The Iraq Thread

[OxPecker 0]

Damn I wish this board was like a chatroom with a button to "ignore chatter".

FSPilot, you are now persona non grata to me. I won't be reading any more of your posts (inlcuing your replies to my posts above), let alone responding to them.

You and your infantile debating "tactics" never fail to piss me off. Goodbye.

And for the record, I will GLADLY take a PR if it means you get one too.  

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And for the record, I will GLADLY take a PR if it means you get one too.<span id='postcolor'>

There's taking one for the team!

[FSPilot 0]

Don't you mean the axis?

[Akira 0]

3--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 06 2003,033)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Damn I wish this board was like a chatroom with a button to "ignore chatter".

FSPilot, you are now persona non grata to me. I won't be reading any more of your posts (inlcuing your replies to my posts above), let alone responding to them.

You and your infantile debating "tactics" never fail to piss me off. Goodbye.

And for the record, I will GLADLY take a PR if it means you get one too.  <span id='postcolor'>

Haven't heard THAT one before      *and rolling eyes for effect*

[Warin 0]

Papa Denoir? What about Uncle Warin!!!

All right. Thats enough from ALL of you. No one is getting PR'd, but if this keeps up, I will start handing out week long PR's to anyone participating.

Clear enough?

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 06 2003,03:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Papa Denoir? What about Uncle Warin!!!

All right. Thats enough from ALL of you.  No one is getting PR'd, but if this keeps up, I will start handing out week long PR's to anyone participating.

Clear enough?<span id='postcolor'>

My apologies Uncle Warin

*sticks tongue out at everyone else*

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Weeeeeeee, I love this shit.

Let me begin by saying "FUCK YOU JINEF". There. I hope a mod PRs me for that; I spend to much time typing because of this forum anyways.

Now let me elaborate why: Jinef, along with others who don't need to be mentioned, hold a near perpetual double-standard over the heads of the United States. Only America gets called to task for alleged atrocities committed decades ago, while other countries continue to dance around on the moral high ground, despite crimes committed in their government's name. Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and Russia all have innocent blood on their hands over the past 50 years (not Sweden though; apparently they spend so much time playing volleyball and having athletic sex that they have no time to make mistakes   ), yet America seems to be the one that gets called to task incessantly for this sort of thing. But I can set that aside, because I've gotten used to it. What I would like to take issue with is Jinef's assumption that we are going to carpet bomb Baghdad, [sarcasm]just like we did last time[/sarcasm]. I'm offended by this because A) We don't do shit like that on purpose (mistakes are made, but the last time we intentionally targeted civilians was when we learned how to do it from the Brits), and B) We are not dumb enough to even consider doing it. This rampant generalization is bigotted (against the rules) and misinformed. By the way, the civilian aid center that was bombed in Baghdad doubled as a command and control center for the Iraqi military (how convenient).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't say things like 'we don't do that anymore' because the US military has hardly changed for decades.

Sad truth  

<span id='postcolor'>

You're right- we're still fighting the good fight, much as we have over the past century. Oh yeah- are USAF personnel, in your opinion 'ignorant twats', because they are American, or just because you are an ignorant, bigotted jackass? Either way, you are in violation of forum rules. Please drive around.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">FSPilot and Tex and everyone

You would be horrified to know what the Americans actually do in combat.

<span id='postcolor'>

I know the facts, thank you very much. You do not have a monopoly on knowledge, and to assume you do just pisses me off more. The difference between you and I is that you are very selective in the facts you recognize. There are less flattering ways that this can be described, but I suppose I've dug my hole deep enough already.

So, what was my point? Can't really remember. Oh well, I guess I'll be moving along now. Denoir, feel free to slap the cuffs on now  

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So, what was my point? Can't really remember. Oh well, I guess I'll be moving along now. Denoir, feel free to slap the cuffs on now   <span id='postcolor'>

You forgot about Warin.

See you in a few days big guy!

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 06 2003,01:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't know if you have served with units from other countries but this is my distinct impression. <span id='postcolor'>

Admittedly limited to the British Royal Marines' Commachio Group and the Bahrani U-Group.  And I saw a Canadian in the PX once.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 06 2003,01:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The life of an American soldier is not so much different then a regular civilian day job.<span id='postcolor'>

After four years as a Marine grunt, I can tell you for a fact that we didn't consider our work to be just "a regular job."  From the first day of boot camp we adhere to two leadership objectives:

1) MISSION ACCOMPLISHMENT

2) Troop Welfare

It's not a coincidence that Mission Accomplishment is listed first.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 06 2003,01:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">When they go into 'harms way' they make damn sure that there is no risk to their lives. And as I said, this is very good as long as you have the situation and resources to pull it off.<span id='postcolor'>

We haven't been faced with the necessity for a long time.  However, crack the history books and see the casualty rates we've endured to take objectives when we felt it was necessary.

And before someone brings up Somalia and the Rangers, remember that:

1) The "Blackhawk Down" mission was tactically successful, and

2) The decision to pull out was not made by the military.

In the final analysis, though, I guess that I'd rather be underestimated than overestimated, and you are underestimating us.

Semper Fi 

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Suppose so. for the record, I didn't see Warin's post, but that doesn't matter- I'm still in the wrong. Anyhow, it needed to be said

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 06 2003,03:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Suppose so. for the record, I didn't see Warin's post, but that doesn't matter- I'm still in the wrong. Anyhow, it needed to be said<span id='postcolor'>

I'll miss ya ya big lug! Even though I agree with everything you said

Just didn't have the nuts to say it

[Warin 0]

At the risk of seeming partial to silly Texans, I am NOT going to PR tex. With the time stamps, it is quite possible that he was writing his little diatribe when I posted. So he gets to use a single slim get out of jail free card. But that's it. Anything from there on is subject to 7 day PR's.

Got it?

[Akira 0]

*ZING!!*

DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUUUN!!!

*the sound of Tex dodging a bullet*

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Plans for a major speech on Iraq next week by the president were under review. Bush might give Saddam a very short time period to disarm completely, perhaps as little as 72 hours, before military action... Officials said a number of options for fighting were now ready... Military officials said the president had been told that an attack against Iraq could be carried out within the next several days, the NEW YORK TIMES is reporting in its Page One lead on Thursday... Developing... <span id='postcolor'>

From The Drudge Report

[FSPilot 0]

Anybody heard anything about the documents saddam "found" regarding the tons of anthrax and how they were destroyed after GW1?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 06 2003,03:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now let me elaborate why: Jinef, along with others who don't need to be mentioned, hold a near perpetual double-standard over the heads of the United States. Only America gets called to task for alleged atrocities committed decades ago, while other countries continue to dance around on the moral high ground, despite crimes committed in their government's name. Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and Russia all have innocent blood on their hands over the past 50 years (not Sweden though; apparently they spend so much time playing volleyball and having athletic sex that they have no time to make mistakes   ), yet America seems to be the one that gets called to task incessantly for this sort of thing. But I can set that aside, because I've gotten used to it.<span id='postcolor'>

Let me give you an explanation of why America is such a high profile target for criticism coming from Europe.

Simply put because we are sick and tired of your government's self-righteous attempts of imposing their vison of moral onto others. We may have some things in common but there are lot of things on which we have different views. No European in their right mind could agree with a government whose attorney general thinks that the death penalty is moral while he feels that nude statues should be covered up becasue they are 'immoral'. That's fine however, I won't judge your culture. You can have your guns, your electric chair, your hollywood, your Michael Jackson, your McDonalds, that's up to you. What I however can demand is that you have equal respect for others as you expect them to respect you. It is the attempts of forcing your absolute moral beliefs on others that irritates people beyond belief: "Iraq is a dictatorship which is bad. We'll introduce democracy because that's good"

Europe considers itself to be in a post-modern, post-war era. We have in a not too distant past experienced two world wars on our soil. That plus centuries of conflicts made us to come to one conclusion: war is always a failure.

USA on the other hand is in a completely different evolutionary stage and it's current opinion is "war is good if we get what we want in the end". The use of violence to get what you want is fully acceptable as long as you are doing the "right thing". This of course without for one second questioning that the "right thing" might not be considered as fully so "right" by others. One would have expected that after the WTC attacks you would have gotten an idea that war isn't that nice up close, but apparently it didn't get through.

During the cold war, America and Europe needed each other so we found a way of ignoring our differences, pretending to be all one big happy western family. Well now when we no longer have what was a bond by necessity we can either accept and respect our differences or we can go separate ways in a confrontational manner like we seem to be going today.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 06 2003,05<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anybody heard anything about the documents saddam "found" regarding the tons of anthrax and how they were destroyed after GW1?<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LA119891

Has the war already started?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">U.S. and coalition warplanes are flying two to three times the number of missions they have been flying over southern Iraq, military sources say. The missions have focused on mobile missile systems being moved into the area, sources said. As many as 750 missions a day are now being flown. sources said.

<span id='postcolor'>

750 missions a day!

At the height of "Operation Allied Force", NATO pilots were flying 600 missions a day over Yugoslavia.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let me give you an explanation of why America is such a high profile target for criticism coming from Europe.

<span id='postcolor'>

And already you're changing the subject. What I said was that Europeans hold the US to a double standard when it comes to mistakes made in the foreign policy arena. I don't need a lecture on why Europe has a more advanced culture than the United States, I've had enough of those, thank you very much.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Simply put because we are sick and tired of your government's self-righteous attempts of imposing their vison of moral onto others. <span id='postcolor'>

Fair enough. I can't help but wonder, however, how much of this grievance is real and how much is imagined (or exaggerated). How many times has America busted in on Sweden and told them what standards they should hold their adult film industry to? Or how Sweden should order their democratic process? Or England? How about Germany (other than that one time)?

Now, how many McDonalds have been popping up all over your fair, millenia-old boulevards? Americanisms popping up in your language? What I'm saying is, that maybe most of the European animosity towards US culture is not caused by our forcing it on you, but rather the shock you have that so many of your fellow Europeans accept, even embrace it. Unless that's une l'Arche Deluxe Poste-Moderne McRib Sandwiche I see there.

Incidentally, why do you assume that the US wants to attack Iraq to implement democracy? Don't you think even a half-wit like Bush would recognize the inherent hypocrisy of allying with dictatorships to overthrow another dictatorship solely because it is a dictatorship? Seriously, we may be uncultured, stupid Americans, but give us a little credit. It couldn't be because of Iraq's non-compliance with a UN Resolution that clearly (despite your very eloquent and post-modern arguments to the contrary) states that anything but immediate and full cooperation will earn severe consequences.

"But they're destroying their Al-Samoud missiles! They're cooperating, so you don't even need troops in the Middle East!" Yes, about a dozen so far, and only (and these are Blix's words, not mine) because of the imminent threat of military action.

Incidentally, Denoir, you posted a link earlier where Iraq claimed that they had accounted for almost all their chemical agents in excavations about a week ago. How'd that shining example of Iraqi compliance turn out? Oh wait, did it turn out to be a lie? Why yes, yes it did. But they're destroying missiles that are useless without the guidance package that would shorten their range to legal limits, so it's all good.

And on a completely ridiculous note, if you in fact claim to respect our culture, then you would respect our right to force our culture on others, because if you look back, that too is an integral part of our culture. We just wouldn't be crass, idiotic Americans without it. So please, don't condemn the very thing that our culture of consumerism and prudishness springs from!

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 06 2003,06:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And on a completely ridiculous note, if you in fact claim to respect our culture, then you would respect our right to force our culture on others, because if you look back, that too is an integral part of our culture. We just wouldn't be crass, idiotic Americans without it. So please, don't condemn the very thing that our culture of consumerism and prudishness springs from!

<span id='postcolor'>

I know you are trying to make a joke here, but it is exactly that arrogance of character (and I am not saying you possess it, but sadly a lot of your countrymen do! ) that makes folks so mental with the US of A.

And I would rather see all the best things in your culture come out, while seeing y'all lose the crass, idiotic bits It would make the world a much nicer place to live!

[Longinius 1]

"No but you're saying we're striking at the civilians. Which is just wrong."

But you were the one saying waterplants and powerplants are military targets? While in fact they are a part of civilian infrastructure, like others have all ready explained.

"If you were fired for it your boss would be in hot water, plus numerous lawsuits from the ACLU and others."

Which in the end probably wouldnt lead to much, except you STILL having no job. And depending on who you are, lawsuits are not always an option.

"Threat calls = freedom of speech."

I thought threatening people was a crime? Is Nazi propaganda also freedom of speech? After all, its just stating an opinion.

"Cancelling contracts = showbiz. No invitation to the Academy awards = also showbiz."

So therefor it is acceptable? I think this classifies as persecution and an actual crimes against the very freedoms you constantly defend, FS. But since it is happening to someone who isnt on your "side" its OK, right?

"I guess we're only close to a dictatorship if you only read the first paragraph of what you see on CNN."

Yeah, and if you take into account that most of the people didnt vote for your elected leader

"Why should I tell you mine if you're not telling anybody yours?"

He has talked about his experiences in numerous posts, if you ever bothered to read it. As far as I know though, you never mentioned yours. Maybe because you have none?

"Not when we make explicit attempts to strike when the number of people in the building is as low as possible."

You mean like at the WTC when terrorists didnt strike at the most busiest hour?

"No. The attack effects civilians, but it was designed to hurt the military."

So then its OK to bomb hospitals. medical centers and refugee camps aswell? Those all effect the military. Glad to see you are reasoning like a WW2 Nazi. Civilians do not matter, you are the übermench after all.

"Or maybe because we're doing a lot of the worlds military work."

You still have a higher friendly fire percentage than anyone else. Not the total number, but the percentage.

"The USA does not target civilians. You're saying that they're doing it simply to kill civilians, they're not."

He didnt say anything about killing civilians. He talked about targeting civilians to make their lifes difficult to reduce morale. To me, its just as bad though because it often results in civilian casualties and suffering.

"How many times has America busted in on Sweden and told them what standards they should hold their adult film industry to? Or how Sweden should order their democratic process? Or England? How about Germany (other than that one time)?"

So just because you are not strong arming us, we cant object to you doing it to others?

Besides, we have been effected plenty by America, in many ways negatively. Granted, we got Coca Cola, and that is good. Plenty of action movies, which is entertaining. But Halloween? Whats that about? Corporations, many of which are based in America, actually introduce American traditions and culture all over the world (to make profit of course). And that IS annoying. To then see the actual government try and do the same isnt really helping.

"It couldn't be because of Iraq's non-compliance with a UN Resolution that clearly (despite your very eloquent and post-modern arguments to the contrary) states that anything but immediate and full cooperation will earn severe consequences. "

If the US cares about the UN, then why are they not doing what the UN dictates? Or paying their bills, for that matter.

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 06 2003,00:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As long as they can rely on high altitude bombing and cruise missiles, there should be no problem. If it on the other hand gets to fighting street by street, house by house then USA stands no chance. Hi-tech weapons won't help there. I saw a military analysis report the other day that estimated about 40% casualties for urban fighting in Baghdad. If only special forces were to be used the report estimated 25% casualties and said that at least 70,000 troops would be required to take Baghdad. That's over 17,000 dead - a figure that would be impossible to accept.

<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, this is very interesting!

Just look at the russian casualties in Grozny! Despite using spetznas - and gunships - the russians had serious losses.

Expect to find the same in Baghdad.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Mar. 06 2003,14:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But you were the one saying waterplants and powerplants are military targets? While in fact they are a part of civilian infrastructure, like others have all ready explained.<span id='postcolor'>

Civilians are not civilian infrastructure. Yes, they may be effected by an attack on infrastructure. But the US goes through a lot to reduce civilian casualties as much as they can.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Which in the end probably wouldnt lead to much, except you STILL having no job. And depending on who you are, lawsuits are not always an option.<span id='postcolor'>

Lawyers are a dime a dozen. And if you have time to go through our legal system, you have time to find another job.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I thought threatening people was a crime? Is Nazi propaganda also freedom of speech? After all, its just stating an opinion.<span id='postcolor'>

As far as I know, threatening people over the phone is not a crime. I'm not sure, but the caller isn't doing anything, and I've never heard of anybody being charged with it. Anybody know for sure?

And yes, nazi propaganda is freedom of speech too.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So therefor it is acceptable? I think this classifies as persecution and an actual crimes against the very freedoms you constantly defend, FS. But since it is happening to someone who isnt on your "side" its OK, right?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, it's acceptable. No, it's not persecution and no it's not an actual crime against anything. Why? Because they don't say "These guys aren't patriots, they don't get to go to the academy awards." They say "Nobody likes these guys, people will not watch our show because they're on it, they don't get to go to the academy awards." They're not doing it because they disagree with whoever it is, they're doing it for ratings, for money, for public opinion.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, and if you take into account that most of the people didnt vote for your elected leader <span id='postcolor'>

You ever read our constitution? It's interesting. You might want to pick it up sometime.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He has talked about his experiences in numerous posts, if you ever bothered to read it. As far as I know though, you never mentioned yours. Maybe because you have none?<span id='postcolor'>

His numerous experiences that are relevant to the topic, all one of them, have since been shown to not prove his point. If you ever bothered to read what I had said you'd know this.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You mean like at the WTC when terrorists didnt strike at the most busiest hour?<span id='postcolor'>

Since when was 9am not the busiest hour? Thats the most absurd thing I've ever heard. It was just plain luck that the body count wasn't MUCH higher.

Now I've seen it all. Someone trying to tell me that the 9/11 terrorists were trying to reduce civilian casualties.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So then its OK to bomb hospitals. medical centers and refugee camps aswell? Those all effect the military. Glad to see you are reasoning like a WW2 Nazi. Civilians do not matter, you are the übermench after all. <span id='postcolor'>

No, those would result in horrendous civilian casualties and would have little to no effect on the military. The US makes lots of efforts to reduce civilian casualties as I've illustrated plenty of times.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You still have a higher friendly fire percentage than anyone else. Not the total number, but the percentage.<span id='postcolor'>

So if I drive 1000 miles a day while everyone else walks to work, and I get in 100% of all the traffic accidents while everyone else doesn't get any, does that make me a bad driver?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He didnt say anything about killing civilians. He talked about targeting civilians to make their lifes difficult to reduce morale. To me, its just as bad though because it often results in civilian casualties and suffering.<span id='postcolor'>

You're going to have to tell me what the difference is between killing civilians and targetting them.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So just because you are not strong arming us, we cant object to you doing it to others?<span id='postcolor'>

Why don't you say that to France when they talk about abusing their veto power to "strong arm" the UN?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Besides, we have been effected plenty by America, in many ways negatively. Granted, we got Coca Cola, and that is good. Plenty of action movies, which is entertaining. But Halloween? Whats that about? Corporations, many of which are based in America, actually introduce American traditions and culture all over the world (to make profit of course). And that IS annoying. To then see the actual government try and do the same isnt really helping.<span id='postcolor'>

So your complaint is that America brings economic stimulus and American culture to your country?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If the US cares about the UN, then why are they not doing what the UN dictates? Or paying their bills, for that matter.<span id='postcolor'>

If the US didn't care about the UN we wouldn't be bothering with them about the Iraq thing, we wouldn't of paid any of our bills in the first place, and we wouldn't put any of our troops in harms way with the UN.

[Longinius 1]

"As far as I know, threatening people over the phone is not a crime. I'm not sure, but the caller isn't doing anything, and I've never heard of anybody being charged with it. Anybody know for sure?

And yes, nazi propaganda is freedom of speech too."

In Sweden if I threaten to kill you, its a crime. And I can be sent to court for it. If I threaten to ruin your life, get you fired and generally mess you up, its also a crime. I always thought these were crimes in most western societys.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 06 2003,06:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Incidentally, Denoir, you posted a link earlier where Iraq claimed that they had accounted for almost all their chemical agents in excavations about a week ago. How'd that shining example of Iraqi compliance turn out? Oh wait, did it turn out to be a lie? Why yes, yes it did.<span id='postcolor'>

Why no it didn't UN is still verifying the results. Blix said in an interview yesteday that so far all has checked out but that it was difficult to verify some of the chemical samples because they were quite old. He also said that the Iraqis are going to produce some more documents on the on Saturday, detailing the destruction process.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And already you're changing the subject. What I said was that Europeans hold the US to a double standard when it comes to mistakes made in the foreign policy arena.

<span id='postcolor'>

It's not chainging the subject. I'm pointing out that you often make decisions in your foregin policy in the name of "the right thing to do", which we disagree with. So of course we will be pointing out flaws in such policy. Other countries do bad things too, but they at least don't have the self-righteous attitude that they are the defenders of the good in the world. I disagree on what the Russians did and are doing in Chechnya, but at least they are not pretending that they are doing the world a huge favour by bombing Grozny. They are not outraged that we all don't help them bomb the Chechens, as USA is now outraged that we don't want to help you bomb Iraq.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fair enough. I can't help but wonder, however, how much of this grievance is real and how much is imagined (or exaggerated). How many times has America busted in on Sweden and told them what standards they should hold their adult film industry to? Or how Sweden should order their democratic process? Or England? How about Germany (other than that one time)?

<span id='postcolor'>

Countless times. For instance in Sweden, one of the more direct times USA threatened with ending diplomatic relations if the Swedish government did not interfere and stop the the publishing of the scientology bible. The Swedish supreme court ruled that the publication of the bible was ok. After US pressure the government intervened and made an (probably unconstitutional) executive decission to stop the publishment of the book. That's not however what I was refering to. I was refering to you forcing us to deal with things that we don't really care about. Like Iraq. We don't agree with you that Saddam is a threat. It's only out of respect and friendship to you that we keep saying in choir that "Saddam must be disarmed, NOW!". And this would be far from the first time that you drag us along on some of your crusades. Take Afganistan for example. We went along on that one ony out of sympathy to you after the WTC attack. Instead of thanking us for being such good friends you have the stomach not only to take our support in everything for granted, but demanding it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now, how many McDonalds have been popping up all over your fair, millenia-old boulevards? Americanisms popping up in your language? What I'm saying is, that maybe most of the European animosity towards US culture is not caused by our forcing it on you, but rather the shock you have that so many of your fellow Europeans accept, even embrace it.<span id='postcolor'>

It's a normal part of globalization. I don't object to the elements of the US culture that we choose to integrate into ours. Nothing shocking about that. In the 18th century we were inspired by the French and now by you - it's a completely natural process of cultural assimilation. That's not the problem. The problem is on the points that we do disagree (which are quite a few) you have a tendency of automatically assuming that your view is the only possible one.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't you think even a half-wit like Bush would recognize the inherent hypocrisy of allying with dictatorships to overthrow another dictatorship solely because it is a dictatorship?<span id='postcolor'>

No.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It couldn't be because of Iraq's non-compliance with a UN Resolution that clearly (despite your very eloquent and post-modern arguments to the contrary) states that anything but immediate and full cooperation will earn severe consequences. <span id='postcolor'>

If it is about enforing UN rule, how come Bush is willing to go without UN approval? I couldn't care less if his reason is fear of WMDs, domestic problems, election preparations, early hairloss or anything else. The point is that we have a disagreement on how serious threat Saddam is, if any. We have respectfully played along, both in the UN and otherwise and supported your demands for disarming him. Is that enough? No, apparently not. If we don't agree with the Bush Way of doing things then we are "Old Europe", "Eurowimps" and ungrateful bastards who would all be speaking German with a strong Russian accent if it wasn't for you.

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, they may be effected by an attack on infrastructure. <span id='postcolor'>

They ARE effected ! FS you keep winding like a snake but you´re still trapped with your false logic or I´d better say "Not - existing" logic.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">His numerous experiences that are relevant to the topic, all one of them, have since been shown to not prove his point.  If you ever bothered to read what I had said you'd know this.<span id='postcolor'>

It´s not about proving my points which is btw completely bullshit as I have been to the region lately. You may have forgotten that. I have seen what Iran is doing right now and I have talked to people living there. My knowledge about the actual Iraq and around situation is in fact 2000 percent more accurate than yours FS.

If you don´t believe what I have seen during my turkmenistan-turkey stay it´s ignorant of you but it doesn´t make my reports biased. You believe everything your president tells you, but you don´t believe a NEUTRAL UN soldier that has been in the region lately ? Guess what ? Tell me who is wrong or ignorant now. It´s certainly not me. I´m getting my money for being a NEUTRAL UN member. But in your opinion this doesn´t mean shit.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You're going to have to tell me what the difference is between killing civilians and targetting them.<span id='postcolor'>

Is this so hard to understand ? You can kill civillians by shooting their head off or you take the soft method and cut them from food , water, electricity and medical treatment. This will kill them in the long term but as you have not shot them you don´t have blood on your hands. This is what I call the humanity of war. You cut the people you pretend to "free" from basic life support and yes you kill some of them with these measures. As Denoir already said the military remains unimpressed as they have their own sources of energy , food, water, etc.

You should listen a bit more to the things we tell you. This would save us from repeating us over and over again only to ensure you did get everything and don´t forget it for your next post.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The US makes lots of efforts to reduce civilian casualties as I've illustrated plenty of times.

<span id='postcolor'>

So why do you intentionally bomb civillian infrastructure ?

Military abused civillian installations ? LOL You better check your own army to find out that they have their own infrastructure when it comes to balls. So has Iraq.

You´d better grab some boots first and than talk about wars you only know from CNN and Discovery channel.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">  

Aha !

So you tell me what they did. I am curiouse.

<span id='postcolor'>

You're the one who told me about this.

Anyway, what they did was not sponsored by the US military and they ended up being reprimanded for it.

<span id='postcolor'>

You don´t even know what I am talking about. I am talking about 3 tanks dug in at the Sharky-beach shooting into Moga undirected once a week to show the somalis that the US is still there. And I´m talking about the Comanche - Apache combination picking firing sources  town and responding undirected gunfire with hellfire rockets. This has NEVER been investigated by the US. It has been investigated by UN but US forces simply said it didn´t happen. I have seen it and I know it did happen. Your statement is false from the beginning to it´s end.