http://news.yahoo.com/...n=world&cat=iraq

*Shock horror*

Guys, this is a good discussion, but don't get personal. Stick to the argument, I'd hate to have to lock this thread.

Cheers,

Alex
--
Gossamer Threads Inc.

Hey that's not fair. Yahoo changed the page that my link above pointed to.

Basically it was saying that an ex-scientist says Saddam is hiding weapons deep underground.

Speaking of...

I saw a documentary where an Iraqi insider spoke of an underground bunker that was so deep that on the elevator ride down his ears popped. They said it was basically an inverted sky-scraper.

Yikes!

Did they use the Earth's core to heat their cups of coffee? ;-)

- wil

This is going to be tough. The inspectors are unlikely to find anything and those who are easily led will assume Saddam is innocent and see no reason for war.

The fact that an ex scientist has said the weapons are buried underground and are unlikely to be found unless by accident seems credible, yet he was jailed for 11 years by saddams regime so one could argue perhaps he is seeking revenge.

Oh well, I'm just glad I'm not the one making the decision :)

Simply untrue.

A few in the US House & Senate have made some comments to this effect, but that's not coming from the Executive Branch.

US public opinion is growing negative on the French, after all they have rich history of playing the weasel (denial of overflight rights en route Libya comes to mind). Not that Chirac has done anything to help the French image, particularly amongst the EU candidate countries.

If there is any American punishment for the French, it will be found in negative consumer reaction.

p.s. Plenty of Arab leaders will be just pleased as punch when Saddam is gone from the world scene.

There is no outgoing CIA director, although it may just be a terminology problem.

The current DCI is George J. Tenet, and he has been head of the CIA since summer 1997.

Old Washington axiom: "retired generals (and old spy masters), are out of date the day they walk out the door".

If you don't like the ties to Al Qaeda. How about clear cut Iraqi ties to Abu Sayyaf?

Link worth reading.

Here is some interesting reading -
http://www.msnbc.com/...QOIL_Front.asp?cp1=1
http://www.counterpunch.org/goldstein01082003.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1118-02.htm
http://members.tripod.com/...URCE/mideastoil.html
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j091302.html

Bob

It's not all to do with oil, but mainly.

This website provides the reasons:

http://KickAss.At/Iraq

What do you think?

Nadeem Azam
Azam.biz, Inc., London
Click here to develop a residual income stream

Not much. His solution for Bin Laden, for example, is to treat him as a "...criminal fugitive, not an enemy of war." [Salon, 9/13/01]

Despite his fixation with the global petrochemical industry, his writings are at least readable.

And he doesn't go out of his way to demonize those opposed to his viewpoint.
That is refreshing when contrasted with the vitriol spewed by much of the "anti-war" movement. Iraq for many protestors appears to just be a placeholder until they go back "protesting" capitalism or some other global conspiracy.

That page says unavailable. But I don't really have the urge to believe what is written at "kickass.at"

I was just watching Sky News and a viewer poll showed that 67% of people now want to go to war. Strange. It wasn't a majority a few weeks ago.

Oh well let's just be glad that our leaders have enough sense to take the bull by the horns instead of being feeble pacifists.

You should take into context Sky News's average viewer and it's target audience. It's mainly A-B, B, and B-Cs, similar to The Sun. In fact, it's owned by the same network.

- wil

Time to send the weapons inspectors into America, not Iraq ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/...americas/2779069.stm

- wil

Yes, because there are so many security council resolutions against those pesky Americans.

How dare America have a military, weapons, and the will to oppose the failed causes of the old left.

Yeah there are two key points in the article...


and


Every country has the right to own weapons to defend itself with and the ability to destroy chemical and biological weapons is certainly a good thing. If they are buried underground then they probably shouldn't be there in the first place.

Curious



Why would you think that someone outside the "western" world would prefer/desire to live under the rule of some like Saddam instead of what you have chosen, a representative government based on the rule of law?

By choice, I mean you have the choice of moving to Iraq and living under Saddam's benevolent rule, or not.
--
Rob

SW Montana's Online Community
Modular Model Railroading

Sorry if you couldn't access the site I referred to. There is a mirror of it here:

http://www.angelfire.com/...books/waroniraq.html

The 'KickAss' bit is supposed to be ironic.

As for Sky News, I'm not really sure. I agree that Sun readers are the dopiest people on the planet (my literature portal, 1Lit.co.uk, actually uses the slogan 'Sun Readers Not Welcome' ), but I would imagine they'd rather be watching Jerry Springer or Trisha than a news channel.

Sun readers are not ABC1s. They tend to be from the lower social classes. The level of English in the Sun is the reading age of the average seven year old. Sky News watchers may be ABC1s but Sun readers are C2DE - white van man, builders, single mothers, the unemployed etc.

Nadeem Azam
Azam.biz, Inc., London
Click here to develop a residual income stream

I'm not too sure how "The Sun" came in to this to be honest. No-one even mentioned it.


Hmm interesting philosophy but I'm not sure of its accuracy. Sky News delivers news the same way every other channel does. Infact if you channel hop over the major news channels more often than not they are all covering the same story at the same time.

The fact that newspapers like the Sun and tv channels like Sky News remain popular is because there is a demand for them. The fact that they are not your choice doesn't make everyone who reads/watches them an idiot.


Good plug.


Be careful of that sweeping generalization as it whooshes past :)

(1) The Sun was mentioned above.

(2) I am not making a generalisation. Advertisers with products for the working class target the Sun because it is bought by the lower social orders.

(3) Buy a copy of the Sun tomorrow and compare it to the FT. You *might* be able to notice a difference in the level of English.

See:

http://www.warwick.ac.uk/...network/3/oneday.htm

"When I worked at The Sun some years ago, we were told to aim at an average reading age of 9; the 'ooh, aah, Daily Star' is much the same, of course!"

Also:

"The features we work on tend to revolve around the soaps, new movies or the latest pop trends. For me, the resulting 'acquisition of ultimately meaningless information' serves two purposes - it pays the mortgage and guarantees victory in Trivial Pursuit."

(4) The News channels are not popular by any definition of the word. Most of the BBC News and Sky News get LESS than 5% of the viewing figures of trash like Eastenders and Coronation Street, which are just about people having affairs. Don't know if it is true or not, my friend tells me that virtually everybody in Eastenders has slept with everybody else.

Anyway, we're getting off the subject, so I'll give it a rest now and let others continue :)

At least when we've blown Iraq to bits, they'll be able to 'free' to enjoy Jerry Springer and Arnold Schwazzenger films.

Nadeem Azam
Azam.biz, Inc., London
Click here to develop a residual income stream

Of course it delivers the same news, it's how it delivers it is what's important. The polls on Sky News are generally those like "Should we kick Saddam's ass?". It's the way the language is delivered, which is quite a lot different from say BBC News 24. It's also about the level of discussion. On Sky News you have LittleJohn (?), who is a popular columnist in the Sun taking his right-wing views on gay-bashing, Saddam-hating, pro-Blair, pro-England, whereas you are far more likely to have a more intellectual and damned right better debate on BBC News or even ITV News recently.

- wil

Yep, I just meant in the context of the thread I'm not sure how the Sun came into it. Someone mentioned it for some reason.


What do you define as someone in the lower social order?


Colloquialism and level of English are totally different :)

It seems like if the US can't convince France to join their quest they'll just take the piss out of them

http://story.news.yahoo.com/..._eu/france_us_iraq_4

I wonder if France will use their vito

I think there's a good chance that France will cave on their position in the UN. The alternative is a US/UK lead victory, an ineffective United Nations, and France left out of post-war Iraq. I can't believe the French would force the UN into such a weakened position.

There is no question that Iraq has the weapons, or that Iraq is in defiance of the UN. That much is acknowledged by the Security Council, the EU, and NATO.

Instead we're treated to French games in the only arena where they still wield power, their vote on the Permanent Five.