Gossamer Forum
Home : General : Chit Chat :

Iraq

(Page 2 of 2)
> >
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
>>
And we will as we always have.
<<

Hmm not quite true.

>>
Osama didn't start the fight on 9/11, his actions of blowing up our buildings and trying to take out the WTC prior were there way before 9/11. We lost men when he blew up one of our Naval vessels in port in the middle east. But we didn't strike back then. We lost people when he blew up our embassy but we didn't strike back then. We had thousands injured in the first attempt on the WTC and we didn't strike back then.
<<

Also not quite true...thats quite a clouded view of the situation. Not quite as one sided as you like to make out.
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] Iraq In reply to
That wouldn't surprise me. It seems UK PMs (regardless of political party) typically side with the US. Not so different as here in Canada (especially under our once Grit PM Mulroney who was a puppet of Reagan). But from what I hear on the news, the British people are not so agreeable. Britian like Canada and many other countries (including the Arab nations - some like Jordan will not allow their soil or airspace be used in an US invasion of Iraq) are not in favour of attacking Iraq. The US has a uphill battle on their hands 'policing the world for all of us' - albeit in the end, just serving the interests of the US.



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
when the US 'invaded' the Moslem world - especially Saudi Arabia, the home of Mecca

We have never invaded Saudi. We were invited!

Yes the US did hurt and kill people other than the enemy as has other countries pilots and infantrymen. And I as well as most Americans were sad to hear of the Canadians that died or were hurt.

War is Hell and the world is at war with terrorism. We have lost many men as well and they will not be talked about as much as the people lost from other countries.

I cannot argue the point on the A Bombs in Japan. They were brutal and something that nobody wants to happen again. Especially us!

We are far from the bully on the schoolyard though. We give more than any other country in dollars, resources and support. But that is always overlooked when convenient to do so by other countries. But when these other countries need monry, resources or support, guess who they ask first?
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
Hmm I really need to cut down my use of the word "quite" Wink

Also not quite true...thats quite a clouded view of the situation. Not quite as one sided as you like to make out.

Last edited by:

Paul: Jul 22, 2002, 12:38 PM
Quote Reply
Re: [Evoir] Iraq In reply to
That is the current belief as they have not been able to show a tie to terrorists outside the US.

BUT, Iraq DOES have weapons grade anthrax and will use it.



Cutaneous (“skin”) anthrax can occur when bacteria enter a break in the skin.
    Cutaneous anthrax, the most common naturally occurring types, comes from handling contaminated animal product - such as meat, wool, or hides.

    Begins as a small bump, progresses to a larger blister in 1-2 days, followed by a black scab called an eschar.

    About 5% to 20% of untreated cases can result in death, but death is rare if given antibiotic therapy.


Gastrointestinal (“stomach”) anthrax can occur when eating raw or undercooked contaminated meat.
    Gastrointestinal anthrax is a very rare disease—no documented U.S. case in the 20th century.

    Initial signs are nausea, loss of appetite, vomiting, and fever — followed by severe abdominal pain, vomiting blood, and severe diarrhea.

    Death results in 25% to 60% of cases.


Inhalational anthrax can occur when inhaling as few as 5000-6000 anthrax spores—perhaps in a single deep breath.
    Initial symptoms may develop in 1-6 days, and resemble the common cold or flu: sore throat, mild fever, muscle aches, and tiredness.

    Mild symptoms can progress very rapidly after a few days to severe breathing problems and shock—if left untreated, death rate exceeds 99%.

    Even when treated aggressively in a state-of-art hospital center, once severe symptoms develop, 45% to 80% of patients could die.
    Edit: I figured the info would be better than the pictures

Last edited by:

Teambldr: Jul 22, 2002, 12:52 PM
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
http://www.cbc.ca/...07/19/bombing_020719
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
http://www.peacecouncil.net/AfghanResponse.htm
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] Iraq In reply to
Not "quite" necessary. One of my high school English teachers taught you should use repitition of key terms to grind your point into your listeners' heads. Sly

--Philip
Links 2.0 moderator
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
The US was not invited by Saudi Arabia per se. You were invited by a family in Saudi Arabia. The royal family that runs Saudi Arabia as a dictatorship, with an iron fist. The Muslim people of Saudi Arabia did not invite you. But it was 'accepted' by some in the short term for the purposes of the 1990 Gulf War. But when it became a permanent occupation of holy Moslem soil, the tide quickly changed. And al Qeada warned the US that they would act. Muslims including Saudis appear to be united in large numbers to rid Saudi Arabia of the US occupation.

Friendly fire incidents involving US troops actually was well documented by the majour Canadian news media outlets. But then news reporting in Canada tends to be less biased, and more balanced.

In total money contributed yes (no surprise given the US GDP). Per capita, it is questionable. Canada usually donates and lends more based on per capita. And sometimes, more in absolute terms as the US often closes its wallet when certain causes (e.g., UN family planning programs) upsets its sense of morality, or is counter to US interests. And when you factor in all other contributions from other nations, the US is still a minority player. But I do not spit in the face of US contributions. They are pivotal and greatly appreciated by the countries that depend on them. But throwing money around does not give the US carte blanc to do as it pleases. And there are consequences.

Further, the US has made no friends or allies in Canada and other countries that the US has declared economical war against. I have to wonder when the US will invade and occupy Canada when our abundant resources (water, energy, etc.) become too valuable to the US.

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] Iraq In reply to
Afganistani people were under the control of the Taliban. The Taliban was under the control of Osama.

The comment made in that article about Osama - Hitler and Afgans - Jews is way off. If Osama is Hitler then the Afgans would be the Germans not one specific sector of the German population. Duh!

So as the Germans were held responible for the actions of Hitler, the Afgans are NOT being held responsible.

The bottom line is that War is Hell and all war is bad. But at what point do you stop turning the other cheek? Iraq will NOT give us OR YOU a warning. They will just launch there missles full of weapons grade anthrax and create the largest amount of deaths ever in world history.

Note of the George Micheal video: We laugh at it because we consider the source! And oh, he GM can thank us for virtually every dime he has as he was VERY big here and NOT elsewhere. But we lost interest in him when he started his slide. So now, to get exposure GN once again has to go to the SHOCK video to get attention even in his own country.
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
So what was it Dan, an invasion or an invitation? Geeeze! Tongue
Quote Reply
Re: [Paul] Iraq In reply to
Yep, the tragedy continues. They died for no good damn reason, and their killers will unlikely pay the consequences. Not the consequences they deserve anyways.



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
Further, the US has made no friends or allies in Canada and other countries that the US has declared economical war against. I have to wonder when the US will invade and occupy Canada when our abundant resources (water, energy, etc.) become too valuable to the US.



Now THAT is the silliest statement I have heard in this whole thread. LOL

Good one Dan!Wink
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
It was an 'invitation' of sorts (after some US arm twisting) by a non-democratically elected head of state in a dictatorship where the people have no say and do not support US (infidel) imperialism on their soil - at least not part of a protracted and even permanent occupation of Saudi Arabia. From what I hear, the US does not support dictatorships, but they will exploit them to serve US interests. And it's this behavior that gets the US in the constant trouble it finds itself in, and contributes to global destablization.



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
So the US is the cause of global destablization then?

OMG....LMAO

Whew...I was told that pot made up for a large chunck of the Canadian GNP but I really had no idea!

I am just kidding Dan...I respect your views and really like a good debate. Thanks for the debate!Cool
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
In what regard is it silly. Canadians (and Europeans as well) are becoming increasingly more resentful of Americans. And would not the US invade Canada if the conditions were right, and such actions were required in the best interests of the US? What if Canada dammed a number of major waterways that drain into the US, thereby reducing supplies of fresh water to the US? For example, as part of the escalating trade war between Canada and the US, or a desire to save the resources for ourselves (our prarrie provinces have been in a drought for some years now). And perhaps greatly restrict or block energy imports to the US. Currently, 49 US states are experiencing drier than normal conditions, and 39% of the US is under drought. And this will only worsen under global warming (now recognized by the Bush administration). And the US is having some measure of difficulty of meeting its energy demands. Not in Canada. Not saying by any means that it is enevitable or likely. But the scenario is possible and plausible. Albeit almost two hundred years ago, you did invade Canada and did draft a policy for the invasion and seizing of British North America (like taking California away from the Spanish). Doubt it will happen, but it's always a possibility down the road.



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [Teambldr] Iraq In reply to
Hey it was fun. We agree to disagree. And last I heard pot was only 60% of our GDP. The other 40% is racked to ding dongs, hogies, twinkies and zig zags. Mind you, the Federal guy who compiles and collects the economical stats is as high as a kite Wink



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
Why would we bother invading our 51st state?
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
OK Dan...you went all over the place on that one. Let me see if I can throw in a couple comments:

In what regard is it silly.

It is silly as we do not invade or occupy a member of our team (so to say). If Canada was to choose not to be on the team then that is a choice that Canada would have made and not the US.

Canadians (and Europeans as well) are becoming increasingly more resentful of Americans.

Until they need us for something and then we are their big brother fighting the bullies in the schoolyard for them.

What if Canada dammed a number of major waterways that drain into the US, thereby reducing supplies of fresh water to the US?

If Canada did this it would just a likely flood itself out then hurt us. You forget, the water from there mainly hits the upper east coast. The west is all covered by the Rockies thank you!

And perhaps greatly restrict or block energy imports to the US.

I am sure that Canada would not want to hurt itself fiscally. Especially since it would not even make a dent (less than 3 percent) in the overall energy use in the US.

And the US is having some measure of difficulty of meeting its energy demands.

This is not new news Dan. Why do you think we helped and were invited to help the Saudis and Kawait?

Albeit almost two hundred years ago, you did invade Canada and did draft a policy for the invasion and seizing of British North America (like taking California away from the Spanish).

Establishing a nation and maintaining a nation are two different beasts. And all of California was not Spanish. Only a couple hundred miles up the coast. California is a huge state Dan.

Doubt it will happen, but it's always a possibility down the road.

Do not be paranoid Dan. We like Canada and Canadians. I guess we like you more than you like us. But that is OK. We can like without being liked back!Tongue
Quote Reply
Re: [ArmyAirForces] Iraq In reply to
LMAO...now now
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
As a consumer of everything US (as Canada is) then surely you are also aware of growing disgust here with Europe and its head in the sand policies. We even have a term for it, "Euro-Whining".

In other words, where they fail to act - we will.

And of course there is no need to physically invade Canada. All that needs to be done is change a few signs, and move the existing border to the vicinity around Québec.

Voila, Pax Americana.

Tongue

Last edited by:

ArmyAirForces: Jul 22, 2002, 2:01 PM
Quote Reply
Re: [ArmyAirForces] Iraq In reply to
If you want Quebec, help yourself Smile Never could understand them or the French - and my gf is French Canadian. All one has to do is to check out CBUF (French CBC), or French television. Man, weird (surreal) stuff. But that's my cultural bias Smile

Now enuff of this. I type at a 3 year old level (just kidding, but not by much), and this is more text typing I do in a week. It was fun, but now back to work. All play and no work makes Johnny a poor boy Wink



Cheers - Dan Cool

----
Cheers,

Dan
Founder and CEO

LionsGate Creative
GoodPassRobot
Magelln
Quote Reply
Re: [dan] Iraq In reply to
Hey, I hold high regards for Canada. ummm, I'd pass on Quebec. I could never understand the French in German anyway. A guy I know from New Foundland tried to explain it out to me, but still ... I'd still pass on that area.

Besides, I go with the 51st idea.

What is the borader between the 2 countries? What is it, a mostly mowed 2 meter wide zone? lololo come on, For America to invade Canada would take really a lot, I mean a lot. Mexico, would probably be before Canada. The south border is like a terminator movie.

Actually, part of California was Russian at one time.

I do wish though, that some body would take over the policing issue. The US isn't really the best choice. Although, it's not that bad of one either. Sure it might have hidden agendas, but who could replace the US?

openoffice + gimp + sketch ... Smile
> >