bible-thumper. We're certainly not going to take the lead on reining in Israel, and we can't change the recent history of the region. But we can see that terrorists pose less threat to us, and we must. Saddam must go. |
Edited by - Erebus on 01/26/2003 20:53:33 |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2003 : 23:52:17
|
But why is it that the US always has to threaten with war..... so far since Sept 11th, all the US has done is threaten war, talk big words and generally make the world wide situation even worse. Don't you think it would be a better idea to try and sit down with these people and work something out diplomatically??? Fairplay, it would probably turn out that Saddam is incapable of this, and if so then so be it, go to war with Iraq. However, the US doesn't seem interested in diplomacy, or looking at the root of the problem, its like a fucking Holywood movie with those right wing gung ho no brained supposed politicians.
Do you really think that killing terrorists, or waging war with countries that sponsor terrorism will end this all??? In my opinion it will just escalate the problem, and then the US be even more at risk against more determined terrorists.
|
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2003 : 21:12:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Stuart
But why is it that the US always has to threaten with war..... so far since Sept 11th, all the US has done is threaten war, talk big words and generally make the world wide situation even worse. Don't you think it would be a better idea to try and sit down with these people and work something out diplomatically??? Fairplay, it would probably turn out that Saddam is incapable of this, and if so then so be it, go to war with Iraq. However, the US doesn't seem interested in diplomacy, or looking at the root of the problem,
Do you really think that killing terrorists, or waging war with countries that sponsor terrorism will end this all??? In my opinion it will just escalate the problem, and then the US be even more at risk against more determined terrorists.
I'll try to be more brief this time. I think there's been a lot of talk, diplomatic and otherwise, over the past ten years, but most of it went nowhere, largely due to those who consistently exploit the optimism and good will of the others. Though it sometimes does bear fruit, more often than not talk with villains just allows the problems to escalate. The US has tried diplomacy for years, and, more recently, for months. I guess we disagree on the facts in that case.
You are right that attacks on terrorist nations and cells will have at least the interim effect of increasing the danger. But to me it seems that we have little choice. We can't work with them; the current situation is itself completely intolerable; and force seems to be the only thing these people understand, at least at this point. From what I understand, Arab culture has historically interpreted lack of response as weakness and therefore as encouragement. I think they will respond in a way more to our liking if we show that we are committed. I do believe that if the US stands tough in coming years, hopefully with ever growing support, we will gradually make headway against the kinds of danger we now face. But we''ve lost faith in talk. War is brought on by the peace that precedes it. The peace of the post-Soviet period is sown with the seeds of wars and many will be fought. This one could be avoided in two simple, very different manners. Saddam could step aside, or the world could actually stand together on this. It is not the US that will be to blame for this war. Rather, it will be the individuals and nations that failed to unite against him. If the Europeans would stand with us, speaking with one voice, and if the leftist antiwar activists would simple shut their mouths, for just a few months, all, except Saddam and terrorism writ large, would get exactly what they want: peace and a free Iraq. |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2003 : 07:14:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
[quote]Originally posted by Stuart
If the Europeans would stand with us, speaking with one voice, and if the leftist antiwar activists would simple shut their mouths, for just a few months, all, except Saddam and terrorism writ large, would get exactly what they want: peace and a free Iraq.
You heard 'em peace-niks....shut your traps.
Keep quiet, don't even think about opening your mouth in this "democratic" society. How dare you? Do you think your pitiful minimum wage existance even registers on the government's GIVE-A-SHIT-RADAR? Don't even try to think about it, peasants. |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2003 : 09:51:38
|
quote:
You heard 'em peace-niks....shut your traps.
Keep quiet, don't even think about opening your mouth in this "democratic" society. How dare you? Do you think your pitiful minimum wage existance even registers on the government's GIVE-A-SHIT-RADAR? Don't even try to think about it, peasants.
My point, which I would have thought to be obvious, had nothing to do with freedom of speech, which I of course completely endorse. The idea is that by presentation of something resembling a unified front all civilized parties could get what they want, at least with respect to Iraq. The largely shortsighted, self-serving devisiveness serves to give comfort to Saddam and his. His house of cards would soon collapse in the face of unified pressure. No wonder you believe the US government is in the business of mass-murder of its citizens. |
Edited by - Erebus on 01/29/2003 09:52:42 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
