The Iraq Thread

[interstat 0]

As to that american ship list picture:

PAN AM bombing was not carried out by Iraq, so that is wrong, in fact it probably wasn't carried out by those convicted of the crime.

After the 'greatly competent' american Navy shot down an Iranian passenger plane in the 1980's I have though that the Iranians hired Palestinians to blow the plane up.

Why put that on the side of your ship? What's Lebannon got to do with this illegal attack on a soverign state? So is the US Navy against the Palestinian's and their struggle?

As for this remark:

'As I recall, the Aussies were not on board until their tourist attraction in Bali was blown to smithereens by terrorists. This is fact. They were wishy-washy until that happened. When you are attacked, it changes one's perspective. '

We in Britain have suffered years of bombing from the IRA, and Europe knows fully well about Terrorism. SO don't lecture us you ignorant individual.

Maybe you won't be laughing when your country gets attacked again by a lone terrorist organisation bred by its hatred of American aggressive foreign policies.

You reap what you sow unfortunately, just like the English have reaped because of their intervention in Ireland some 400 years ago. Memories stay long in peoples minds and are passed down through generations, dpn't forget that.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (interstat @ Mar. 21 2003,19:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">SO don't lecture us you ignorant individual.<span id='postcolor'>

please refrain from name calling. we beleive there are better ways, a civilized manner to share our thoughts here.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (interstat @ Mar. 21 2003,1907)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">After the 'greatly competent' american Navy shot down an Iranian passenger plane in the 1980's I have though that the Iranians hired Palestinians to blow the plane up.<span id='postcolor'>

Er, Pan Am 103 was Libya's handiwork.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (interstat @ Mar. 21 2003,1907)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why put that on the side of your ship?  What's Lebannon got to do with this illegal attack on a soverign state?  So is the US Navy against the Palestinian's and their struggle?<span id='postcolor'>

No, the U.S. Navy is not against the Palestinian people.  Lebonese terrorists, on the other hand... Well, let's just say we've got long memories, too.  The USMC would like nothing better than to square off against Hezbollah.

Semper Fi

[Tales_From_Topographic_Oceans 0]

RalphWiggum: let the bloke speak for Pete's sake.

This bloke[sic] did not read my post carefully as I specifically said "massive civilian casualties." Furthermore, UK is "on board" so my post was not directed at them.

I pulled out my western civilization history book and I can't find an instance where almost 3,000 UK civilians were killed in one single attack in recent years. The Battle of Britain (1940?) is the only thing that comes close.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Memories stay long in peoples minds and are passed down through generations, dpn't forget that<span id='postcolor'>

Yep, us Confederate Southerners still hold a grudge at the 1861-1865 war. Weez still upset that we lost.

FYI, the attacks listed on the ship were carried out by terrorists.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tales_From_Topographic_Oceans @ Mar. 21 2003,19:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I pulled out my western civilization history book and I can't find an instance where  almost 3,000 UK civilians were killed in one single attack in recent years. The Battle of Britain (1940?) is the only thing that comes close.<span id='postcolor'>

Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 21 2003,20:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tales_From_Topographic_Oceans @ Mar. 21 2003,19:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I pulled out my western civilization history book and I can't find an instance where  almost 3,000 UK civilians were killed in one single attack in recent years. The Battle of Britain (1940?) is the only thing that comes close.<span id='postcolor'>

Hiroshima and Nagasaki?<span id='postcolor'>

He isnt talking about ENEMY casualties Denoir. Sheesh. Get it right!

[brgnorway 0]

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

3. There have been reports of Al Queda connections to Iraq.

They have been proved wrong.

<span id='postcolor'>

---

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Intelligence officials have discounted — if not dismissed — other information believed to point to possible links between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

The CIA said it can find no evidence supporting post-Sept. 11 reports that Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers in the attacks, met with an Iraqi agent in the Czech capital, Prague, in 2001.

Similarly, intelligence officials described reports that Hussein is funding an Al Qaeda-connected extremist group in northern Iraq as "wildly overstated."

There is no evidence so far to confirm that Iraq is arming, financing or controlling the group, known as Ansar al-Islam, one official said. "There isn't a factual basis for such assertions," the official said.

<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.latimes.com/news....adlines

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

There is information that non-Kurdish fighters arrived in the region from Afghanistan following the U.S.-led war against the Taliban in 2001. Detainees have described camps where fighters are trained in basic infantry skills and suicide bombings for possible dispatch throughout the world. Allegations have been made that al-Qaeda operatives hosted by Ansar al-Islam are working to develop chemical weapons in the small area it controls – and if substantiated, this would be extremely serious.

However, ICG Middle East Program Director Robert Malley said: "This is a region outside Baghdad's control and we see no evidence that Ansar has a strategic alliance with Saddam Hussein. There is no question that the group has brought misery to many people in the area it controls, but it is highly unlikely that Ansar al-Islam is anything more than a minor irritant in local Kurdish politics".

ICG is not in a position to independently evaluate statements made by the U.S. Secretary of State on 5 February that a purported al-Qaeda operative, Abu Musab Zarqawi, established a "poison and explosive training centre camp" in the small area under Ansar's control. Nor can ICG evaluate whether the Iraqi regime "has an agent in the most senior level of" Ansar, as Secretary Powell stated. ICG's assessment is that links between al-Qaeda and Ansar are possible, but even PUK officials, who stand most to gain, deny that there is collusion between Ansar and Baghdad.

ICG Middle East Project Director Joost Hiltermann said:

"Profound ideological differences and a history of atrocities committed by the regime against the Kurds make a strong connection between Saddam Hussein and Ansar al-Islam extremely unlikely. If there is support from Baghdad, it is likely to be in the form of financial assistance, motivated by a desire to keep a finger in the pot, stir up trouble among the Kurds and keep the PUK on the defensive, rather than a strategic alliance with Ansar's cause. And it must be remembered that this is a small, isolated group who could muster some 700 fighters at most and who are no match for the PUK. Ansar al-Islam has been catapulted to a significance that does not appear warranted by the known facts".

<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/projects/showreport.cfm?reportid=886

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Have they been "proven" wrong? Really? No offense, but some of you people in other countries are not privy to our information.<span id='postcolor'>

Have you proven otherwise? Really? No offense but some of you people in US are not privy to any other information.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"Honest Abe" Saddam has denied any linkage but we (the US) has evidence that they (Al Queda) are training in Iraq. This was reported a few weeks ago. They are training to hijack planes there.<span id='postcolor'>

Now you'r being daft! That piece of shit is by no means even circumstancial evidence. It doesn't prove anything and I strongly suspect you would believe anything being throwed at you as long as it suits your own point of view! Some pictures of an airplane doesn't mean they are training to hijack. Actually, it could be though - that they are training to secure domestic flights from terrorism.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraq probably did not have a direct link to 911 but indirect links exist as well as direct links in supporting Palestinian suicide bombers. <span id='postcolor'>

No direct link as well as no indirect links exists whatsoever!

That Saddam want's to cash in on the intifada shouldn't surprise anyone. Do you honestly believe the palestinian suicide bombers kill themselves for money they can't enjoy? Perhaps they wan't to purchase a nice bungalow and a Mercedes-Benz when they arrive the Paradise? How silly is that!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam is a nuisance and must be neutralized--to use the military term.<span id='postcolor'>

You are right - but at what cost?

How many innocent civilians must die to achieve that?

Is it worth the risk - if the middle eastern region is destabilised?

Would you really risk a coup in the dictatorship of Pakistan - a country with a large following and sympathi for Taliban, al Queda and muslim extremism in general. Are you aware of the fact that Pakistan also have nuclear weapons - and long range missiles to deliver those weapons?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's easy for these anti-US, anti-war countries to sit back and lick their chops and criticize us for neutralizing these threats but until they experience first-hand massive civilian casualties from an attack, they need to quietly sit on the sidelines and mind their own business.<span id='postcolor'>

If you stopped being ignorant you would realise that european nations have experienced a wee bit more terror than your very own country! Funny thing is that many US citizens actually helped finance the murdering of the british!

And about that sideline of yours, the world does not solely belong to the US, everyone else have a saying too. We just won't sit quietly on the sideline when the world goes down the drain because of your stupid efforts!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For example, India is against our war. Hypocities--oh brood of vipers! They fuss with Pakistan all the time over Kashmir and were on the brink of nuclear war about a year ago--over a desolate, nothing grows there, good for nothing, rocks everywhere, goat infested, cold barren tundra, and wasteland? Who the effing hell are they to criticize us?<span id='postcolor'>

The fact that India have an ongoing border dispute with Pakistan (a dictatorship supported by your country with arms and money) does not disqualify them from having an opinion with the war in Iraq! Indirectly, they do actually have an interest in that conflict because Pakistan could be destabilised and having in mind that India feels threatend by muslim extremism - you could be looking at a nasty nuclear conflict.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Opps, one more scathing thing that needs to be said. I have noticed that the anti-war protestors are trying to mimic the maggot infested hippies of the 60s with their "peace and love" themes.<span id='postcolor'>

I can't judge on the behalf of demonstrators in the US, but you wouldn't find many of those on the european continent.

[Tales_From_Topographic_Oceans 0]

Have a nice weekend folks. Sirens are going off so I need to head to the bunker now.

Just heard the B-52s are on the way with their payload.

[DarkLight 0]

Just saw the horrible images of Baghdad on the news, apparantly they have bombed again. This one looked pretty fucking heavy, i'm 100% sure that some civilians must've been hit. Impossible that no civs have been hit... must be really horrible down there...

Also, the media claims that the battle is very easy, cnn seems to say that the tanks can drive at full speed through the desert cuz there's no resistance. If you ask me (and some specialists) this is bullshit, god i fucking hate the media. One side says the Iraqis are surrendering, the other side says they are fighting back...

Oh well... they probable both are telling a part of the truth.

I also found a very funny movie, dunno where to post it, if it shouldn't be posted here, feel free to replace it...

Click here for movie!!!!!

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Mar. 21 2003,13:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, let's just say we've got long memories, too.<span id='postcolor'>

Why is it that only the US Marines are allowed to have long memories.  Why are countries like Iran not allowed to remember what the US did to them under the Shah.  Perhaps it's lucky for the USA that the Japanese, Guatemalans, Cambodians, Chileans, El Salvadorians, Nicaraguans, Panamanians and Sudanese don't have such long memories.

[ROR 0]

I guess what pisses Americans most off about europeans is their ignorance to the workings of the world; or is that arrogance. If you bothered to read the whole message at the top in bold print it clearly says "WHY WE ARE HERE", it then list acts of terrorism against American citizens and others. Bush clearly stated after September 11 that our aim is to rid the world of terrorists AND the states that support it.

If the world has a problem with American foreign policy then blame japan and europe for it. Until  6 December 1941, 98% of Americans did not want to go to war in europe. 79% of Americans were ok with the german occupation  of france (if asked today I bet it would be a 100%). American foreign policy was one of pacifism. As some of you know this policy forever changed on 7 December 1941 with the attack on Peral Harbor by the japanese.

We learned that you can not fight action with inaction. This was reaffirmed on September 11. Pacifism is akin to communism, they look great on paper but just do not work in  reality. So since 7 December 1941, American foreign policy has shifted from pacifism to one of being proactive.

Over 100,000 iraqis live in the Detroit Michigan area, and the majority overwhelmingly support the war in iraq. So why does such a large percentage of iraqis in this area support the war, and by the way who have lived under the terror of saddam, and so many europeans are against it.  Makes me question the true nature of european opposition to the war. France in particular is worried about there economic situation in iraq and nothing else.

Americans are not perfect, and we would be the first to admit this. As an American who has lived in europe I can tell you this we have the best thing going.

   O how the europeans tolerated us so, when there was big bad russian bear in the backyard, but now there is only a cub and they resent us so.

You wonder why so many europeans immigrated to the U.S., to get away from the likes that inhabit it now, I reckon.

[Guest]

Watching these bombings of Baghdad with a certain disgust I started to wonder if they are not in violation of the Geneva conventions. Many of the targets are political infrastructure and therefor civilian buildings. That's not allowed. I have no problem with the bombings of military installations, but I don't think that the targeting of the political infrastructure is justifiable.

How would it be labeled in USA if somebody (sent by the Iraqi military) say drove a truck full of TNT into the White House, or the Capitol? Would that be an acceptable, fair target? Or would they be yelling terrorism and war crimes?

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ROR @ Mar. 21 2003,21:30)</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">I guess what pisses Americans most off about europeans is their ignorance to the workings of the world; or is that arrogance. <span id='postcolor'>

What you are stating is THE reason why americans are so hated around the world - especially the poorer world - including the middle eastern region.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush clearly stated after September 11 that our aim is to rid the world of terrorists AND the states that support it.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you - because the way terrorism is fought nowadays will definately make you an even more likely target - and terrorism will also increase because of your actions.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If the world has a problem with American foreign policy then blame japan and europe for it.<span id='postcolor'>

Oh - I see! It's our fault now - and US does not have an agenda of it's own?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">American foreign policy was one of pacifism. As some of you know this policy forever changed on 7 December 1941 with the attack on Peral Harbor by the japanese.

<span id='postcolor'>

In fact - that's not true. I believe US screwing the banana republiques of latin america went on a wee bit prior to second world war.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pacifism is akin to communism, they look great on paper but just do not work in reality.<span id='postcolor'>

One could say the same about capitalism you know (no I'm not a commie-bastard) . Just think about the inequality and poverty of the world. Oh yeah - capitalism at it's best. No wonder the poorer world objects to US interests!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Americans are not perfect, and we would be the first to admit this. As an American who has lived in europe I can tell you this we have the best thing going.<span id='postcolor'>

You are free to have an opinion on the different european countries. I for one can't stand the thought of living in your nation. That does not mean I suggest my own country is the best. Frankly, I don't care who's the best or the greatest - I care about being ok and stay healthy, to live in a relative democracy and not being dominated by a foreign power.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> O how the europeans tolerated us so, when there was big bad russian bear in the backyard, but now there is only a cub and they resent us so.<span id='postcolor'>

I guess the feeling was mutual. It would be foolish to suggest you had no use for the european nations during the cold war.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You wonder why so many europeans immigrated to the U.S., to get away from the likes that inhabit it now, I reckon.<span id='postcolor'>

That's not a particulary nice thing to say! Most europeans migrated to US because of poverty, overpopulation or persecution. Are you judging us in any way?

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 21 2003,15:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Watching these bombings of Baghdad with a certain disgust I started to wonder if they are not in violation of the Geneva conventions. Many of the targets are political infrastructure and therefor civilian buildings. That's not allowed. I have no problem with the bombings of military installations, but I don't think that the targeting of the political infrastructure is justifiable.<span id='postcolor'>

I could well imagine that Bush ordered the destruction of all Presidential Palaces to remove the stain of Hussein from the land.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 21 2003,15:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How would it be labeled in USA if somebody (sent by the Iraqi military) say drove a truck full of TNT into the White House, or the Capitol? Would that be an acceptable, fair target? Or would they be yelling terrorism and war crimes?<span id='postcolor'>

Are you saying that only the WTC attacks of 2001-09-11 were acts of terrorism?  (I'm just playing the devil's advocate.)

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I guess what pisses Americans most off about europeans is their ignorance to the workings of the world; or is that arrogance.<span id='postcolor'>

Ignorance, consider that only 13% of US students can point out the country they are attacking on a map. I would call it experience....

As you seem to point out, the US is a 'better' place than Europe...... If thats not arrogance what is?

Your attitude sickens me. I like most Americans, but its people like you that give your country a bad name.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Mar. 21 2003,2107)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why is it that only the US Marines are allowed to have long memories.  Why are countries like Iran not allowed to remember what the US did to them under the Shah.<span id='postcolor'>  

Sorry, I didn't get this memo.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Mar. 21 2003,2107)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Perhaps it's lucky for the USA that the Japanese, Guatemalans, Cambodians, Chileans, El Salvadorians, Nicaraguans, Panamanians and Sudanese don't have such long memories.<span id='postcolor'>

Certainly can't argue about Central and South America.  Our history there is almost completely indefensible.  Then again, it is completely unrelated to the terror attacks documented on the ship.

BTW:  The photo of the ship dates back to the Afghanistan invasion, which is clearly a result of some of the events listed.   

Semper Fi

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 21 2003,21:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ignorance, consider that only 13% of US students can point out the country they are attacking on a map.<span id='postcolor'>

*From Saddam's point of view*

Good news:  Only 13% of young Americans can find Baghdad on a map.

Bad news:  They're all Marines.

Semper Fi

[Placebo 29]

LMAO nice

[Badgerboy 0]

Colin Powell came back at a journalist with that one didn't he? He's the only guy in the cabinet I have any respect for.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Mar. 21 2003,15:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW:  The photo of the ship dates back to the Afghanistan invasion, which is clearly a result of some of the events listed.<span id='postcolor'>

Ah-hah!  I didn't realise.

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 21 2003,06:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Mar. 21 2003,06:41)</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">France's and the majority of the UN SC position was only to let the inspector finish their work. The option of going to war always remained.

<span id='postcolor'>

france said that they would veto any resolution that had any possibility of military action.  <span id='postcolor'>

No, that is what Bush's minister of propaganda Fleischer tried to make it. France said that it would veto any resolution that set an ultimatum that was not approved by the UN inspectors. If the UN inspectors said "attack tomorrow" then France would have attacked tomorrow. Do you wish me to post references?<span id='postcolor'>

I already posted references, the most important being de Villians speech at the UN, stating that not only would France not accept any resolution with an ultimatum, but also ANY resolution using force.

It was a around page 320 or something.

[interstat 0]

'BTW: The photo of the ship dates back to the Afghanistan invasion, which is clearly a result of some of the events listed.'

So is the Taliban somehow related to blowing up the American soldiers in Lebanon?

Is the Taliban related to PAN AM downing?

I'd like to see the evidence.

As for the Libya connection and PAN AM, that's on dodgy ground. See here for an example

lockerbie

http://www.serendipity.li/more/lockerb.htm

[ROR 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It would be foolish to suggest you had no use for the european nations during the cold war.<span id='postcolor'>

What use?, to ensure a stable europe, well we are guilty of that. Europe is far better of today than it was on May 8 1945  ...As europeans shout in an inaudible voice "Thanks Marshall Plan"

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh - I see! It's our fault now - and US does not have an agenda of it's own?<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, it is a proactive agenda to rid the world of terrorism AND the states that support it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I believe US screwing the banana republiques of latin america went on a wee bit prior to second world war.<span id='postcolor'>

 This "screwing the banana republiques" could be worthy of the nobel peace prize comared to the colonialism of the dutch, england, france, portugal, and spain.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I for one can't stand the thought of living in your nation.<span id='postcolor'>

Why? Have you ever been to the U.S.? If so what happened that made you so envious of it?

I noticed no one disputed my remark about france. Did any of you read what I stated about the iraqis living here. Surely iraqis who lived under the terror of saddom and support regime change can not be wrong, can they europe? Or is that arrogant of me?

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Mar. 21 2003,22:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Colin Powell came back at a journalist with that one didn't he? He's the only guy in the cabinet I have any respect for.<span id='postcolor'>

Unfortunately, it's an urban legend.

Do you realize how long I've been waiting to use that line?  Set-ups like that come along once in a blue moon.

Semper Fi

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (interstat @ Mar. 21 2003,23:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">'BTW:  The photo of the ship dates back to the Afghanistan invasion, which is clearly a result of some of the events listed.'

So is the Taliban somehow related to blowing up the American soldiers in Lebanon?

Is the Taliban related to PAN AM downing?<span id='postcolor'>

I draw your attention to the word "some" in my quote.

Semper Fi