If you enjoy computers then play with them. You will lose your joy if you become a professional. I like eating ice cream but I don't think I'd enjoy eating ice cream if I worked in an ice cream factory.
This business is harsh. I don't know what medicine is like but the IT industry is not pleasent anymore. It was at one time when the field was filled with brilliant innovators but now it's just shit.
Finally any doctor I know drives a nicer car, has a better house and a better looking wife then any computer professional I know.
Amen bro. My ex next door neighbors are gay and it never thrreatened my marriage. They were nice guys and we even hung out once in a while. Why do people feel so threatened anyway?
BTW the bible does not say that homosexuals should not get married. It says that they should be executed immediately. I wonder if anybody will try to get an amedment to execute gays.
Ok you got me. I mistyped. I first said they were NOT the same thing. You said they were, then I said that I am glad you changed your mind and agreed with me. I mistyped is all.
Anyway we both agree that nazism and fascism are NOT the same thing. Now that we have that out of way...
What do they have in common? Because you are so stupid I will make it easy for you. Here are the links to dictionary.com
After you read them you will see that they have a few things in common. Mainly belligerent nationalism, nationalistic expansion and of course racism.
You see now how you are a nazi and a fascist? You are racist and you advocate belligerent nationalism. You advocate controlling opposition through terror and censorship.
It's the other way around. Darly and co did not start to make money until they ditched their ethics and morals. As soon as they started lying and suing they got millions from MS and other investors.
Daryl is a supposed devout mormon with 7 kids. He sure is teaching his kids a valuable lesson isn't he? It's OK to lie cheat and steal as long as it's done for money. Let's hope his kids ask him where that's written in the book of mormon.
Thank you for agreeing with me that nazism and fascism are the same thing. You are both a nazi and a fascist. BTW it is possible to have one without the other despite your ignorant remarks to the contrary.
" The ultimate arrogance is that you pretend to know how I think"
I know what you think because I read your words. Your words tell me that you are mindless brownshirt follower. When the time comes to round up people like me and take them to the concentration camps Ashcroft will rely on people like you drive the buses and spy on your neighbors.
You are mindless. You are a facist. You are a nazi. There is a difference between a nazi and a facist but apparently you don't know the difference.
people like you are followers. They don't think. They just listen to Rush or Bill or whever is sprouting most hate today against homosexuals, hippies, democrats, arabs, muslims or whoever your hated group today is and nod their head saying AMEN BROTHER.
I'll say it again because you are too stupid to understand it the first time.
Anybody who helps an evil dictator commit mass murder is evil. Got that? Anybody, even America. You don't get a pass just because you are an american.
BTW I don't hate America despite what Ann Coulter told you. I hate you, I hate the half of America that thinks like you. I hate anybody who uses the power and greatness of America for evil purposes.
In a nutshell that's you and this administration. People who take the greatness of America and use for evil purposes.
'That's because the resolution drafted made scant mention of Iraq"
Except for the fact that it was condemning iraq for launching chemical warfare.
" Heck, you don't even address the French and German Nuclear technical assistance, including the sale of EIMS and Gas Centrifuge technology by Karl Hienz Schaab that gave Iraq"
Nonsense. I addressed the fact that other nations helped iraq. That makes them evil. I also addressed the fact the US helped iraq. That makes US evil. You get it now? Everybody who helped a brutal dictator launch chemical attacks is EVIL.
the US is no better then libya, communist china, communist russia, germany or france.
They all sold him weapons, we sold him chemicals, knowhow and intelligence. I'd say we were more help to saddam then any of them perhaps all of them combined.
"Get an education, and stop believing everything your leftwit buddies tell you."
Coming from a brainless fascist nazi that's rich. Maybe Rush was hallucinating when he gave you your marching orders ever think of that?
There is no way this supreme court is going to let this ruling stand. The majority has already indicated that they are behind this president 100%. No way in hell will they question his autority or judgement.
" I don't recall the rest of the world having a problem with him either."
The UN drafted a resolution to condemn the chemical attacks, the US (Reagan administration) blocked it. It never even got to a vote.
"Lets see, the French, Russians, Chinese, Germans, and Libyans, Czechs, Swedes, and Japanese all sold Saddam Hussein military and technical hardware over the past thirty years, but oh yes...it's the US that "kept" him in power."
I am sure the libyans sold him some AKA47s or something and maybe the russians sold him a tank or two. We provided him with knowhow and chemicals so he could manufacture chemical weapons. We provided him with intelligence and sattelite imagery so that he could kill as many people as possible using those weapons. Of course we also paid him lots of money too.
Sure the libyans, russians chinese also helped him but we helped him more. You know what that means? That means that the US no better then them. Are you proud of that? Are you proud that the US is no better then the libyans? You sure seem to be. Are your standards for your country that low? You really think that because Libya helped a brutal and savage person like saddam it was OK for us to do it too? I hold America up to a higher standard then china, libya and communist russia, apparently you don't.
Ok Lets sum it up. The US actually helped a tyrant and a brutal dictator stay in power by providing him with money, intelligence, technology and chemicals. This went on the entire time Reagan Bush was in office. So don't give me any bullshit about how democrats are soft on tyrants.
How many years did the US keep saddam in power? Wasn't it Bush Sr and reagan who sat on their hands while Saddam was gassing the kurds and iranians with chemical weapons given to them by Reagan.
There is a difference between regime change and invasion and occupation.
'1. N. Korea has thousands of artillery pointed at Seoul, S. Korea, and could level that city killing hundreds of thousands in minutes.
We know where those positions are. We could knock them out with bombers and cruise missles. If a few get through then so what? So a few people die in south korea who the fuck cares.
2. N. Korea has a vast, modern, dedicated army with the ability to strike many of our allies very hard from afar.
Total and utter bullshit. Their military is neither vast nor modern. The only ally then can strike is south korea and maybe japan. BOth countries have ample defenses and we could certainly minimize any damage that may occur by hitting first. We flew over 300 sorties per day in the first month of desert storm. We knocked out almost everything they had in the first night.
3. N. Korea has NUKES, you IDIOT. The fact this is news to you is proof you prefer your own ignorance just so you can go on bashing Bush.
They have a few nukes. We know where they are. They don't yet have any real delivery device for their nukes and they certainly did not have anything at the time we invaded iraq. We could have invaded them first thereby preventing them from having nukes and held off iraq for a later time because saddam had nothing!.
4. N. Korea's population has been very thoroughly cut off from the rest of the world for 50 years. They remain the only country in the world where it is impossible for to get internet access. The people revere their leaders as gods, and have had no opposing points of view presented to them. Invasion, much less occupation, would be orders of magnitude more difficult than Iraq."
They are starving and opressed. They are weak. They would be easy to control.
It was much more logical to invade north korea who was close to having nukes then to invade iraq which was decades away from having nukes.
"Ok, let's try having a megalomaniacal dictator and avowed enemy of the U.S. who has invaded his neighbors twice and is pursuing WMD so he can try again w impunity in the most unstable region of the world, who is both openly and covertyly funding and supporting terrorism"
He did not have WMDs, he did not have WMD programs. Did you hear about Kay quitting and saying that? read about it. He hated the US but then again so do a lot of other people. He was fully contained. There was a no fly zone, there were thousands of weapons inspectors running all over the country, we bombed them at least once a month. He was no harm to anybody. So he funded a few palestenians big fucking whoop as I said before we give israel billions of dollars woth of funds a few thousand dollars from saddam wasn't doing anything. Israel is in firm control over west bank and gaza and a few hundred dead israelis is a pretty small price to pay for keeping 3.5 million people under occupation. Hell we lost 500 people in just a few months in Iraq.
"But let's be real here. Being an enemy of the U.S. makes any dictator more desirable to you."
I guess when you have nothing you can resort to name calling.
"A few hundred billion wouldn't make a scratch on the world's poverty situation"
It would make a huge impact. It would certainly make more of an impact then invading iraq.
"In fact, you stated Iraq was worst off now than under Saddam. I then asked if you would rather live in Iraq now or then."
Neither. I live in the US and have no desire to live in Iraq anytime. I visited there and that was enough for me. But you are asking the wrong question. the question is not whether iraq is better off it's whether we are better off. Whether spending 100 billion dollars in one year to invade and occupy iraq was a good idea and made us any safer and whether that money could have bee
CBS: Link to a story about an al-quada operative caught in iraq. Al quada operatives were caught in the US, canada, germany, france, england, malasia, philipines, yemen and many other countries. You posed a completely irrelevent link.
CNN: Link to an article written by a hate group (CFOR). COFR is a jihadist organization. CNN is not jihadist but the COFR is.
London Telegraph: Link to a story which has since been proved to be forgery.
CSM: A link to a story about how kurds are saying that the taliban are coming across the border from afghanistan. The Iraqi intelligence office story has already been debunked thouroughly. Once again you are pointing to fraudulent discredited stories.
Need I go on?
Your links are meaningless. They are old, discredited or written by jihadists. If there was a link between Saddam and Osama you don't think the president would say it?
"Interesting, that sounds just like the logic of the peaceniks before WWII that claimed we should not fight Hitler because he wasn't after us way over here in America, and like the prevailing logic in America before 9/11."
Not really. In fact it's the opposite. Bush sound a hell of a lot like hitler and the hate speech coming from republicans about liberals sounds awfully like the speeched hitler gave against gypsies and jews. In fact GW has already set up concentration camps in cuba, afghanistan, quatar and iraq where tens of thousands of arabs are locked up indefinately. Hitler at least gave his prisoners walls and a roof, GW puts them in chain link cages.
As I said Israel is perfectly capable of defending itself. They have won every war they have fought. they already hold millions of arabs under occupation very successfully and are capable of holding millions more without any more help then we already give them. Remember we give them lots of money and arms it's not like we are doing nothing.
"And why do you think that is? Maybe it is a direct response to the mass murder directed explicitly against Isreali civilians by Arafat?"
For every israeli killed two to three palestenians are killed. The numbers don't lie.
"I agree, but obviously invading Palestine would have been impossible."
What? Why? Put down the crack pipe. Invading palestine would have been a breeze. It's small, the people would welcome us, israel would shore up one border, mossad has tons of intelligence agents inside there. It would be a cakewalk. Where do you get off saying it would be impossible?
"The cycle is not going to stop until every dictator in the region is removed"
The cycle is never going to stop. Jihadists don't stop until their god tells them to.
"You are underestimating the level of fear and control by the regime in the last decade."
No you are insanely stupid. You have enver been to Iraq (I have). You have never been to Iran (I have), you have never been to turkey or afghanistan (I have). The borders are mountainous, sparsely populated and porous as all hell. Smuggling is a daily occurance and has been for ever. You really should go visit there and see for yourself. It's impossible to seal up the borders. the US military can't do it for gods sake.
"BTW, I gave an explanation why N. Korea cannot be moved on militarily. Are you going to acknowledge it or respond at all?"
You gave no explanation. You simply said that it would be impossible. Which of course is utter bullshit. We spend 400 billion on defense spending which is more then the next 14 countries combined. That includes russia, china and pretty much all of europe. We can invade any country we want, any time we want and take whatever we want whenever we want.
Yadda Yadda Yadda. What the hell does have anything to do with what we are talking about. Sure we are a republic but we are supposed to be a representive one. When the politicians ignore the vast majority of the public and concentrate on a handful of small states it does not serve a democracy or a republic.
" I gave you tons of links, and there are tons more than that. I know a few leads were incorrect, but the vast majority of them were not."
You gave links to zealot propaganada and forged information. This administration is evil but not stupid. They know that if they release forged documents the press will eat it up and freepers like you will link to them perpetually while completely ignoring the fact that the information later turned out to be forgery.
"Hahaha, OK, now I see, terrorism isn't worth fighting when it's by stoked up by totalitarian societies against a democracy? "
I am concerned about terrorism directed against the US. Not terrorism directed against Israel. My tax dollars should be spent fighting osama not palestenians.
"The Palestenians are opressed by their own terrorist leaders, who refuse to allow economic development in their territory, steal and squander hundreds of millions intended for their people in terrorist enterprises, and blame the inevitable Irseali response on their victims."
The palestenians are also opressed by israel. You may choose to ignore that but it's true anyway. it's hard to have an economy when 700,000 people are under curfew and can't leave their houses. It's hard to have an economy when tanks regularly blow up your buildings, airplanes shoot missiles into your cities, and walls are built to keep your kids from going to school.
"The Palestenian situation is the biggest propoganda tool of both of both the terrorists and the Arab dictators who use them to divert attention from the real cause of their woes. "
Then it's in our interest to solve it once and for all. Why didn't we invade palestine and free them instead? That's what we should have done. The palestenians deserve freedom more then the iraqis and giving them freedom would have diffused other terrorists.
"Paying terrorists $25,000 per attack to continue this cycle of opression is no 'small' thing, and the Isrealis should not be required to just take one for the team."
No they should not. They should have invaded and occupied Iraq thenselves. It's not my job to pay to get rid of their fucking headache. We already pay them billions every year to kill arabs why don't they use that money to invade iraq instead of having us do it for them.
"Oh, Jesus! What a load of bullshit. Where do you get your information"
Just go their web site and read. They are a hate group. There is no real difference between the COFR and the KKK or al-quada. They all jihadists.
". Did the fact that noone goes in or out of Iraq, much less lives in Iraq w/o the blessing of the regime, and in the case of outsiders, minders?"
You are truly truly stupid if you think no person can leave or enter iraq without the govt knowing. Kurds, iranians, afghans syrians, and lebanese have been doing this for decades. Get educated.
The problem is that the democrats have nobody who will be able to widthstand the nonstop attacks by the republican hate machine. Kerry, Clark and Edwards are too decent and nice to be able to stand up to Fox, CNBC, MSNBC, Rush etc.
They will get crushed.
Al Sharpton should get nominated. He would lose like all the rest but at least he would fight back and be entertaining about it.
BTW It's easy to attack GW from the right. Immigration, big govt, steel tarrifs, etc. This is the tax and spend president of our generation.
They already do this by and large. Most states consistently vote either democrat or republican. Those states get ignored. There are a handful of swing states and that's where the politicians spend most of their money and time.
The solution is to remove winner take all. Take that away and you have real democracy.
There are no provedn ties between saddam and osama. Some papers were "found" but they have since been proved to be forgeries.
Saddam did pay the palestenians who are fighting their occupation by Israel but so what? Palestenians never attacked the US and we give Israel billions of dollars per year to keep the palestenians subjugated. Wasn't that enough money? Why do we have to spend another 100 billion to invade and occupy iraq just so saddam won't give a couple of thousand dollars to a palestenian. What kind of madness is that?
Israel has over 200 nuclear weapons, they have the best intelligence in the world, they have an exceptionally well trained army, they have been able to defeat every enemy that attacked them. Why do they need more help from us? Isn't the money we give them enough for gods sake? If Saddam was such a threat to Israel then Israel should have invaded Iraq and occupied them just like they are occupying palestine.
BTW the council of foreign relations and similar neocon organizations are borderline hate groups. They are right wing extremists who have called for invasion of many oil producing countries including iraq and saudi arabia for years now because they believe that oil should be under US control and they have no ethical or moral problems with killing people and taking their stuff. I certainly would not put any credence is anything the CoFR, RAND and other neocon "thinktanks". As I said there is little difference between them and the KKK.
Finally there have been many Al-Quida operatives caught in the US, Europe, Canada, and elsewhere. Just because an al-quida member was caught in a country that does not mean the country provides support for them.
I think you are way too overestimating what is likely to happen. If corporations would pay an invoice for 500 from anybody who threatens to sue then everybody would be doing it. Trust me it doesn't work that way.
" The reason we haven't invaded other countries is because either other possibilities like diplomacy have not been exhausted (unlike after 12 years in Iraq), "
This statement is all kinds of false. There was not 12 years of negotiations or diplomacy with Iraq. We beat them back, imposed sanctions, imposed a no fly rule, and bombed them on a regular basis. None of that counts as diplomacy. GW kept saying that Saddam must disarm and he kept saying that he didn't have WMDs. I guess Saddam was right in this case. Saddam was given two choices. Disarm or be invaded. He submitted to the UN for inspections and let them do whatever they wanted.
Honestly I don't think anybody actually believes that GW was interested in a diplomatic solution. He wanted to get saddam from the getgo. Probably because Saddam wanted to kill his dad.
"the military situation is impossible (N. Korea),"
Why? What do you mean impossible? You mean the combined might of the US and coalition forces could not invade and occupy north Korea? That's just silly.
"or the post-war occupation would be orders of magnitude more difficult than Iraq."
Again why? The north koreans would probably welcome us more then the Iraqis did. They have a population of disarmed starving people.
"There are a few countries we could bring democracy to by force and the occupation would relatively easy, however in none of those are American security interests significant enough to warrant such a large investment in time, money, or lives."
That's an awfully vague justification. What American interests are you talking about?
"So now I've answered your question. Now please answer mine instead of changing the subject."
You have done no such thing. I'll ask again. There are hundreds of millions of people suffering all over the world. We could help many of them for less money then we spent in Iraq and with no loss of US soldiers. With a hundred billion or two we could end starvation and illeteracy in the entire world. We don't even have to invade or occupy countries. We could help them without using our military.
Why did George W choose to help the Iraqis first? Aren't there other more deserving people in the world? In africa, north korea and china, south america hell right here in our own country. How come the Iraqis deserve freedom before anybody else does? Why are they so special?
If what you say is true then why don't more people send bills for bogus things to corporations. Why don't you say that you own some code in linux and send corporations a bill for $500.00?
It's not that easy. If a corporation pays up then they face extortion from everybody. It's usually worth it to fight blackmailers.
Slashdot Mirror
If you enjoy computers then play with them. You will lose your joy if you become a professional. I like eating ice cream but I don't think I'd enjoy eating ice cream if I worked in an ice cream factory.
This business is harsh. I don't know what medicine is like but the IT industry is not pleasent anymore. It was at one time when the field was filled with brilliant innovators but now it's just shit.
Finally any doctor I know drives a nicer car, has a better house and a better looking wife then any computer professional I know.
Don't do it, you'll regret it later.
$700.00. Kicks ass, robust, scalable, includes IDE and app server. Pleasure to work with.
Amen bro. My ex next door neighbors are gay and it never thrreatened my marriage. They were nice guys and we even hung out once in a while. Why do people feel so threatened anyway?
BTW the bible does not say that homosexuals should not get married. It says that they should be executed immediately. I wonder if anybody will try to get an amedment to execute gays.
" Nazism and Fascism are not the same thing,"
Ok you got me. I mistyped. I first said they were NOT the same thing. You said they were, then I said that I am glad you changed your mind and agreed with me. I mistyped is all.
Anyway we both agree that nazism and fascism are NOT the same thing. Now that we have that out of way...
What do they have in common? Because you are so stupid I will make it easy for you. Here are the links to dictionary.com
fascism
nazism
After you read them you will see that they have a few things in common. Mainly belligerent nationalism, nationalistic expansion and of course racism.
You see now how you are a nazi and a fascist? You are racist and you advocate belligerent nationalism. You advocate controlling opposition through terror and censorship.
"Lately, our government hasn't even bothered paying lip service to the Constitution except when it serves their own interests to do so."
Look for a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages pretty soon. See they love the constitution.
It's the other way around. Darly and co did not start to make money until they ditched their ethics and morals. As soon as they started lying and suing they got millions from MS and other investors.
Daryl is a supposed devout mormon with 7 kids. He sure is teaching his kids a valuable lesson isn't he? It's OK to lie cheat and steal as long as it's done for money. Let's hope his kids ask him where that's written in the book of mormon.
Thank you for agreeing with me that nazism and fascism are the same thing. You are both a nazi and a fascist. BTW it is possible to have one without the other despite your ignorant remarks to the contrary.
" The ultimate arrogance is that you pretend to know how I think"
I know what you think because I read your words. Your words tell me that you are mindless brownshirt follower. When the time comes to round up people like me and take them to the concentration camps Ashcroft will rely on people like you drive the buses and spy on your neighbors.
You are mindless. You are a facist. You are a nazi. There is a difference between a nazi and a facist but apparently you don't know the difference.
people like you are followers. They don't think. They just listen to Rush or Bill or whever is sprouting most hate today against homosexuals, hippies, democrats, arabs, muslims or whoever your hated group today is and nod their head saying AMEN BROTHER.
I'll say it again because you are too stupid to understand it the first time.
Anybody who helps an evil dictator commit mass murder is evil. Got that? Anybody, even America. You don't get a pass just because you are an american.
BTW I don't hate America despite what Ann Coulter told you. I hate you, I hate the half of America that thinks like you. I hate anybody who uses the power and greatness of America for evil purposes.
In a nutshell that's you and this administration. People who take the greatness of America and use for evil purposes.
'That's because the resolution drafted made scant mention of Iraq"
Except for the fact that it was condemning iraq for launching chemical warfare.
" Heck, you don't even address the French and German Nuclear technical assistance, including the sale of EIMS and Gas Centrifuge technology by Karl Hienz Schaab that gave Iraq"
Nonsense. I addressed the fact that other nations helped iraq. That makes them evil. I also addressed the fact the US helped iraq. That makes US evil. You get it now? Everybody who helped a brutal dictator launch chemical attacks is EVIL.
the US is no better then libya, communist china, communist russia, germany or france.
They all sold him weapons, we sold him chemicals, knowhow and intelligence. I'd say we were more help to saddam then any of them perhaps all of them combined.
"Get an education, and stop believing everything your leftwit buddies tell you."
Coming from a brainless fascist nazi that's rich. Maybe Rush was hallucinating when he gave you your marching orders ever think of that?
There is no way this supreme court is going to let this ruling stand. The majority has already indicated that they are behind this president 100%. No way in hell will they question his autority or judgement.
Neither friendly nor a startup. That should tell you everything.
" I don't recall the rest of the world having a problem with him either."
The UN drafted a resolution to condemn the chemical attacks, the US (Reagan administration) blocked it. It never even got to a vote.
"Lets see, the French, Russians, Chinese, Germans, and Libyans, Czechs, Swedes, and Japanese all sold Saddam Hussein military and technical hardware over the past thirty years, but oh yes...it's the US that "kept" him in power."
I am sure the libyans sold him some AKA47s or something and maybe the russians sold him a tank or two. We provided him with knowhow and chemicals so he could manufacture chemical weapons. We provided him with intelligence and sattelite imagery so that he could kill as many people as possible using those weapons. Of course we also paid him lots of money too.
Sure the libyans, russians chinese also helped him but we helped him more. You know what that means? That means that the US no better then them. Are you proud of that? Are you proud that the US is no better then the libyans? You sure seem to be. Are your standards for your country that low? You really think that because Libya helped a brutal and savage person like saddam it was OK for us to do it too? I hold America up to a higher standard then china, libya and communist russia, apparently you don't.
Ok Lets sum it up. The US actually helped a tyrant and a brutal dictator stay in power by providing him with money, intelligence, technology and chemicals. This went on the entire time Reagan Bush was in office. So don't give me any bullshit about how democrats are soft on tyrants.
How many years did the US keep saddam in power? Wasn't it Bush Sr and reagan who sat on their hands while Saddam was gassing the kurds and iranians with chemical weapons given to them by Reagan.
Yes it was.
You know it's coming.
"Regime change had been the policy for years,"
There is a difference between regime change and invasion and occupation.
'1. N. Korea has thousands of artillery pointed at Seoul, S. Korea, and could level that city killing hundreds of thousands in minutes.
We know where those positions are. We could knock them out with bombers and cruise missles. If a few get through then so what? So a few people die in south korea who the fuck cares.
2. N. Korea has a vast, modern, dedicated army with the ability to strike many of our allies very hard from afar.
Total and utter bullshit. Their military is neither vast nor modern. The only ally then can strike is south korea and maybe japan. BOth countries have ample defenses and we could certainly minimize any damage that may occur by hitting first. We flew over 300 sorties per day in the first month of desert storm. We knocked out almost everything they had in the first night.
3. N. Korea has NUKES, you IDIOT. The fact this is news to you is proof you prefer your own ignorance just so you can go on bashing Bush.
They have a few nukes. We know where they are. They don't yet have any real delivery device for their nukes and they certainly did not have anything at the time we invaded iraq. We could have invaded them first thereby preventing them from having nukes and held off iraq for a later time because saddam had nothing!.
4. N. Korea's population has been very thoroughly cut off from the rest of the world for 50 years. They remain the only country in the world where it is impossible for to get internet access. The people revere their leaders as gods, and have had no opposing points of view presented to them. Invasion, much less occupation, would be orders of magnitude more difficult than Iraq."
They are starving and opressed. They are weak. They would be easy to control.
It was much more logical to invade north korea who was close to having nukes then to invade iraq which was decades away from having nukes.
"Ok, let's try having a megalomaniacal dictator and avowed enemy of the U.S. who has invaded his neighbors twice and is pursuing WMD so he can try again w impunity in the most unstable region of the world, who is both openly and covertyly funding and supporting terrorism"
He did not have WMDs, he did not have WMD programs. Did you hear about Kay quitting and saying that? read about it. He hated the US but then again so do a lot of other people. He was fully contained. There was a no fly zone, there were thousands of weapons inspectors running all over the country, we bombed them at least once a month. He was no harm to anybody. So he funded a few palestenians big fucking whoop as I said before we give israel billions of dollars woth of funds a few thousand dollars from saddam wasn't doing anything. Israel is in firm control over west bank and gaza and a few hundred dead israelis is a pretty small price to pay for keeping 3.5 million people under occupation. Hell we lost 500 people in just a few months in Iraq.
"But let's be real here. Being an enemy of the U.S. makes any dictator more desirable to you."
I guess when you have nothing you can resort to name calling.
"A few hundred billion wouldn't make a scratch on the world's poverty situation"
It would make a huge impact. It would certainly make more of an impact then invading iraq.
"In fact, you stated Iraq was worst off now than under Saddam. I then asked if you would rather live in Iraq now or then."
Neither. I live in the US and have no desire to live in Iraq anytime. I visited there and that was enough for me. But you are asking the wrong question. the question is not whether iraq is better off it's whether we are better off. Whether spending 100 billion dollars in one year to invade and occupy iraq was a good idea and made us any safer and whether that money could have bee
"CBS, CNN, the London Telegraph, CSM, zealots???"
CBS: Link to a story about an al-quada operative caught in iraq. Al quada operatives were caught in the US, canada, germany, france, england, malasia, philipines, yemen and many other countries. You posed a completely irrelevent link.
CNN: Link to an article written by a hate group (CFOR). COFR is a jihadist organization. CNN is not jihadist but the COFR is.
London Telegraph: Link to a story which has since been proved to be forgery.
CSM: A link to a story about how kurds are saying that the taliban are coming across the border from afghanistan. The Iraqi intelligence office story has already been debunked thouroughly. Once again you are pointing to fraudulent discredited stories.
Need I go on?
Your links are meaningless. They are old, discredited or written by jihadists. If there was a link between Saddam and Osama you don't think the president would say it?
"Interesting, that sounds just like the logic of the peaceniks before WWII that claimed we should not fight Hitler because he wasn't after us way over here in America, and like the prevailing logic in America before 9/11."
Not really. In fact it's the opposite. Bush sound a hell of a lot like hitler and the hate speech coming from republicans about liberals sounds awfully like the speeched hitler gave against gypsies and jews. In fact GW has already set up concentration camps in cuba, afghanistan, quatar and iraq where tens of thousands of arabs are locked up indefinately. Hitler at least gave his prisoners walls and a roof, GW puts them in chain link cages.
As I said Israel is perfectly capable of defending itself. They have won every war they have fought. they already hold millions of arabs under occupation very successfully and are capable of holding millions more without any more help then we already give them. Remember we give them lots of money and arms it's not like we are doing nothing.
"And why do you think that is? Maybe it is a direct response to the mass murder directed explicitly against Isreali civilians by Arafat?"
For every israeli killed two to three palestenians are killed. The numbers don't lie.
"I agree, but obviously invading Palestine would have been impossible."
What? Why? Put down the crack pipe. Invading palestine would have been a breeze. It's small, the people would welcome us, israel would shore up one border, mossad has tons of intelligence agents inside there. It would be a cakewalk. Where do you get off saying it would be impossible?
"The cycle is not going to stop until every dictator in the region is removed"
The cycle is never going to stop. Jihadists don't stop until their god tells them to.
"You are underestimating the level of fear and control by the regime in the last decade."
No you are insanely stupid. You have enver been to Iraq (I have). You have never been to Iran (I have), you have never been to turkey or afghanistan (I have). The borders are mountainous, sparsely populated and porous as all hell. Smuggling is a daily occurance and has been for ever. You really should go visit there and see for yourself. It's impossible to seal up the borders. the US military can't do it for gods sake.
"BTW, I gave an explanation why N. Korea cannot be moved on militarily. Are you going to acknowledge it or respond at all?"
You gave no explanation. You simply said that it would be impossible. Which of course is utter bullshit. We spend 400 billion on defense spending which is more then the next 14 countries combined. That includes russia, china and pretty much all of europe. We can invade any country we want, any time we want and take whatever we want whenever we want.
Yadda Yadda Yadda. What the hell does have anything to do with what we are talking about. Sure we are a republic but we are supposed to be a representive one. When the politicians ignore the vast majority of the public and concentrate on a handful of small states it does not serve a democracy or a republic.
" I gave you tons of links, and there are tons more than that. I know a few leads were incorrect, but the vast majority of them were not."
You gave links to zealot propaganada and forged information. This administration is evil but not stupid. They know that if they release forged documents the press will eat it up and freepers like you will link to them perpetually while completely ignoring the fact that the information later turned out to be forgery.
"Hahaha, OK, now I see, terrorism isn't worth fighting when it's by stoked up by totalitarian societies against a democracy? "
I am concerned about terrorism directed against the US. Not terrorism directed against Israel. My tax dollars should be spent fighting osama not palestenians.
"The Palestenians are opressed by their own terrorist leaders, who refuse to allow economic development in their territory, steal and squander hundreds of millions intended for their people in terrorist enterprises, and blame the inevitable Irseali response on their victims."
The palestenians are also opressed by israel. You may choose to ignore that but it's true anyway. it's hard to have an economy when 700,000 people are under curfew and can't leave their houses. It's hard to have an economy when tanks regularly blow up your buildings, airplanes shoot missiles into your cities, and walls are built to keep your kids from going to school.
"The Palestenian situation is the biggest propoganda tool of both of both the terrorists and the Arab dictators who use them to divert attention from the real cause of their woes. "
Then it's in our interest to solve it once and for all. Why didn't we invade palestine and free them instead? That's what we should have done. The palestenians deserve freedom more then the iraqis and giving them freedom would have diffused other terrorists.
"Paying terrorists $25,000 per attack to continue this cycle of opression is no 'small' thing, and the Isrealis should not be required to just take one for the team."
No they should not. They should have invaded and occupied Iraq thenselves. It's not my job to pay to get rid of their fucking headache. We already pay them billions every year to kill arabs why don't they use that money to invade iraq instead of having us do it for them.
"Oh, Jesus! What a load of bullshit. Where do you get your information"
Just go their web site and read. They are a hate group. There is no real difference between the COFR and the KKK or al-quada. They all jihadists.
". Did the fact that noone goes in or out of Iraq, much less lives in Iraq w/o the blessing of the regime, and in the case of outsiders, minders?"
You are truly truly stupid if you think no person can leave or enter iraq without the govt knowing. Kurds, iranians, afghans syrians, and lebanese have been doing this for decades. Get educated.
The problem is that the democrats have nobody who will be able to widthstand the nonstop attacks by the republican hate machine. Kerry, Clark and Edwards are too decent and nice to be able to stand up to Fox, CNBC, MSNBC, Rush etc.
They will get crushed.
Al Sharpton should get nominated. He would lose like all the rest but at least he would fight back and be entertaining about it.
BTW It's easy to attack GW from the right. Immigration, big govt, steel tarrifs, etc. This is the tax and spend president of our generation.
They already do this by and large. Most states consistently vote either democrat or republican. Those states get ignored. There are a handful of swing states and that's where the politicians spend most of their money and time.
The solution is to remove winner take all. Take that away and you have real democracy.
Just like they did in afghanistan. Freedom is nice but not too much freedom. Too much freedom is a dangerous thing.
There are no provedn ties between saddam and osama. Some papers were "found" but they have since been proved to be forgeries.
Saddam did pay the palestenians who are fighting their occupation by Israel but so what? Palestenians never attacked the US and we give Israel billions of dollars per year to keep the palestenians subjugated. Wasn't that enough money? Why do we have to spend another 100 billion to invade and occupy iraq just so saddam won't give a couple of thousand dollars to a palestenian. What kind of madness is that?
Israel has over 200 nuclear weapons, they have the best intelligence in the world, they have an exceptionally well trained army, they have been able to defeat every enemy that attacked them. Why do they need more help from us? Isn't the money we give them enough for gods sake? If Saddam was such a threat to Israel then Israel should have invaded Iraq and occupied them just like they are occupying palestine.
BTW the council of foreign relations and similar neocon organizations are borderline hate groups. They are right wing extremists who have called for invasion of many oil producing countries including iraq and saudi arabia for years now because they believe that oil should be under US control and they have no ethical or moral problems with killing people and taking their stuff. I certainly would not put any credence is anything the CoFR, RAND and other neocon "thinktanks". As I said there is little difference between them and the KKK.
Finally there have been many Al-Quida operatives caught in the US, Europe, Canada, and elsewhere. Just because an al-quida member was caught in a country that does not mean the country provides support for them.
I think you are way too overestimating what is likely to happen. If corporations would pay an invoice for 500 from anybody who threatens to sue then everybody would be doing it. Trust me it doesn't work that way.
" The reason we haven't invaded other countries is because either other possibilities like diplomacy have not been exhausted (unlike after 12 years in Iraq), "
This statement is all kinds of false. There was not 12 years of negotiations or diplomacy with Iraq. We beat them back, imposed sanctions, imposed a no fly rule, and bombed them on a regular basis. None of that counts as diplomacy. GW kept saying that Saddam must disarm and he kept saying that he didn't have WMDs. I guess Saddam was right in this case. Saddam was given two choices. Disarm or be invaded. He submitted to the UN for inspections and let them do whatever they wanted.
Honestly I don't think anybody actually believes that GW was interested in a diplomatic solution. He wanted to get saddam from the getgo. Probably because Saddam wanted to kill his dad.
"the military situation is impossible (N. Korea),"
Why? What do you mean impossible? You mean the combined might of the US and coalition forces could not invade and occupy north Korea? That's just silly.
"or the post-war occupation would be orders of magnitude more difficult than Iraq."
Again why? The north koreans would probably welcome us more then the Iraqis did. They have a population of disarmed starving people.
"There are a few countries we could bring democracy to by force and the occupation would relatively easy, however in none of those are American security interests significant enough to warrant such a large investment in time, money, or lives."
That's an awfully vague justification. What American interests are you talking about?
"So now I've answered your question. Now please answer mine instead of changing the subject."
You have done no such thing. I'll ask again. There are hundreds of millions of people suffering all over the world. We could help many of them for less money then we spent in Iraq and with no loss of US soldiers. With a hundred billion or two we could end starvation and illeteracy in the entire world. We don't even have to invade or occupy countries. We could help them without using our military.
Why did George W choose to help the Iraqis first? Aren't there other more deserving people in the world? In africa, north korea and china, south america hell right here in our own country. How come the Iraqis deserve freedom before anybody else does? Why are they so special?
If what you say is true then why don't more people send bills for bogus things to corporations. Why don't you say that you own some code in linux and send corporations a bill for $500.00?
It's not that easy. If a corporation pays up then they face extortion from everybody. It's usually worth it to fight blackmailers.