mr mahs

Track deez nuts.....

The Iraqi channels are contolled by Sadam's son real reliable sources... I geuss you beleive that 911 was started by Isreal.. Oh and I geuss you beleive iraq won the first war right???

You can't be serious... The last time the Iraqi people rose up against the govt they were gassed.... There's your proof...

Governments, opposition parties and war protesters from around the world today registered their reaction to the start of military action against Iraq. Many countries voiced concern as the United States-led coalition launched cruise missiles at Baghdad, with veto-wielding members of the United Nations (UN) Security Council among the most vociferous dissenters France France, which with Germany and Russia, vowed to oppose any UN resolution authorising the use of force to disarm Iraq, noted the outbreak of hostilities with "deep concern", said Francois Rivasseau, a foreign ministry spokesman. France, which with Russia, China, the United States and the UK holds the right of veto at the Security Council, "hopes that the conflict which has just begun can be ended as soon as possible", he added in the statement. China China demanded today that military action against Iraq should stop immediately and asserted that the initial attack by the United States was "violating the norms of international behaviour". Kong Quan, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, said the beginning of the attack on Iraq by the US-led military force took place "in disregard for the oppposition of the international community". Mr Kong said China continues to maintain that "the Iraq question can be solved peacefully". Russia President Vladimir Putin kept his silence today after Moscow's attempts to prevent the war through diplomacy. The Kremlin said in a terse statement that Mr Putin was being constantly informed of the situation but gave no initial reaction to the first strikes on the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. Meanwhile, a host of lawmakers voiced outrage at the attacks. The Duma, Russia's parliament, was expected to vote on a resolution calling for the UN General Assembly to hold an emergency session on Iraq later today. Mikhail Gorbachev, the former Soviet president who gave his tacit approval to the first Gulf War in 1991, angrily told the Interfax news agency that Washington was behaving in world affairs "as if it owns the place". Germany Germany, which has been one of the most vocal European opponents of a war, called for the fighting to be over quickly. "Now everything must be done to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe among the Iraqi people," the Government said in a statement, as security was boosted around US and British embassies and at Frankfurt and Berlin airports. Italy Franco Frattini, Foreign Minister, said today that disarming Saddam Hussein had become "a tragic necessity" for the international community. Despite adverse public opinion, Italy has been a staunch supporter of Washington's hardline stance on Iraq. The Italian parliament voted yesterday to open its airspace to United States warplanes, but forbid their use of airbases to launch direct attacks on Iraq. Spain Jose Maria Aznar, the Prime Minister, is one of Washington's staunchest allies in its standoff with Saddam Hussein. However, Spain's opposition parties denounced military action and heavily criticized the Prime Minister, while opinion polls show a vast majority of Spaniards opposed to war in Iraq even with UN backing. The Netherlands Jan Peter Balkenende, the Prime Minister, said today that his country, which has a large and spirited anti-war movement, could not commit combat troops but “gives political support to the action launched against Saddam Hussein”. “Freedom and safety for all, including the inhabitants of Iraq, is the highest goal,” he said. Vatican Pope John Paul II devoted his daily mass to peace and the Iraqi people today after being informed of the start of the military campaign against Baghdad, his aides said. The Vatican has not issued a formal reaction to the air attacks on the Iraqi capital. The Pope also dispatched Cardinal Pio Laghi, a former Vatican representative to the United Nations and a personal friend of President Georghe W Bush, to Washington where he attempted in vain to persuade the US leader not to unleash an attack on Iraq. Iran Iran, which was at war with Iraq during the 1980s and which President Bush said was part of the "axis of evil", called the attacks on Iraq "unjustifiable and illegitimate". "The continued disregard for public wisdom by the United States will completely ruin the valuable achievements by governments and nations over half-a-century to consolidate cooperation for peace," Kamal Kharrazi, Foreign Minister, said. Japan Junichiro Koizumi, the Prime Minister, said today he supported the US-led campaign to disarm Iraq by force and promised his country would contribute to postwar reconstruction. "Iraq has continued to ignore the United Nations resolutions and has not acted sincerely," Mr Koizumi said. "Therefore, I understand and support US action to disarm Iraq." Mr Koizumi's conservative administration has stood by the United States throughout the Iraq crisis. Australia John Howard, the Prime Minister, insisted today that joining the Iraq war has not increased the risk of an attack by Islamic radicals, but officials are taking no chances. As thousands of anti-war protesters gathered in Sydney and Melbourne, police took up positions in the streets and at landmarks such as the Sydney Opera House. Armed police were also deployed for the first time around the Parliament in Canberra and there was an increased presence at US diplomatic missions. Indonesia President Megawati Sukarnoputri said in a rare radio address that “Indonesia is of the opinion that the use of military action against Iraq is an act of aggression which is against international law". Malaysia Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Malaysia's acting Prime Minister, said today in a live television broadcast that military action against Iraq was against international law. “It is in contravention of international law, upon which the security and stability of the world is based”, he said. “The consequences of this war will not only have devastating implications on Iraq and the Middle East, but will ultimately impact upon the entire world." South Korea President Roh Moo-hyun told his country today the US-led war on Iraq had been inevitable and he would do his utmost to ensure the conflict did not heighten tension with North Korea. Mr Roh said that Seoul continued to support Washington in a televised address to his country and vowed to work to minimise the impact of the war on the South Korean economy.

Amen

Money well spent Last Updated: Thursday, 20 March, 2003, 10:24 GMT Email this to a friend Printable version US offers Israel billions in aid US military aid is a fashion accessory in Tel Aviv The US has offered $10bn (£6.4bn) to Israel, to bail it out of the worst economic crisis in its history. Israel's Finance Ministry said the package consisted of $1bn (£640,000m) in direct military aid and $9bn in loan guarantees. The 30-month-long Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation and the global economic slowdown have plunged the country into its third year of recession. Israel - the biggest recipient of US aid worldwide - initially asked for $4bn (£2.5bn) in military aid and $8bn in loan guarantees. The US will deduct from the loan guarantees any Israeli expenditure on settlement activities in Palestinian areas. The package, which is part of President George W Bush's war budget, still needs approval by the US Congress. Economic troubles US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice pledged the aid to Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday. "Rice told Netanyahu that the (Bush) administration decided to raise the amount of the guarantees by $1bn over what had been planned because the Americans were impressed by the economic plan that has been presented to the government," Israel's finance ministry said in a statement. Israel's economy contracted by 1% in 2002 after a 0.9% fall in 2001 and the budget deficit is running at 6%, twice the forecast for 2003. Mr Netanyahu on Monday announced government spending cuts and reductions in the public sector wage to rein in the budget deficit. Israel already receives $3bn a year from the US, mostly as military aid. __________________ R.I.P. BIGMAHS Victim of left wing censorship..... "We will accept no outcome but Victory" Pres Bush.

Last Updated: Thursday, 20 March, 2003, 10:24 GMT Email this to a friend Printable version US offers Israel billions in aid US military aid is a fashion accessory in Tel Aviv The US has offered $10bn (£6.4bn) to Israel, to bail it out of the worst economic crisis in its history. Israel's Finance Ministry said the package consisted of $1bn (£640,000m) in direct military aid and $9bn in loan guarantees. The 30-month-long Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation and the global economic slowdown have plunged the country into its third year of recession. Israel - the biggest recipient of US aid worldwide - initially asked for $4bn (£2.5bn) in military aid and $8bn in loan guarantees. The US will deduct from the loan guarantees any Israeli expenditure on settlement activities in Palestinian areas. The package, which is part of President George W Bush's war budget, still needs approval by the US Congress. Economic troubles US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice pledged the aid to Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday. "Rice told Netanyahu that the (Bush) administration decided to raise the amount of the guarantees by $1bn over what had been planned because the Americans were impressed by the economic plan that has been presented to the government," Israel's finance ministry said in a statement. Israel's economy contracted by 1% in 2002 after a 0.9% fall in 2001 and the budget deficit is running at 6%, twice the forecast for 2003. Mr Netanyahu on Monday announced government spending cuts and reductions in the public sector wage to rein in the budget deficit. Israel already receives $3bn a year from the US, mostly as military aid.

It's not all of them just some. I truly beleive that it's not there fault they don't know any better...

I am sitting at my desk sifting through the news websites looking for the latest piece of information regarding the Iraqi conflict... I came across a articlE on fox that interviewed a shopkeeper in Pakistan he said trembeling with anger " Every muslim should pick up arem and help the Iraqi people" what's wrong with this statement??? The United States is the strongest nation known to man and if we wanted to the whole middle east would be a parking lot.. The ordinance that will be dropped in Iraq will be laser guided which means it has the capability of hitting the intended target by a couple of feet. The weapons today can literally pick an choose what they want to hit... By selecting the targets how are we targeting the Iraqi people or even Islam?? The shop keeper in Pakistan is saying we are wrong.. Why do SOME muslims beleive this is against them and not the Iraqi dictator? Why don't the same muslims that are calling for arms against the Americans when it should be a call across the world for Jihad against the regimes that are opressing them? I just don't get it it really baffles me....

I saw this puke on Bill MAHER Complete idiot....

You hide behind the 1st amendment you coward...

My fellow citizens. At this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. "On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign. "More than 35 countries are giving crucial support from the use of naval and air bases to help with intelligence and logistics to deployment of combat units. "Every nation in this coalition has chosen to bear the duty and share the honour of serving in our common defence. "To all the men and women of the United States armed forces now in the Middle East, the peace of a troubled world and the hopes of an oppressed people now depend on you. That trust is well placed. "The enemies you confront will come to know your skill and bravery. The people you liberate will witness the honourable and decent spirit of the American military. "In this conflict America faces an enemy that has no regard for conventions of war or rules of morality. Saddam Hussein has placed Iraqi troops and equipment in civilian areas, attempting to use innocent men, women and children as shields for his own military. A final atrocity against his people. "I want Americans and all the world to know that coalition forces will make every effort to spare innocent civilians from harm. A campaign on the harsh terrain of the nation as large as California could be longer and more difficult than some predict and helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment. "We come to Iraq with respect for its citizens, for their great civilisation and for the religious faiths they practise. We have no ambition in Iraq except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people. "I know that the families of our military are praying that all those who serve will return safely and soon. "The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. "We will meet that threat now with our army, air force, navy, coastguard and marines so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of firefighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities. "Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force and I assure you this will not be a campaign of half measures and we will accept no outcome but victory. "My fellow citizens, the dangers to our country and the world will be overcome. We will pass through this time of peril and carry on the work of peace. We will defend our freedom. We will bring freedom to others and we will prevail."

If you are new to the board you will quickly realize that he is a COMPLETE LOON...

THIS present war will not last long, but its effects will echo for decades. And they will be positive effects - for Iraq, for the Middle East, for the world beyond the theater of conflict and for the United States of America. This war will be smaller in scale and shorter in duration than many of the conflicts in which we have been engaged over the past half century. It is not without grave risks. But its practical benefits and the message it sends make it the most important "hot" war we have waged since World War II. President Bush is not the most articulate of the world's heads of state. Elitists who speak artfully, while failing to listen honestly, dismiss him. Yet while the intelligentsia clings to the past, our president has the vision to see that the old patterns of diplomacy have failed us, that the world's health is too grave for yesterday's quack medicines. He will never write a scholarly tome on strategy that will win the applause of academics and diplomats. But our president is rewriting the strategy itself, in a manner so bold and vital that we have not yet begun to grasp its full import. The new American policy toward which the times have driven us is as radically different as our critics fear. It breaks with a failed and blood-soaked past. We have finally accepted that it is no longer enough to wait for enemies to attack first. We have accepted our unique responsibility to intervene abroad in the cause of global security and human rights. And we have dispensed with a corrupt sham sustained by our critics: the notion that a dictator, no matter how cruel and illegitimate, is untouchable behind his "sovereign" borders. It is no accident that the core countries of "Old Europe," France and Germany, oppose us. Between them, they have been responsible for every major European conflict since the Napoleonic era. Those who now accuse us of aggression bear the weight of hundreds of millions of corpses. President Bush has turned away from the murderous logic of European diplomacy, from mechanisms of statecraft that have led only to unchecked aggression and unchallenged genocide. The essential purpose of European diplomacy has been, and remains, the preservation of the powerful, by the powerful, for the powerful. Wherever in the world we see a dictatorship protected by diplomatic custom and webs of trade, we see an outpost of "Old Europe." Saddam is more European than Tony Blair. Just as we fought our Civil War to cast off the European legacies of human bondage and political power vested in a landed aristocracy, we are now fighting to cast off an Arab dictator who embodies the European tradition of a tyrant sustained by a bureaucracy of terror. Europeans pioneered the methods. Saddam is merely an imitator. Our Spanish-American War shattered the inviolable image of European empires. Underestimated in its importance because it was a "small" war, the Spanish-American War was the first time a non-European power reached out to destroy an oppressive European empire. It sparked the century-spanning collapse of European empires that ended with the disintegration of the Soviet incarnation of the empire of the czars, in 1991. The Europeans will never forgive us for spoiling their party. Now we have begun a new endeavor. It, too, may last a century. With the old empires gone, we are sending notice to dictators everywhere that the rules formulated by Old Europe no longer apply, that Saddam may be only the first dictator to fall, that the United States will no longer overlook massive violations of human rights, that we shall no longer allow ourselves to be threatened without responding and that we will no longer heed the voices of those foreign capitals that have failed the world with such devastating consequences. What shall we say to those who accuse us of violating "time-honored" and "proven" rules of international relations? None of us would want to be operated upon by a surgeon using a medical text from the 19th century. And we cannot address the strategic cancers of the 21st century using antique diplomatic etiquette designed to protect the kings, czars and emperors of bygone Europe. I do not suggest that our government has a detailed road map to the future. We are learning as we go, improvising and gradually shaping a new strategy to address new challenges. The pace of change is so rapid that we have not even developed the new vocabulary we need. But Europe is the continent of words; our world is one of action. We are shaping tomorrow, while those who mock us cling to discredited yesterdays. Our instincts are good, our motives are sound and our standards of behavior are the highest in the history of nations. Who shall lead the way, if we do not? This is an epochal war, one of those rare events that mark the end of one era and the beginning of another. Much attention has been paid to the new technologies we will bring to bear in this conflict. But our new convictions will leave the greater legacy. As our aircraft pierce the skies over Baghdad and our tanks roll toward the Tigris and Euphrates - along with those of our like-minded British allies - history has returned to the sands that gave rise both to the world's earliest civilizations and some of the world's most brutal tyrants. Our president's command to our forces to enter Iraq marks a break with an ancient and enduring legacy of cruelty, with ideologies of statehood that have killed rather than protected and with the unacceptable tradition that one man, having seized power, has the right to oppress, torment and butcher millions. I do not underestimate the possible costs of this war. Nor will we know its true results for years, until we survey the altered landscape of the Middle East at least a decade hence. But the cost of continuing to subscribe to the great-power politics and corrupt behaviors that constitute the European tradition of diplomacy is far too high for humanity to pay. In a sense, President Jacques Chirac of France did us a great favor in making the choice between the future and the past so stark and clear. When Saddam ignored our president's ultimatum, he chose the past. We have chosen the future.

[ How much will it cost? Try $20 billion a year indefinitely, says a Council on Foreign Relations Task Force co-led by Thomas Pickering, United Nations ambassador under the current president's father during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. That's for rebuilding the country's shattered infrastructure, providing food, shelter and medicine for millions of Iraqi civilians, and preventing bloody reprisals among rival ethnic and religious groups. If the job requires significantly more than 75,000 U.S. troops, which the task force calls a real possibility, then "the funding requirement would be much greater." Updated March 19, 2003 12:27 a.m.

So leaving it alone will help.. Where are all you tree huggers when this loon was gassing and starving his own people??? Where are all the activists with there signs when he gassed Iran?

A perfect example of Democracy and western values improving the way of life in the Middle East is Kuwait.. The only people afraid of United States intervention in the region are the people in control..

Do you agree with what the US is trying to do? And please don't answer what right is it of America.

Pre PVD, dinner def and maybe the Perfecto party at OPIUM...

PVD..... Any questions?

It's not that I condem her critisizing the president, it's the way she disrespected the president which is our representative to the world.. To speak out against the war is one thing but to say I am ashamed of him is a little too far especially in front of your fans which already adore her and probabbly beleive this to be the norm in America... To say that a celebrities comment's should be treated the same as any americans is untrue due to the spotlight they receive to make their voices heard... Liberals say that we are harshly critcizing the HEFTY CHICs.. I don't agree..

Yeah the lead singer is a horse...

Multi-lingual do you have any other talents? any instruments???

Diffrent.. The average american thinks the economy is controlled by the president and that is incorrect.. They reward clinton for the robust economy which is also the farthest from the truth.. The slump in the economy is not Bush's fault it is cyclical and began to erode in the last years of "CLITON"

ISN'T IT TOO LATE??? If not where can I get one???