Iraq War - Support Our Troops

[koky]

kaint we auuull just get along ?? do it for rodney king !!

:D :D

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by sobeton

Yes SOME events happen under a democratic administration, I don’t really see the relevance other then mere speculation. President Bush sent US troops to Somalia back in 1992, so I’m confused by your reference. At that time we knew Bin Laden, was supporting rebels in Somalia.

It was under the Reagan – Bush administration, that Osama Bin Laden along with the Afghanistan’s, received money and arms training from the US, to help fight the former Soviet Union. Panama, and Grenada are successes?? Please let the people of those countries know. Berlin Wall was coming down with or without Reagan. We supplied Kuwait with arms, money, training, etc. Hmmmmm isn’t that what we did for Bin Laden??

see i dont see it as a Democrat/Republican mistakes...when we elect a president, he represents us...there are mistakes done under EVERY administration, that leaves problems for the next one...Example: THIS SHITTY ECONOMY, we knew it was coming when Clinton was still in office...Bush hasnt done anything to improve it...Presidents are men and men will make mistakes...like training Bin Laden...but when u train people, nations or make a regime change...u never know if they will or will not be on ur side 10 yrs from now...we know after the fact, but thats called hind sight...life is made up of opportunities and they may only come around once in a while...sometimes u must act on these windows of opportunities and other times u must not...but we never know the effect, until after the fact...best friends turn on best friends, husbands turn on wives...what makes u think that nations and US trained guerilla fighters wont do the same to the US?

[sobeton]

Originally posted by mrmatas2277

see i dont see it as a Democrat/Republican mistakes...when we elect a president, he represents us...there are mistakes done under EVERY administration, that leaves problems for the next one...Example: THIS SHITTY ECONOMY, we knew it was coming when Clinton was still in office...Bush hasnt done anything to improve it...Presidents are men and men will make mistakes...like training Bin Laden...but when u train people, nations or make a regime change...u never know if they will or will not be on ur side 10 yrs from now...we know after the fact, but thats called hind sight...life is made up of opportunities and they may only come around once in a while...sometimes u must act on these windows of opportunities and other times u must not...but we never know the effect, until after the fact...best friends turn on best friends, husbands turn on wives...what makes u think that nations and US trained guerilla fighters wont do the same to the US?

I don’t seem as mistakes either; which is why I never stated the same. what I did is point out, things which Obby stated as facts; which are not. Yes every administration makes mistakes. it’s when we don’t learn from those mistakes, that other issues manifest. with regard to the economy, I doubt one could have foreseen a weak economy while Clinton was in office. know one could predict 9/11, and that sent the economy into a tailspin. which we are still trying to recover from. I also understand when you are dealing with "guerilla fighters",and volatile governments, that nothing is really predictable.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by sobeton

I don’t seem as mistakes either; which is why I never stated the same. what I did is point out, things which Obby stated as facts; which are not. Yes every administration makes mistakes. it’s when we don’t learn from those mistakes, that other issues manifest. with regard to the economy, I doubt one could have foreseen a weak economy while Clinton was in office. know one could predict 9/11, and that sent the economy into a tailspin. which we are still trying to recover from. I also understand when you are dealing with a "guerilla fighters",and volatile governments, that nothing are really predicable.

Clinton's last, on his last year...all that was on the News Channels, was talk about whoever took over after Clinton would be seeing a very shaky economy...this economy was no surprise, what IS a surprise is that we arent doing anything positive to get out of it....

[sobeton]

Originally posted by mrmatas2277

Clinton's last, on his last year...all that was on the News Channels, was talk about whoever took over after Clinton would be seeing a very shaky economy...this economy was no surprise, what IS a surprise is that we arent doing anything positive to get out of it....

again you can’t overlook 9/11, as a significant factor affecting the economy. the wall street journal did a great analysis of the economy, at the end of the Clinton administration. it offered some interesting analysis. right now we are distracted with other issues. let’s hope the economy doesn’t bottom out, before we decide to address it.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by sobeton

again you can’t overlook 9/11, as a significant factor affecting the economy. the wall street journal did a great analysis of the economy, at the end of the Clinton administration. it offered some interesting analysis. right now we are distracted with other issues. let’s hope the economy doesn’t bottom out, before we decide to address it.

yup i agree about 9/11...but we werent doing so hot prior either...things just went from bad to worse with 9/11...lets hope the bottom doesnt fall out, but i know alot of people that will not be having jobs by the end of this month...so the economy is hitting home right now...

[sobeton]

Originally posted by mrmatas2277

yup i agree about 9/11...but we werent doing so hot prior either...things just went from bad to worse with 9/11...lets hope the bottom doesnt fall out, but i know alot of people that will not be having jobs by the end of this month...so the economy is hitting home right now...

I hear ya bro.

[vipnerd]

Originally posted by obby

Check your facts because our Government does send funding approved by Congress to both NPR and PBS.

Look it up.

The Public Broadcasting Service: An Overview

PBS in Brief

A private, nonprofit corporation whose members are America’s public TV stations.

Founded in 1969.

Provides quality TV programming and related services to 350 noncommercial stations serving all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa.

PBS oversees program acquisition, distribution and promotion; education services; new media ventures; fundraising support; engineering and technology development; and video marketing.

PBS Member Stations

171 noncommercial, educational licensees operate 350 PBS member stations.

Of the 171 licensees, 87 are community organizations, 57 are colleges/universities, 20 are state authorities and 7 are local educational or municipal authorities.

The Public Television Audience

The public TV audience reflects the social and economic makeup of the nation.

70.9% of all American television-owning families - 75.7 million households representing 143.6 million people - watched public television in October 2002, with the average home tuning in for over seven and a half hours during the month.

PBS Education Services

PBS KIDS / PBS Ready To Learn helps to increase school readiness for all of America's children with an unrivaled line-up of educational and entertaining children's programming each weekday, coupled with short educational video spots. The value and impact of these programs are enhanced through outreach services provided by more than 140 local PBS stations to their communities, including workshops, free children's books, a magazine and other learning resources to help parents, teachers and child-care providers prepare young children to enter school ready to learn. PBS Ready To Learn collaborates with a number of organizations at the national and local levels in the development and delivery of these services. Ready To Learn is supported by the U.S. Department of Education.

The PBS Adult Learning Service, a partnership involving local PBS stations and colleges, provides college credit TV courses to nearly 400,000 students each academic year.

PBS is the #1 television resource in the country for classroom programming, according to Cable in the Classroom's three national surveys of teachers and school librarians.

PBS Programming Activities

National Program Service - the major package of programs PBS distributes to its member stations. It features television's best children's, cultural, educational, history, nature, news, public affairs, science and skills programs.

Programs are obtained from PBS stations, independent producers and sources around the world. PBS does not produce programs.

PBS Digital Leadership

PBS.org is not only the most visited dot-org Web site in the world, it is also the home of comprehensive companion Web sites for more than 500 PBS television programs and specials, as well as original Web content and real-time learning adventures. With hundreds of thousands of pages of content to explore, visitors to award-winning pbs.org can delve further into the subjects they most enjoy — from news to history and the arts to science and technology.

PBS member stations are digital television leaders, from groundbreaking work in interactive TV and a monthly schedule of original high-definition programming to the PBS KIDS Channel and PBS YOU multicast services.

Public TV Funding

Public TV's total national, regional and local revenue in FY00 totaled $1.6 billion, according to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Leading sources of revenue: members (23.5%); state governments (18.3%); CPB and federal grants/contracts (16.4%); businesses (16.1%); state colleges and universities (6.5%); and foundations (5.5%).

4.5 million individuals and families contributed $380 million to public TV in FY00.

PBS Budget

PBS' operating revenue has grown from $262 million in FY98 to a projected $324 million in FY03, a 24% increase in just five years, largely from non-member revenue sources.

This revenue growth has enabled PBS to invest more in three key areas: national programming, advertising and promotion, and PBS.org.

January 2003

___________________________________

For a quick and easy link to the underwriters .... click ....

http://www.pbs.org/insidepbs/annualreport/2002/Underwriters.pdf

Peace ...

Vip

[obby]

For everyone who thinks that we are conquerors and not liberators.

Excellent Quote from Secretary of State Colin Powell

When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

It became very quiet in the room.

[mrmatas2277]

Originally posted by obby

He answered by saying, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

[sobeton]

"Americans are largely innocent of the fact that much of the rest of the world believes that it is American power, and not terrorists with weapons of mass destruction, that is destabilizing the world, and nowhere are these views more firmly held than among America's European allies. " - Francis Fukuyama

[obby]

ESTAHROX@aol.com wrote:

The word is "Nazi". And your math is fuzzy. You're not God. You can't justify killing people.

____________________________________________________

djobby@bellsouth.net responded:

Good eye

Sorry about the typo. Sorry it offends you so much. Tends to happen when you write allot and don't use spell check.

There is only one God and he is not I. He happens to be the same God that watched over my father when he fought (two tours) in Vietnam and the same God that also watched over my brother who fought in Desert Storm and is the same God that will be watching over our troops while they risked their lives to liberate the Iraqi's from their brutal and evil dictatorship they are currently under (not much longer though).

I value life as much as you may but TODAY we need to think more with our heads and not with our hearts. Once we liberate Iraq we can then go back to thinking with our hearts (until another Saddam Hussein, Hitler ect ect ect comes along).

Whether it sounds snobby to you. We (USA, You, I) are a "super power" and it is up to us to help stop the evil that faces not only us but the World around us.

Read up

http://www.krg.org/reference/halabja/us-state-dept-info.asp

http://www.krg.org/docs/articles/gosden-halabja.asp

Are you say we should just shit back and do nothing?

Like I said, FOR NOW, think with your head more and not your heart.

Respectfully,

Obby

[bbflux]

Originally posted by vipnerd

The Public Broadcasting Service: An Overview

PBS in Brief

A private, nonprofit corporation whose members are America’s public TV stations.

Founded in 1969.

Provides quality TV programming and related services to 350 noncommercial stations serving all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa.

PBS oversees program acquisition, distribution and promotion; education services; new media ventures; fundraising support; engineering and technology development; and video marketing.

PBS Member Stations

171 noncommercial, educational licensees operate 350 PBS member stations.

Of the 171 licensees, 87 are community organizations, 57 are colleges/universities, 20 are state authorities and 7 are local educational or municipal authorities.

The Public Television Audience

The public TV audience reflects the social and economic makeup of the nation.

70.9% of all American television-owning families - 75.7 million households representing 143.6 million people - watched public television in October 2002, with the average home tuning in for over seven and a half hours during the month.

PBS Education Services

PBS KIDS / PBS Ready To Learn helps to increase school readiness for all of America's children with an unrivaled line-up of educational and entertaining children's programming each weekday, coupled with short educational video spots. The value and impact of these programs are enhanced through outreach services provided by more than 140 local PBS stations to their communities, including workshops, free children's books, a magazine and other learning resources to help parents, teachers and child-care providers prepare young children to enter school ready to learn. PBS Ready To Learn collaborates with a number of organizations at the national and local levels in the development and delivery of these services. Ready To Learn is supported by the U.S. Department of Education.

The PBS Adult Learning Service, a partnership involving local PBS stations and colleges, provides college credit TV courses to nearly 400,000 students each academic year.

PBS is the #1 television resource in the country for classroom programming, according to Cable in the Classroom's three national surveys of teachers and school librarians.

PBS Programming Activities

National Program Service - the major package of programs PBS distributes to its member stations. It features television's best children's, cultural, educational, history, nature, news, public affairs, science and skills programs.

Programs are obtained from PBS stations, independent producers and sources around the world. PBS does not produce programs.

PBS Digital Leadership

PBS.org is not only the most visited dot-org Web site in the world, it is also the home of comprehensive companion Web sites for more than 500 PBS television programs and specials, as well as original Web content and real-time learning adventures. With hundreds of thousands of pages of content to explore, visitors to award-winning pbs.org can delve further into the subjects they most enjoy — from news to history and the arts to science and technology.

PBS member stations are digital television leaders, from groundbreaking work in interactive TV and a monthly schedule of original high-definition programming to the PBS KIDS Channel and PBS YOU multicast services.

Public TV Funding

Public TV's total national, regional and local revenue in FY00 totaled $1.6 billion, according to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Leading sources of revenue: members (23.5%); state governments (18.3%); CPB and federal grants/contracts (16.4%); businesses (16.1%); state colleges and universities (6.5%); and foundations (5.5%).

4.5 million individuals and families contributed $380 million to public TV in FY00.

PBS Budget

PBS' operating revenue has grown from $262 million in FY98 to a projected $324 million in FY03, a 24% increase in just five years, largely from non-member revenue sources.

This revenue growth has enabled PBS to invest more in three key areas: national programming, advertising and promotion, and PBS.org.

January 2003

___________________________________

For a quick and easy link to the underwriters .... click ....

http://www.pbs.org/insidepbs/annualreport/2002/Underwriters.pdf

Peace ...

Vip

Just for the record..... if you click on that link that takes you to the list of underwriters, you'll see that the US Dept of Education and US Army each gave one million last year.

[funketeer]

[vipnerd]

Originally posted by bbflux

Just for the record..... if you click on that link that takes you to the list of underwriters, you'll see that the US Dept of Education and US Army each gave one million last year.

I know ... also on my post ... which you quoted ... states that ... 16.4% was given by federal grants/contracts ...

"Public TV Funding

Public TV's total national, regional and local revenue in FY00 totaled $1.6 billion, according to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Leading sources of revenue: members (23.5%); state governments (18.3%); CPB and federal grants/contracts (16.4%); businesses (16.1%); state colleges and universities (6.5%); and foundations (5.5%).

4.5 million individuals and families contributed $380 million to public TV in FY00. "

PBS is one of the few sources on TV which can give you perspectives other than the daily military actions ... it is of importance to form the future leaders of this country ... that is why so many universities use it as part of their educating system ...

In any event ... the mention of PBS was to comment on the context of the Newshour ...

And the term "liberal" ... used by Obby ... as a sole basis to deter the quality of its programming ... is weak ...

PBS has a more democratic (no allusion to the political party) composition since it presents different opposing views in the same proportions of exposure ... debate feeds the quality of thought and keeps abuses of power if not under control ... at least under vigilance ... not to mention top quality panelists and staff ...

The fact that the US government donates funds is just an annecdote and doesn't redefine PBS's private ... non-profit ... form ...

On the same note ... this is less a forum to convince as to express ...

Obby says that the position to attack Iraq has to do with "thinking with the head" ... that politics are not always nice ... etc .. etc ... to simplify Obby's approach ... "the ends justify the means" ...

My view ... to oppose unilateral military action ... which can bring as consequence a redefinition in the way the super powers act in this world in the next decades ... was qualified as "thinking with the heart" ...

As much a military power as we are ... when you have nuclear powers in different sides ... just creates world instability ... we were trying to build bridges with Russia and China for the exact opposite reason ... a miscalculation by this administration has switched this trend and lost the trust of some of our most important allies in Europe ...

Our soldiers are dying on the other side of the globe ... I just hope they are back ASAP ...

[vipnerd]

Interesting little discussion ...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june03/perspective_3-22.html

Peace,

Vip:hat:

[sobeton]

Originally posted by vipnerd

Interesting little discussion ...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june03/perspective_3-22.html

Peace,

Vip:hat:

good looking out.. some very interesting discussion. "Simultaneity" wtf

[demo909]

Originally posted by obby

He answered by saying, "Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

It became very quiet in the room.

AND DON FORGET THE LAND FOR AMERICAN BIG BUSINESS TO SET UP SHOP!

[obby]

If you think OUR Country is so malicious then why are you living here?

Move to Iraq.

Fight agains your own (Americans).

[demo909]

Originally posted by obby

If you think OUR Country is so malicious then why are you living here?

Move to Iraq.

Fight agains your own (Americans).

the reason i love this country is because i'm able to debate people like you. that is a freedom i don't think i could live with out. people with my opinion are the majority in this country right now and around the world. America is a far different place now then it was at the turn of the last century. Our ideas and beliefs have changed. our position in the world has changed, but the one thing that has not changed is the fact that this country was founded by people who spoke up against there government and demanded change!

Thats what we protest now...we want change and change starts at home! not by sending troops to iraq.

the world is watching right now and the vast majority feel the way that i do.....it's only a matter of time before enough is enough.

your response is childish to say the least. When ever you want to debate your good friend mr. bush with me you let me know.

and one other thing....I'M MORE AMERICAN THAN SOMEONE LIKE YOU

[obby]

WRONG!

nice try though,,,you and people like minded equal approx 20% of the country (America, that is). your pipedream of "the majority" is severely skewed. if 20% is a majority in your world, then so be it, but we are on earth now, your welcome to return.

What small minded people fail to acknowledge is the sad, but true FACT that PEACE AND FREEDOM have ALWAYS been governed by the use/threat of force. You don't have to like that point, but it's REALITY,,,,SUCK IT UP!

No nation, in history and acquired more power and abused it less than America. Are we perfect, of course not. Are we right in going after terrorism before it strikes us again,,,OF COURSE!! if 4 planes took down the twin towers and part of the pentagon & caused our economy to come to a grinding halt, I cannot imagine what a WMD might do. To bend over and claim we will only "piss off" the enemy by taking the war to them before they bring more terror to us borders on being FRENCH!

America is not known for being a pussy! Again,,,PEACE HAS ALWAYS AND WILL ALWAYS BE GOVERNED BY THE THREAT/USE OF FORCE! keep repeating that until it sinks in. IT'S REALITY!

BUSH, MONEY, OIL, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah,,,,,,ALL INSIGINFIGANT,,,,,,,what good is a job if your dead??? Yes, there is plenty that America needs, domestically speaking,,,of course,,,but when prioritising,,,,,I think BEING ALIVE is right at the top.

The same "freedom" that you love and the "you can't live without" is the same "freedom" that Iraq will soon have thanks to the United States Of America, Our Troops and our President.

I take it you do not want other Countries to have the same "freedom" that you have and enjoy?

[demo909]

You can't be serious. Thats what you're saying this is all about? Freedom for the people of Iraq? In that case lets get into Cuba too and free the Cubans....then after that we will head to China in the name of freedom, then North Korea too. We will free every country around the world so they can be just like us. Then this world be be a much safer and better place. We will all be free we will all have the same religion and everything will be great for the next 1000 years.

Pretty soon we'll have the whole world goose stepping in line right behind us....wait this sounds like deja vu....oh yeah who was the guy in the 40's who had this great idea of everyone following in line...and who used force against all that opposed him???

If we are not careful, then history will have a strange way of repeating itself huh?

Let me make myself more clear so you don't think I'm some nazi or something. I agree that something has to be done in Iraq, that Sadam has to be removed from power....but at what cost? look what Vietnam did to this country. In the beginning of that war, all the war planners and the government said the same thing..."this campaign will be short and desice" but day's turned into weeks and weeks turned into months and then years. Before we knew it we were there for 13 years. You can't tell me that this is not turning into the same thing. even if this war with iraq ends with in the next month....then what. Years of occupation by american troops and years of suicide bombs and hatered towards america. and you say this is for freedom? the ynamics of the middle east are something that we can't begin to understand. simply using force to get our way is not the answer.

Now i ask you this....what about N. Korea? they pose a 100 times greater threat then Iraq does right now. wouldn't you agree? they have a leader who has isolated his country from the world. killed millions of his own people by starving them to death, built a stock pile of nuclear weapons and has shown total disregard for what the rest of the world thinks of him. If those terrorists on 9/11 would have been asian....don't you think we would be dropping bombs on N. Korea right now?

I could go on and on....what about Israel and their gross disregard for human life and the paletinian people. they have been encroching on thier land for 25 years now and the world has not said a thing. first the palestinians started throwing rocks to protest....now they blow themselves up.

This campaig that we are waging right now only serves to propetuate the cycle of violence in the world. It's time to break that cycle so that no more lives will be lost in vien.

[demo909]

By the way where and what are these weapons of mass destruction??? why have we not found them...because they don't exist. a few chemical weapons similar to those which half the modern armies of the world posses are not WMD.

By the way none of the terroist of 9/11 were from Iraq....they were from suadi arabia and egyept and fund by al quida...not iraq

by the way the idea of a pre-emptive war is bullshit. it's like me saying that i think you want to beat the crap out of me so i better kill you first because you "might" want to kill me......what bullshit is that. thats not common sense.....think about it

By the way the same power that we have aquired and not abused, we won't let others aquire. why? what are we so affraid of? not being the big kid on the block anymore? it's alright for us to have WMD but it's not for anyone else. Why? cause they are not a civilized as us? because we are the only people who deserve to have them? give me one good reason other than leverage the these weapons hold for us.

[georgeacasta2]

I saw this on the current events board

How to sell a WAR about OIL without actually mentioning

Inquisitive Citizen (IC): Why did you say we are we invading Iraq?

Warmonger (WM): We are invading Iraq because it is in violation of Security Council Resolution 1441. A country cannot be allowed to violate Security Council resolutions.

IC: But I thought many of our allies, including Israel, were in violation of more Security Council resolutions than Iraq.

WM: It's not just about UN resolutions. The main point is that Iraq could have weapons of mass destruction, and the first sign of a smoking gun could well be a mushroom cloud over NY.

IC: Mushroom c loud? But I thought the UN weapons inspectors said Iraq had no nuclear weapons.

WM: Yes, but biological and chemical weapons are the issue.

IC: But I thought Iraq did not have any long range missiles for attacking us or our allies with such weapons.

WM: The risk is not Iraq directly attacking us, but rather terrorists networks that Iraq could sell the weapons to.

IC: But couldn't virtually any country sell chemical or biological materials? We sold quite a bit to Iraq in the eighties ourselves, didn't we?

WM: That's ancient history. Look, Saddam Hussein is an evil man that has an undeniable track record of repressing his own people since the early eighties. He gasses his enemies. Everyone agrees that he is a power-hungry, lunatic murderer.

IC: We sold chemical and biological materials to a power-hungry, lunatic murderer?

WM: The issue is not what we sold to Saddam, but rather what Saddam did. He is the one that launched a pre-emptive first strike on Kuwait.

IC: What about our green-light to the invasion of Kuwait?

WM: Let's deal with the present, shall we? As of today, Iraq could sell its biological and chemical weapons to Al Quaida. Osama bin Laden himself released an audio tape calling on Iraqis to suicide-attack us, proving a partnership between the two.

IC: Osama bin Laden? Wasn't the point of invading Afghanistan to kill him?

WM: Actually, it's not 100% certain that it's really Osama bin Laden on the tapes. But the lesson from the tape is the same: there could easily be a partnership between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein unless we attack immediately.

IC: Is this the same audio tape where Osama bin Laden calls Saddam a "secular infidel"?

WM: You're missing the point by just focusing on the tape. Powell presented a strong case against Iraq.

IC: He did?

WM: Yes, he showed satellite pictures of an Al Quaeda poison factory in Iraq.

IC: But didn't that turn out to be a harmless shack in the part of Iraq controlled by the Kurdish opposition?

WM: And a British intelligence report...

IC: Didn't that turn out to be copied from an out-of-date graduate student paper?

WM: And reports of mobile weapons labs...

IC: Weren't those just artistic renderings?

WM: And reports of Iraqis scuttling and hiding evidence from inspectors...

IC: Wasn't that evidence contradicted by the UN's Chief Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix?

WM: Yes, but there is plenty of other hard evidence that cannot be revealed because it would compromise our security.

IC: So there is no publicly available evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

WM: The inspectors are not detectives, it's not their JOB to find evidence. You're missing the point.

IC: So what is the point?

WM: The main point is that we are invading Iraq because resolution 1441 threatened "severe consequences." If we do not act, the Security Council will become an irrelevant debating society.

IC: So the main point is to uphold the rulings of the Security Council?

WM: Absolutely. ...unless it rules against us. Of course!

IC: And what if it does rule against us?

WM: In that case, we must lead a coalition of the willing to invade Iraq.

IC: Coalition of the willing? Who's that?

WM: Britain, Turkey, Bulgaria, and Spain, for starters.

IC: I thought Turkey refused to help us unless we gave them tens of billions of dollars.

WM: Nevertheless, they may now be willing.

IC: I thought public opinion in all those countries was against war.

WM: Current public opinion is irrelevant. The majority expresses its will by electing leaders to make decisions.

IC: So it's the decisions of leaders elected by the majority that is important?

WM: Yes.

IC: But doesn't the Constitution say only Congress can declare war?

WM: I mean, we must support the decisions of our president, because he's acting in our best interest. This is about being a patriot. That's the bottom line.

IC: So if we do not support the decisions of the president, we are not patriotic?

WM: I never said that.

IC: So what are you saying? Why are we invading Iraq?

WM: As I said, because there is a chance that they have weapons of mass destruction that threaten us and our allies.

IC: But the UN inspectors have not been able to find any such weapons.

WM: Iraq is obviously hiding them.

IC: You know this? How?

WM: Because we know they had the weapons ten years ago, and they are still unaccounted for.

IC: The weapons we sold them, you mean?

WM: Precisely.

IC: But I thought those biological and chemical weapons would degrade to an unusable state over ten years.

WM: But there is a chance that some have not degraded.

IC: So as long as there is even a small chance that such weapons exist, we must invade?

WM: Exactly.

IC: But North Korea actually has large amounts of usable chemical, & gt; biological, AND nuclear weapons, AND long range missiles that can reach the west coast AND it has expelled nuclear weapons inspectors, AND threatened to turn America into a sea of fire.

WM: That's a diplomatic issue.

IC: So why are we invading Iraq instead of using diplomacy?

WM: Aren't you listening? We are invading Iraq because we cannot allow the UN inspections to drag on indefinitely. Iraq has been delaying, deceiving, and denying for over ten years, and inspections cost us tens of millions.

IC: But I thought war would cost us tens of billions.

WM: Yes, but this is not about money. This is about security.

IC: But wouldn't a pre-emptive war against Iraq ignite radical Muslim sentiments against us, and further decrease our security?

WM: Possibly, but we must not allow the terrorists to change the way we live. Once we do that, the terrorists have already won.

IC: But every one has admitted there is no evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq with the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Almost every one of the alleged terrorists were from our "ally" Saudi Arabia, none were from Iraq.

WM: Yes, but this is not just about terrorist attacks. It's about our national security.

IC: So what is the purpose of the Department of Homeland Security, color-coded terror alerts, and the Patriot Act? Aren't they supposed to protect us? And don't these change the way we live?

WM: I thought you had questions about Iraq.

IC: I do. I'd like to know why are we invading Iraq?

WM: For the last time, we are invading Iraq because the world has called on Saddam Hussein to disarm, and he has failed to do so. He must now face the consequences.

IC: So, likewise, if the world called on us to do something, such as find a peaceful solution, would we have an obligation to listen?

WM: By "world", I meant the United Nations.

IC: So, we have an obligation to listen to the United Nations?

WM: By "United Nations" I meant the Security Council.

IC: So, we have an obligation to listen to the Security Council?

WM: Well, I meant the majority of the Security Council.

IC: So, we have an obligation to listen to the majority of the Security Council?

WM: Well... there could be an unreasonable veto.

IC: In which case?

WM: In which case, we have an obligation to ignore the veto.

IC: And if the majority of the Security Council does not support us at all?

WM: Then we have an obligation to ignore the Security Council.

IC: That make s no sense.

WM: Look, if you love Iraq so much, you should move there. Or maybe France, with the all the other cheese-eating surrender monkeys. It's time to boycott their wine and cheese, no doubt about that.

IC: I give up!

[vipnerd]

Originally posted by georgeacasta2

IC: I give up!

I give up myself ...

BTW ... in reference to public opinion on the war ... if U got speakers you can listen to it on Real Audio as well ...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june03/opinion_3-30.html