mr mahs

GOOD SHIT

You guys work together? Where at? what company?

Damn your ruthless:aright:

Hey look it's a future terrorist..

It's a conspiracy theory with no merrit. It is the equivalent of saying that we never landed on the moon a complete fabrication of some college tree hugger's imagination look at the site Punk voter... If you think that is as insulting as some of the things coming from that meathead I strongly disagree my little BAKLAVA

Do you beleive Bush has financial ties to BinLADEN???

DUBYA'S DUTY N.Y.POST -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- March 13, 2003 -- It was six months ago yesterday that President Bush went before the United Nations and warned the world body that it would either "serve the purpose of its founding" by moving against Saddam Hussein or become "irrelevant." Saddam remains in power. And the United Nations has proven itself to be, if not irrelevant, then impotent. Clearly, the Security Council never meant to enforce fulfill the strict conditions of its Resolution 1441, passed unanimously last fall. And it hasn't. Instead, Bush finds himself in the humiliating position of begging nations like Angola, Guinea, Mexico and Chile to support yet another resolution. To hell with it. To hell with Jacques Chirac of France and Hans Schroeder of Germany and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Summer is arriving in the Persian Gulf - with a vengeance. "Fierce winds swept across desert camps near the Iraqi border Wednesday," reported the Associated Press, "enveloping soldiers in blinding clouds of sand and rattling tents like a drum roll. "Weatherwise, the worst is yet to come: A summer of stifling heat and choking sandstorms." That's not the only reason why President Bush needs to quit groveling before self-important leaders of countries that once mattered and get on with the dispossession of Saddam Hussein. But it's as good as any. Every day that passes without decisive action allows Saddam's soldiers more time to get ready to kill Americans. And every diplomatic sashay sows more confusion among America's allies - which America's enemies then seize upon further to weaken allied solidarity. It's a vicious circle. It has to end sometime. Why not now? Today! Yesterday, the talk was of just a little slippage in the (supposed) March 17 deadline for action - either by Saddam or against him. But 'til when? 'Til summer arrives in the Gulf in full blast-furnace ferocity? Let's be clear: What's happening at the United Nations has nothing to do with avoiding war. It doesn't even have anything to do with finding a non-violent way to genuinely disarm Iraq. The charade is all about containing U.S. power and influence. Pure and simple, it's envy and resentment over America's emergence as the world's lone post-Cold-War superpower. There's a subtext, to be sure: A bid to create a new world order with Europe at its center. Though not all of Europe: Mostly just France and Germany and yappy little lapdogs like Belgium. And, of course, a little cheap chiseling on the side: Chile, temporarily ensconced on the Security Council, is standing with its hand out looking for its payday - U.S. approval for NAFTA membership, perhaps. What Chile needs - and should get straight away - is a cuff behind the ear. That would serve Santiago right - and serve also as an example to all the other extortionists on the council. They make Saddam look almost honorable in comparison. But every time he successfully thumbs his nose at yet another U.N. resolution, America's ability to fight terrorism is diminished. Four months ago, Bush warned that "the old game of cheat-and-retreat, tolerated at other times, will no longer be tolerated." Yet that's exactly the game Saddam Hussein is managing to play. He is a desperate man, who has nothing to lose - and everything to gain - from untoward delay. Answer this question: What will a new resolution - no matter how strictly worded or how tough the conditions - mean to a man who has so ignored all the others? All 17 of them. So far, successfully. Dragging out the inevitable also demoralizes those, here and abroad, who have stood strong with America. Yes, further compromise may achieve consensus on a new resolution. But, again, so what? France, all of a sudden, is going to abandon its agenda? Germany is going to support war? Saddam, after 12 long years of dissembling and defiance, is going to come clean? Not a chance. The time has come. Pull the trigger, Mr. President.

OKAY I found it

I went to http://www.timesonline.co.uk/ And couldn't find shit.. Please post the website address..

Did Oreilly tear into that asshole? I saw the one with Ann Coulter and Ann couldn't stop laughing from the idiocy coming from Maher and this other loon. I hate to bitch but this guy makes my blood boil

1) In WWII be fore the dropping of the bomb which Germany came within months to develop the Allies were planning an invasion. The estimated invasion of japan was estimated to cause 5-10 million lives. The United States is not proud of using the weapons but isn't 200k better then 10 million?? I am all for total disarment but how do you enforce it? In a perfect world this would work but can't that really happen? These are the questions that hinder that thought from becming a reality... 2) The sad thing about a nuclear exchange is once it happens it over for all of us. That thought is scary right? that's why we can't let any of these twisted middle east leaders get there hands on them. The leader of Iran is willing to destroy his country for the name of Islam and to defeat the infidels the American's would never do that.. see the diffrence? morally we are on a diffreent level.

Yeah you beleive that he is willing to torch all of Iran.. In his eyes it would be a victory for Islam because Iran is small % of muslims.. In that sick fucks head the exchange between the 2 countries would be a giant martydom operation.. And we are evil?? ***Hey Igloo what's the chances we can excite O'reilly or Hannity enough to challenge Bill Maher to a live debate on his show?? I sware I would give 50 bucks to see that, honestly I tried to e-mail the show and tell Oreilly that I would donate to one of his charities if he did it but the link is not working...

Not just Iraq the hole world man.. The rest of this planet except for a select few countries hate everything we do and stand for bro.. It's the "Talk softly but walk with a big stick" moto that will protect our way of life.... This Iraqi situation is not a war it's a raid to disect this piece of garbage from the country... When it's all over we will be liberators just like Kuwait, Afghanistan and France;)

Despite defeat in the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq remains one of the largest military powers in the Middle East region. But its potency has been severely undermined by more than a decade of sanctions, an arms embargo, and US and UK bombing. Most regular Iraqi soldiers are conscripts "Iraq's inability to modernise means that much of its armed forces are now obsolete. Many units have uncertain readiness, and will be difficult to sustain in combat," a 2002 study by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) reported. Despite numerical superiority in the region, most military analysts say that Iraq's forces would stand no chance against the United States, the most advanced military power in the world. The Iraqi army is usually divided into two groups; the regular army and the Republican Guard. Iraq has about 375,000 regular soldiers. These men - mainly conscripts - are poorly equipped and paid. Morale is believed to be low and it is widely predicted that many units would quickly surrender in the face of any US attack. Iraq is a highly ethnically diverse country, and these divisions extend into the armed forces. Saddam Hussein has had to deal with extensive problems within his military over the last decade, according to reports. Hardware shortcomings Iraq is estimated to have about 2,600 tanks, mostly ageing Soviet T-55, T-59 and T-69 designs imported or built under licence. There are a similar number of armoured personnel carriers of various types. Only a comparatively small number of these vehicles are thought to be operational. All of Iraq's military hardware suffers from a shortage of spare parts. Iraq's patched-up tanks are expected to provide little opposition to the US Fuel shortages restrict their operability, and many tanks are reportedly in such poor state that the army is resigned to simply placing them in position and using them as artillery. Any tanks which make it into action are predicted to have little effect against modern, technologically advanced US armour. Those that do are likely to be swiftly picked off by the US' overwhelming aerial firepower. The Republican Guard is considered Iraq's most effective fighting force. With a manpower of 60-70,000 men and run by Saddam Hussein's younger son, Qusay, its units are dedicated to defending and protecting the regime. Recruits are usually volunteers and are often from Saddam Hussein's home town Tikrit. They are better trained, equipped and paid than their regular army counterparts. Republican Guard units have the most modern types of tanks - the Russian-designed T-72, some of which are equipped with night-vision equipment. The Iraqi air force is also run down, with few modern aircraft and poorly trained pilots. Estimates of the numbers of serviceable planes range from 100-300. Fuel shortages have prevented pilots from gaining sufficient flying experience to be able to fight effectively in the air. Iraq still has extensive stocks of short-range air-to-ground missiles and cluster bombs, analysts believe. US warplanes are the most advanced in the world Roughly 17,000 personnel are thought to serve in Iraq's air defence command, which controls some 850 surface-to-air missile launchers and about 3,000 anti-aircraft guns. Iraq is believed to have about a dozen al-Hussein missiles which have a range of 650km, enough to reach cities in Israel, Turkey, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Some experts believe they could be fitted with chemical or biological warheads. Most analysts agree that Iraq would require several years and possibly help from a foreign power to produce longer range missiles. A number of smaller, shorter range al-Samoud missiles have recently been handed over to and destroyed by UN weapons inspectors. Truest indicator In modern warfare, military spending is a far better indicator of military might than sheer numbers of tanks, troops or aircraft, analysts say. The US position as the world's only superpower effectively guarantees its military pre-eminence. Washington will spend $343bn on its armed forces in 2003. The combined military budgets of the "axis of evil" identified by President George Bush last year - Iran, Iraq, and North Korea - comes to a about $10bn. Russia and China's military expenditure totals $95.5bn. In contrast to Iraq's dilapidated weapons, the US has an array of versatile and modern equipment. In terms of manpower its armed forces are not only large, but well equipped, trained, supported and motivated. On the ground, its main M-1 Abrams battle tanks are fast across the ground and packed with the latest electronic targeting and night vision technology. In the air US warplanes are the world's most advanced, with the ability to patrol the skies 24-hours a day and perform a multitude of missions ranging from close ground support to high-altitude bombing. Both above and below the ocean surface fleets of giant Nimitz class aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines give Washington the ability to extend its massive firepower to any point on the globe. In support of these forces, the US is unrivalled in its communications, intelligence gathering, and logistics networks

Fucko, Instead of calling names why don't you get your head out of your ass and up with modern day. But if you you want to harp on the past.. They were our ally 200 years ago to overthrow the British because we had a common enemy. The times have changed and time and time again the French stuck a knife in our back starting in 91 with the first Gulf war ... The U.S. OF A has paid it's debt to the french 10x over from bailing those pussies out in WWII to providing crucial financial assistance in the 60's. The french are playing a very dangerous diplomatic game to appease their people. The french are resentful because the American way works and the socialistic society they follow is crap.. I will tell you this they need us more then we need them period... The objection to a new resolution was a deliberate jab to humiliate us in front of the world and they should pay through their noses for it.. Boycott everything from wine to fucking EZ wider paper those pricks don't deserve shit... The French are washed up and this blocking of the new resolution is a desperate attempt to put that shit hole country back on the map... so you and the FRENCH can go Fuck yourself....

9) He provided every member of the Bin Laden family living in the U.S. a chartered plane shortly after 9/11 to fly back home to Saudi Arabia without questioning them. One of GW’s first petroleum venture was partnered with the Bin Laden family and George Sr. has been getting filthy rich selling defense contracts to the Bin Ladens. These are just some examples of the many ties the Bush family has with the Bin Ladens. *****This is a horse shit conspiracy theory that the liberal media would jump all over if true.. Do you still beleive in the boogie man? LOON

Chirac is in bed with Sadam. If you can't see this then that's you smoking rock in your sig.. And why would we need anyone's help IF we went to war with France??It's like me and my freinds jumping my baby brother...

DEAD AMERICANS By RALPH PETERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- March 12, 2003 -- THE government of France is fighting an undeclared war with the United States. The result will be the needless deaths of American soldiers in the Gulf. And the more Americans Saddam manages to kill, the greater President Chirac's satisfaction will be. The French pride themselves on their rationality. But the rabid anti-Americanism that has gripped the Parisian elite is a form of collective madness, spawned by jealousy, wounded pride and astonishing delusions about French power. To embarrass America, the French government is willing to destroy no end of international organizations and alliances. The real cowboys in this conflict are galloping along the banks of the Seine. In the end, the greatest loser will be France, since French power is as crumbly as Roquefort cheese. Paris isn't a "third force," but a third farce. French behavior in the current crisis is obsessive, not reasoned and ultimately self-defeating. In the short term, though, the bill-payers for the Gallic tantrum will be the additional American soldiers - as well as Iraqi soldiers and civilians - who will die because Paris has encouraged Saddam to believe the international community, led by France, will protect him even after a war begins. Thanks to Jacques Chirac, Saddam Hussein and his generals now see hope where there is none. At least some of those who would have surrendered readily will now fight. Saddam will pull every possible trick to excite world opinion against the United States, including staged atrocities. And our troops will have to kill men who otherwise would have surrendered. Some of our own fighting men and women will die in the process, all because France has led the Iraqi regime down the garden path. Of course, France will abandon Saddam in the end. But we must make no mistake about French culpability for the ultimate casualty figures. This is not a mere diplomatic tiff. At the highest levels of government, the French know what they are doing, at least tactically (their strategy is a dangerous, pathetic muddle). We cannot allow a French betrayal in so important a matter to go unpunished. If there are no consequences for French complicity in the deaths of young Americans, there will be no future for American diplomacy in Europe. Too smart for their own good, the French have upset Carl von Clausewitz's old dictum that "War is a simple continuation of politics by other means." For Chirac and for Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, international politics is now a form of war. And their war is not against terrorism, or tyrants, or injustice. Their war is against the United States of America. The French would love to prevent the war in the Gulf, thus setting themselves up as the champions of tyrants everywhere and of Arab tyrants in particular. But Paris realizes there is really very little chance of deflecting Washington. So their essential goal is to complicate matters, to vilify America and to make the United States pay the highest possible price for any success it achieves, while remaining ready to capitalize on any American failures. When the war in Iraq ends with a decisive American victory, Chirac will put on his little C'est la vie smile and insist that our differences were nothing but a disagreement between old friends, something one must expect in our complex world. Meanwhile, he and his closest advisers yearn for a bloody American defeat. Nothing would please Chirac more than thousands of dead American soldiers inside the borders of Iraq, with Saddam alive and defiant. If this war goes badly, Chirac could have more American blood on his hands than does Osama bin Laden. Consider the practical effects of French cheerleading for Saddam: * Saddam should feel hopeless by now; instead, he has been led to believe that, even if war cannot be averted, he has a real chance of defeating the United States diplomatically by fighting our troops to a bloody stalemate. He believes - thanks to the French - that the more blood he sheds, the likelier he and his regime are to survive. * Saddam will be even more inclined to employ weapons of mass destruction on as wide a scale as possible, certain that France and his other supporters will excuse his behavior as an inevitable response to American aggression, not proof that he possessed such weapons all along. * The war is delayed, day after day, giving Saddam ever more time to strengthen his defenses, while American troops sit in the desert, watching Saddam wire his oilfields with explosives, dig in his troops and prepare a massive defense of Baghdad. Our troops are ready now, and each delay only weakens our readiness compared to that of our adversary. * The French support for Saddam encourages terrorists, Iraqi-sponsored or otherwise, to believe that wartime actions against the United States could have a decisive effect, given the opposition to American policy even among Washington's traditional "friends." The last point is easy to undervalue. Terrorists - and Saddam himself - do not live in our world of abundant, competitive information. Rather, they live in worlds of enthusiastic self-delusion and megalomania. The ruthless French defense of Saddam - an unspeakable dictator - has played into the fantasies of tyrant and terrorist alike, convincing them that they are stronger than they really are, that they are not alone, and that it is America which is evil and vulnerable. Readers may note that I have not even raised the issue of recent reports that French firms continued to help Iraq improve its armaments into the early weeks of this year. Although one of the many reasons the French do not want us in Baghdad is that they don't want us going through Iraqi archives and uncovering the extent of their complicity in Saddam's defiance of sanctions, the material aid French firms may have provided to Iraq is a trivial issue compared to the moral and diplomatic encouragement Paris has given Baghdad. Ultimately, this grotesque resurgence of French "diplomacy" will fail. France is weak, ill-defended and hated in Africa and much of the Middle East with a quiet hatred that goes far deeper than the topical anti-Americanism so much in evidence. Nor will its attempts to glorify itself at America's expense provide France with any security. The terrorists will not reward France for its pandering; on the contrary, I expect we shall see a major terrorist strike in France this year. The French do not merely live in a bad neighborhood - the bad neighborhoods live within France. The French are bribing their executioners in the expectation of mercy. We may hope - and pray - that the war against Iraq will be swift, with low casualties. But every American who dies in this war will have a French diplomatic bullet in his or her body. Ralph Peters has canceled his orders for 2000 Bordeaux. And he will cancel his support for the Bush administration if it does not punish France for its betrayal.

THE REPUBLICAN OATH: I believe that the proper function of government is to do for the people those things that have to be done but cannot be done, or cannot be done as well by individuals, and that the most effective government is government closest to the people. I believe that good government is based on the individual and that each person's ability, dignity, freedom and responsibility must be honored and recognized. I believe that free enterprise and the encouragement of individual initiative and incentive have given this nation an economic system second to none. I believe that sound money policy should be our goal. I believe in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, age, sex or national origin. I believe that persons with disabilities should be afforded equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity as well. I believe we must retain those principles worth retaining, yet always be receptive to new ideas with an outlook broad enough to accommodate thoughtful change and varying points of view. I believe that Americans value and should preserve their feeling of national strength and pride, and at the same time share with people everywhere a desire for peace and freedom and the extension of human rights throughout the world. Finally, I believe that the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.

Oh I get it kill em with kindness... Good idea. Gentley inform them how dellusional they are..

????

Who cares you can listen to that mut every weekend. You have every WORLD renoun dj and you want to see him? I just don't get it..

Chirac is going to get slapped very soon... 1st- diplomatically 2nd- economically And he better hope we don't fiind anything incriminating in Iraq or France is next.... That you can bank on!!!!

IGLOO-

nOrmal heyy nOOrmal What is your answer there, Ben GAY??? ????Normal seriously, all kidding aside what can you contribute to solving this terrrorism promblem we have??? I mean really what else is coming out of your corner then blame America first?? This so called lit obviously states that we created our promblem but what does that solve?? See how silly you people sound "What has Sadam done to us"? "Bush is the real threat" always looking at the cup half empty, ball of negativity, a minus to any operation, useless... get my point? The left always bitch and point out flaws with no answers... What is your answer to 3k people dying in NEW yORK????