Falluja Surrounded By USA!

JOKOMOFF,

Ill try to be brief as you are wasting everyones time with twisted reality.

I always read the cited links, and im glad i do now. Much like the reason I gave for reading the satanic bible, now that ive read many of these basicly uncredible websites, i have a better understanding of the mentality underlying them, and im affraid.

Im affraid because this "blame America" mentality is deep rooted and vicious. It comes from people seemingly willing to throw everything away, because thats exactly what will happen if say there was NO DOUBGHT that the American government staged 9-11.
There would be total chaos...people would riot, some just TO riot....not because of any politics....many would suffer, and civil institutions could break down....wouldnt you love trash pilling up at your house, or food rationing? Mabey just gunfire in the streets as gangs, millitia, "patriots" and every other group tried to grab a piece.

Im not saying dont look for the truth, or dont hold government accountable...but

This is not FRANCE!! Here you are innocent until proven guilty.

Moreover, when i state a lack of credibillity, as a career journalist, BY LAW we must be accurate because of slander and lible laws. The reason these websites you cite dont get into the mainstream media is because none of them want to get SUED!!! THERE IS NO PROOF!

Yes i can see where certain analogies can be made after looking at timelines, behaiviuors, and evidence, BUT if even one major fact that is ASSUMED in some of these theories is false, the rest of the argument crashes like a house of cards. and as most of the KEY MAJOR FACTS in many of these theories are still unknown (your not holding the smoking gun) i cant as a credible ethical journalist report that as fact. EVEN IF I AM CONVINCED that it really happened that way.

SOMALIA
did you look at the timeline of events that i cited?
this whole opperation was overall to get the aid out of the warlords hands and to the people...during it 25 UN pakistani troops were ambushed by aideed forces and killed, the aid they guarded stolen. then the UN aksed the US to apprehend aideed. we attempted it, hence Blackhawk Down.

Yes i think that savages or more accuratly, young uneducated warlord gangs heard those big birds hovering and went to see what was going on.
BUT When you see ANYONES trained millitary, conducting a millitary operation, and you shoot at them...YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU GET IN RETURN!
yes colatteral dammage happened as COMBAT ERUPTED.
COMBAT..FIGHTING..VIOLENCE..KILLING....What did those somalis think was going to happen if they shot at the millitary? Did they expect less? Thats like shooting at the police....dumb. like poking a wasp nest...dumb. For whatever your ideological reasons, shooting at trained armed soldiers, unless you are making a concerted attack to wipe them out is dumb.

So the USA has used its clout and manipulated people like saddam, aideed, obl ect...DID YOU FORGET ABOUT THE COLD WAR? Much of this occured when the world was polarized into 2 big camps, and spying, espionage, economic warefare ect are all tactics that were used to aviod war but still gain advantage.

These tactics have been used for centuries...BIG DEAL...like we were the first to have used tools other than formal negoations or warfare to get stuff done. In fact, if we did make a mess by creating or proping up these charecters, than we have a responsibillity to clean up our mess.

STATISTICAL MANIPULATION
It is really irrelavent what % or how much total $$ amount in aid is given.
ITS THE ACT OF GIVING THAT COUNTS.
Or are you saying that anyone that cant give equally isnt contributing? Not everyone even gave. Doesnt that belittle the nations that only gave a little...giving is giving. could someone give more? perhaps. did some sacrifise more? possibly, but does that lesses the others contributions? NO.
Stop insulting those nations in order to point the bad guy finger at the US.

THE BOMB
YOU;
It was known the Japanese had instructed their ambassador in Moscow to work on peace negotiations with the Allies. Japanese leaders had begun talking of surrender a year before this, and the Emperor himself had begun to suggest, in June 1945, that alternatives to fighting to the end be considered. "

Ill agree to this. pay attention.
Its all well and good to look back in time and say they were sitting in the palace, talking with diplomats and the emperor about surrender...BUT THAT ISNT SURRENDERING IS IT? They could have talked all day and night but if they didnt call their enemy and say we surrender, then they were still AT WAR.

There is no doubght that use of atomic weapons is horrific. Its supposed to be.
killing is killing is killing, dead is dead.
hands, rock, knife, pistol, tank, missile, nuke..these are all weapons. By their nature, they are all horrific if used for their purpose. Is being beaten to death more or less humane than being killed in seconds? There is no right answer as death of the person is the end result. it doisnt matter how death comes. The USA has formally appologized to Japan for this act or have you forgotten?

THE UN
We both agree that the USA spends the most $$ on the UN.
We helped CREATE it, We fund it THE MOST, and membership is not MANDITORY for any country. Any one may withdraw from the UN at any time.
Its pretty much a country club, the USA doesnt take orders from the UN, They take orders from us.
Using your % giving ideas, when the other member nations give an = % to the UN, then ill listen more sympathetically. Until then...the UN can do what it wants, but i expect that our leaders in the USA will be looking out for the USA FIRST, never the UN.

As we see with Iraq, while the UN could have enforced its own mandates, it dint. Hence it is impotent. Why do we have to do something that they wont force us to do? that what saddam thought, thats what i think too, thats what the president basicaly told the UN...PUT up or SHUT up. If you dont, you lose your credibillity.
Ray Charles saw that!

LEGALITIES
The sanction didnt specify anything. See the paragraph above for IMPOTENCE.
The UN has no legal athority to allow ANY country to attack another country. There forehow can it be "legal" with or without the UNs permission slip?

You give up our soverinty to the UN? I dont agree.

The USA was very careful to ensure that those detained in GITMO met the definitions for, and are classified as ILLEGAL COMBATANTS under INTERNATIONAL LAW!!
We can do this and did.

I posted a link and have read the conventions many times. NO WHERE DO THEY MENTION NAPALM OR DU SPECIFICALLY!
IF the USA was in violation of the sanctions, had us with evidence in black and white, Where are the nations and UN drafting piles of "BAD USA" paperwork? Where are the embargos? removal of diplomats?
Certantly some say "we dont like what your doing", but they cant say "what your doing is illegal", because it isnt..

Do you really think the NWO wouldnt cross its t's and dot the I's legally? (laughing at my use of conspiracy to justify anything..LOL)

What exactly makes Falluja a 'holy city' anyway?

Did the prophet ever teach there?
Were lessons of peace ever taught there?

Or was it simply something a "cleric" decided?



[Edited on 4/21/2004 by Border Guy]

Originally posted by Jokomoff
"How many Islamic fundamentalists do you really believe are out there?"

There are an estimated 1.8 billion Muslims in the world today; best estimates are that 15% are 'fundamentalists'

That means 270,000,000 - or, a population the size of the United States. If even half are 'radical' consider the possibilities....

As per the topic: Falluja?
Perhaps we're doing this thing the right way. We're allowing the Iraqis to handle the problem and in so doing, teaching them how to conduct business in a more civilized manner.

Requires patience, but patience usually pays off.

[Edited on 4/21/2004 by Border Guy]

Hmm, days later, and jakomo's responce is.......?????

zzzzzzzzz....oh it got so quite there i fell asleep!

Hmm perhaps the light of truth has sent the bug of lies scrambling into hiding.

CazMedia: Gee, sorry it took so long to reply, but I have, you know, a job and a life.

And you're SO WRONG on so many points that it'll take a while, so pay attention.

"I posted a link and have read the conventions many times. NO WHERE DO THEY MENTION NAPALM OR DU SPECIFICALLY!
IF the USA was in violation of the sanctions, had us with evidence in black and white, Where are the nations and UN drafting piles of "BAD USA" paperwork? Where are the embargos? removal of diplomats?"

www.iol.co.za...

"American pilots dropped napalm - the controversial and deadly incendiary agent - on Iraqi troops as United States forces advanced towards Baghdad in the war to oust Saddam Hussein. The attacks caused massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.

Although the Pentagon initially adamantly denied using napalm at the time, marine corps pilots and their commanders returning from Iraq have now confirmed using an upgraded version of the weapon against dug-in Iraqi positions. They said napalm, which has a distinctive smell, was used because of its psychological effect on an enemy."

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

www1.umn.edu...

www.zmag.org...

I haven't even mentioned the use of cluster bombs, which is also restricted.

"THE UN
We both agree that the USA spends the most $$ on the UN.
We helped CREATE it, We fund it THE MOST, and membership is not MANDITORY for any country. Any one may withdraw from the UN at any time.
Its pretty much a country club, the USA doesnt take orders from the UN, They take orders from us....Until then...the UN can do what it wants, but i expect that our leaders in the USA will be looking out for the USA FIRST, never the UN.
"

So what's your point? That the US can thumb its nose at the UN (the world community) and expect no blowback? How's about this : the UN now refuses to go into Iraq because it's too dangerous, so this means more US soldiers who will be dying, as opposed to other nation's soldiers.

"LEGALITIES
The sanction didnt specify anything. See the paragraph above for IMPOTENCE.
The UN has no legal athority to allow ANY country to attack another country. There forehow can it be "legal" with or without the UNs permission slip?"

WHAT?! The UN has the ONLY legal authority to allow another country to attack another. The only "valid" reason is "defensive", which, haha, the US has yet to prove any threat from Iraq in, what, now 2 years?

"The USA was very careful to ensure that those detained in GITMO met the definitions for, and are classified as ILLEGAL COMBATANTS under INTERNATIONAL LAW!!
We can do this and did. "

This is so far from the truth that it's astounding. They're fighting this in the Supreme Court RIGHT NOW, with hundreds of lawyers and human-rights organizations signed on. NOBODY has been prosecuted for anything at Gitmo and yet they've been there for over 2 years in some instances. Does this seem legal to you? Nevermind, it's not.

"There is no doubght that use of atomic weapons is horrific. Its supposed to be.
killing is killing is killing, dead is dead.
hands, rock, knife, pistol, tank, missile, nuke..these are all weapons. By their nature, they are all horrific if used for their purpose."

We're talking about dropping bombs on CITIES, not military encampments, do you see any difference there at all? Killing is one thing, massacring 700,000 innocent people is one thing. It was terrorism by the USA.

"IF the USA was in violation of the sanctions, had us with evidence in black and white, Where are the nations and UN drafting piles of "BAD USA" paperwork? Where are the embargos? removal of diplomats?
Certantly some say "we dont like what your doing", but they cant say "what your doing is illegal", because it isnt.."

How can you be an actual journalist and be so totally clueless as to what actually goes on at the UN? Kofi Annan spends half his time condemning U.S. (and Israeli) actions.

"Moreover, when i state a lack of credibillity, as a career journalist, BY LAW we must be accurate because of slander and lible laws. "

Yeah your lack of credibility is pretty shocking. And it's spelled LIBEL, you'd figure a "journalist" would know that one specifically.


jako

Not one shred of credible documentation for a page full of bovine excrement - no wonder Canada is in the sorry state its in now.

As for the UN? What a farce! Any governing body MUST have the consent of the governed - haven't noticed any free elections to the UN have you?

The UN has absolutly no legal authority for anything - ever hear of national sovereignty? No I guess not, your Canadian and they capitulated years ago.

Originally posted by Border Guy
Not one shred of credible documentation for a page full of bovine excrement - no wonder Canada is in the sorry state its in now.

As for the UN? What a farce! Any governing body MUST have the consent of the governed - haven't noticed any free elections to the UN have you?

The UN has absolutly no legal authority for anything - ever hear of national sovereignty? No I guess not, your Canadian and they capitulated years ago.

Look, if you don't know anything about Canada, either ignore it, learn something about it, or destroy it.

Instead of complaining, do something about.

Two words...

FIRE BOMB!!!

No, here's what you do...

Take an old bomber (something big, a B-52 or something with a huge fuselage), fill it with 200lb bombs, paint in big, bold, block letters - "IRAQI INTERIM GOV'T PROPERTY" - and fly around dropping bombs on stuff. Doesn't matter what, just indiscriminate bombing...

No one will question the interim government, and everyone will be happy to welcome the democratic process at the end of June.

Peace... through superior firepower.

DeltaChaos

Jakomo,
First, let me take a moment to commend you on being one of the more reasonable and capable debators ive interacted with here on these boards. You generally aviod emoting in favor of rational approaches. You neither seem to be a wacko nor an idiot.

However,

Your sources have a credibillity issue, as myself and pothers point out.

Your anti-war stance is very evident....i doubght that you would support war for any reasons.

Debating the nuts and bolts of HOW war is waged (use of war tools) is somantics..war is war and its hell.

I looked at all of your posts supporting alledged illegality of napalm and cluster munitions (use the new correct designation MARK 77 munitions, slang term is napalm),
....(This eliminates the "lie" from the pentagon...they were using SPECIFIC terminology to distinguish between actual old napalm and the new device)
((i can hear you now, "Its basically the same", yes it is, but its not the same weapon system, its derivative))

Your own posts back me up on the "controversial" weapons but dont support Illegal weapons..(One alledges this, but this is not proven and appears to be the authors interpretations....and the others title uses term IRREGULAR weapons, not termed Illegal). The USA did not sign the treaty against its use (napalm/mark 77's) and we recognize our SOVERIGN RIGHT to equip our millitary as we feel nessisary.

The USA policy for armed conflict is to always use the most effective means to end the conflict with THE MINIMUM DANGER TO US FORCES....To that end we will use ANY weapon we see fit. We love our fathers, sons and daughters serving in the millitary and will do what it takes to keep them as safe as possible during hostilities AND to end the conflict as quickly and efficiently as possible. This is a really basic millitary principal, and were not the first or only ones to adopt this.

The goal of armed conflict is to DEFEAT YOUR ENEMY!
I want my enimies to understand that IF our millitary is going to need to act...MY ENEMY WILL DIE!
Our troops are WARRIORS, and our enimies NEED to fear them. Thats the point.

The UN
Of course the USA does not exist in a vacume, and we do attempt to address other nations concerns, and work with the UN....however
THE UN IS NOT IN CHARGE OF PROTECTING THE US!
THE US WILL PROTECT ITS INTERESTS.
Again i ask, where are countries withdrawing diplomats? moving twords sanctions, trade restrictions, or any of the other ways listed in the UN charter? (or not in the UN)

2 reasons i can think of are.....A) the legal basis for such acts is not evident or workable to the UN or member nations, or B) because we're one of the founders (OWNERS) of the UN, we would squash it with a veto, or worse yet for the UN pull our funding. (closing this little country club)

ME;
"The USA was very careful to ensure that those detained in GITMO met the definitions for, and are classified as ILLEGAL COMBATANTS under INTERNATIONAL LAW!!
We can do this and did. "
YOU;
This is so far from the truth that it's astounding. They're fighting this in the Supreme Court RIGHT NOW, with hundreds of lawyers and human-rights organizations signed on.

The supreme court is indeed examining the legality of the gitmo detainees, but that doesnt mean its illegal until they say it is...And they could just as well uphold it too....Ohhh noo if that happens, then it WILL be legal....
(surrender isnt surrender until you tell your enemy your surrendering) (illegal isnt illegal until the court decides)
What will you do when/if the courts uphold those detained?

Besides, are you forgetting that the USA is one of the MOST littigous societies in the world, like our legal team isnt stocked with the best legal eagles in the world.

The Bomb...
Again you persist in citing one thing OUT OF CONTEXT, to point the bad guy finger at the USA....
It was WWII, Japan had NOT surrendered, many countries were engagued in wide spread fire bombing of cities, usually at night......Why? Both to demoralize the population as well as to hit PRODUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE that was keeping the enimies war effort going.

Indeed there was probable truely "innocent" people at both nuke attacks, but....
were there weapon production plants? food distrubution? Sea ports? rail points? Fuel depots? ect?

While the people working making planes, guns, ammo, packing and shipping food, medical, and supplies for their troops ect might not have been front line soldiers, they worked every day making things or doing jobs to support the war efort.

Brutal weapon? no doubght...but in the context of that conflict...effective...resulting in unconditional surrender of our enemy a very short time later. Is it wrong to have won the war?

The UN...
It cant enforce its own rules on itself, what makes you think they can enforce anything on anyone?
Can you say food for oil rippoff? This swelling tale of greed and corruption is gonna reach the highest levels of the UN and France and Russia....Hmm its no wonder they didnt want to upset their extortion thru the UN, and no doubght pissed as the USA has cut them off from their money laundering cash cow. Im supposed to trust them with my families security? I think not.

ME;
"I can see millitary studies is not a big deal in Canada as the USA has been providing Canada with protection for a long time. Do you even have a millitary? or just a coast guard? (why pay for one when your buddies to the south will protect you?)"
YOU;
"No, our military is not big because we don't need it, it's strictly defensive and for UN peacekeeping.
And yeah, why should we bother when you guys spend trillions on your defense. We'll just piggyback and use it to our advantage"

Its no wonder there is a seperate thread about bashing Canada, WHAT ARROGANCE IN YOUR STATEMENT!
Your talk about "piggybacking and using" your neighbor and supposed ALLY is insulting!
No thank you for the decades of protection and tech youve gained from us?

You know both Japan (wwII) and the USSR (cold war) had plans to invade N America starting by comming across the kamchatka peninsula and RIGHT THRU CANADA!!! Why? Because it would have been easier than comming to the USA directly as you wouldnt have lasted long at all. You were an apatizer for their plans against the USA.

The fact that your ungrateful for our decades of support is one thing, but then you BITE THE HAND PROTECTING YOU by trying to make the US into a bad guy in the world? That doesnt sound like a neighbor OR practically a BROTHER nation to us...Or are you only a fair weather friend of the USA?

We could use some support from our ally of Canada, even if its tough or your not 100% with the idea...instead of getting "put on trial" for not only current actions, but past actions as well. (almost all of it subjective with no punative actions against the USA)

I know many Canadians, so I wont blame your nation...but what a poor representative youve been to your friends to the south. Youve added injury to insult.
I think Ill boycot Labbatts and Moosehead until I feel more support from Canada.

You asked "why should you bother? (to pay for a millitary)
Hmm, mabey if you were paying for it or someone was threatening your soverignty, you might not need to ask...

FLAME ALERT!
In a moment of clarity i realized
Hmm, where did all of our draft dogging wimps flee to in the 60's? Oh yeah, CANADA!....Hmm what can I infer?
That the wimps there must be wimpier than the wimps here, as thats where all the wimps here fled to.
FLAME ENDS

We hear your impassioned pleas for a peaceful resolution, and appreciate your humanitarian ideals, but we here in the USA are not in the mood to be threatened, extorted, or physically assaulted by anyone, including supposed allies.

Here in the states, if i said to a neighbor, "i want to kill you and burn down your house", i would be arrested..(making terroristic threats)..
Saddam pretty much said the same as well have the terrorists...well, thats an actionable threat in my book.
Just saying those things is enough to go to jail here, even without matches and a can of gas (or WMD's).

If the police were looking for someone that had only made threats like in my example, and i had them in my house and didnt tell the police, id be guilty of crimes as well....(harboring terrorists or providing them with aid)
Hell Iraq is guilty of both threats and harobring and aiding....good enough for me. Too bad for them.

In canada are you guilty before innocent? (like the French) or innocent before guilty?

Something I noticed. Americans who insult Canada sound just like Arabs, French, and South Koreans who insult America.

I guess we really aren't that different!

I knew a Canada who distinguished her flag in numerous acts of herosim on many fields of honor -

Today unforuntately Canada embraces the Euro-Socialism that has led to their military being unable to field a drill team much less a credible military force. The economy of Canada from all economic sources suggests serious problems. And, due to the policy of nearly completely open borders the social safety net of welfare is nearly bust.

I get tired of those who take their "news" from questionable sources and take for fact the tired line "...it's all America's fault"

Has it occured to anyone that Canadians should look after Canada's internal challenges and let American's look after theirs?

As for the United Nations, the facts are conclusive of the self-interest and corruption rampant in that un-elected bunch of self-appointed elites.

As for Falluja? Either the rules of warfare are followed and the rules for police action abandoned, or more lives on both sides will be lost.

It is sad and unfortunate that once again 'religion' is being used as an excuse for killing. This time by Islam.

At some point here soon, our pause to give the dissenters time to consider this order to disarm will break down, and the us troops will go in with guns ablazing....

Unfortunatly "innocent" casualties will no doubght result....but hey, we did sit there for a week now and attempt negotiations...thru which they kept shooting sporadically...i hope none of the insurgants loved ones are in town too, cause their defiance has put everyone at risk.

BorderGuy: "Today unforuntately Canada embraces the Euro-Socialism that has led to their military being unable to field a drill team much less a credible military force. The economy of Canada from all economic sources suggests serious problems. And, due to the policy of nearly completely open borders the social safety net of welfare is nearly bust. "

Um, stick to what you know. Canada's economy is growing faster than the United States'. And nearly completely open borders has actually been a good thing up here. We don't kill people who are different, or chuck them in jail for stupid boolsheet.

"I get tired of those who take their "news" from questionable sources and take for fact the tired line "...it's all America's fault""

First off, it IS all America's fault, your government was the one pushing for this illegal war in the first place. Secondly, the two most questionable news sources out there are CNN and FOX, so save your breath.

CazMedia: "I looked at all of your posts supporting alledged illegality of napalm and cluster munitions (use the new correct designation MARK 77 munitions, slang term is napalm),
....(This eliminates the "lie" from the pentagon...they were using SPECIFIC terminology to distinguish between actual old napalm and the new device)
((i can hear you now, "Its basically the same", yes it is, but its not the same weapon system, its derivative)) "

www.smh.com.au...

"The Pentagon no longer officially uses the brand-name Napalm, a combination of naphthalene and palmitate, but a similar substance known as fuel-gel mixture contained in Mark-77 fire bombs was dropped on Iraqi troops near the Iraq-Kuwait border at the start of the recent war.

"I can confirm that Mark-77 fire bombs were used in that general area," said Colonel Mike Daily, of the US Marine Corps.

Colonel Daily said that US stocks of Vietnam-era napalm had been phased out, but that the Mark-77s had "similar destructive characteristics"."

Yeah, similar destructive characteristics. Good one. A rose by any other name...

"The USA policy for armed conflict is to always use the most effective means to end the conflict with THE MINIMUM DANGER TO US FORCES....To that end we will use ANY weapon we see fit. "

So don't try to pretend that you try to protect civilians when you deem you will use ANY weapon you see fit.

"The supreme court is indeed examining the legality of the gitmo detainees, but that doesnt mean its illegal until they say it is...And they could just as well uphold it too....Ohhh noo if that happens, then it WILL be legal....
(surrender isnt surrender until you tell your enemy your surrendering) (illegal isnt illegal until the court decides"

And meanwhile 800 people languish in jail, uncharged, undefended and without access to anyone on the outside. Can you give me a Sieg Hiel?

"Brutal weapon? no doubght...but in the context of that conflict...effective...resulting in unconditional surrender of our enemy a very short time later. Is it wrong to have won the war? "

Again, check your history, the bombs were unneccessary and were just used as a way to demoralize the Japanese after they had already started their surrender. Let's call that state-sponsored terrorism.

"Its no wonder there is a seperate thread about bashing Canada, WHAT ARROGANCE IN YOUR STATEMENT!
Your talk about "piggybacking and using" your neighbor and supposed ALLY is insulting!
No thank you for the decades of protection and tech youve gained from us?"

Protecting us from WHAT?! Nothing. We have few to no enemies. The US is far more paranoid than Canada about its' security, so we just take advantage of the fact your security is so tight. What's wrong with that?

"The fact that your ungrateful for our decades of support is one thing, but then you BITE THE HAND PROTECTING YOU by trying to make the US into a bad guy in the world?"

Protecting us from what?

"You asked "why should you bother? (to pay for a millitary)
Hmm, mabey if you were paying for it or someone was threatening your soverignty, you might not need to ask... "

Yes, but since we are well respected around the world we don't need to defend our sovereignty from any invaders. A good deal, and cheap.

"Here in the states, if i said to a neighbor, "i want to kill you and burn down your house", i would be arrested..(making terroristic threats)..
Saddam pretty much said the same as well have the terrorists...well, thats an actionable threat in my book.
Just saying those things is enough to go to jail here, even without matches and a can of gas (or WMD's)."

So it's because Saddam scared you with a threat that wasn't even actionable? That's a basis for war? Yikes, that's so high school.



jako

I've read some reports that claim as many as 600 civilians have been killed in Falluja since the hostilities erupted there recently.

That makes it about 150 Iraqi civilians for each of the U.S. citizens killed there. I need to ask: Isn't that enough or does more killing have to continue to satisfy revenge?

[Edited on 27-4-2004 by heelstone]

This is not about vengance, if it was id say dont stop untill DOUBLE the # of people killed in 9-11 have been wasted. (Dont bother with the 9-11 not related to iraq crapola either, this is an overall regional strategy and iraq was the 2nd, weakest domino to fall after afganistan.) Again this is not about vengance.

This is about eliminating/disrupting the environments that breed jihadists....that cause instabillity in a region that controls the life blood of world industry (oil).

This is about which form of ideology will prevail
(democratic or fundamental jihadism)

This is about a criminal underworld organization that has hijacked islam for its devious purposes...using religion as the ultimate brain washing motivational tool to deal in weapons, drugs, corruption, and cause chaos.
(targets= USA, G.B., Spain, Jordan, Saudi, Bali, and other places rocked or threatened by Jihadists.)

Originally posted by heelstone
That makes it about 150 Iraqi civilians for each of the U.S. citizens killed there. I need to ask: Isn't that enough or does more killing have to continue to satisfy revenge?

Revenge!?! What is this revenge for??? We have been entirelly too patient with this city for too long, if they want to continue to support Saddam and what he did, fine, but they will have to endure what Saddams troops did when we first rolled in. I was against going into Iraq when we did, but now that we are there, there is absolutly no reason for this loss of american life PERIOD. I also understand that there are women and children there, so what is keeping them from packing it up and going to another city while we blast the hell out of this city. If they want to fight for Saddam, then fight for him, by all means, but don't come crying when the entire Marine Armored Colum comes rolling into town. Just my $0.02 worth. -Muzz

The "innocent" civilians have been given the opportunity to either stop the militants or leave Falluja - so, whoever's remains deserves what happens now. So how innocent can the remaining "civilians" really be?

Originally posted by Jakomo
BorderGuy: "Today unforuntately Canada embraces the Euro-Socialism that has led to their military being unable to field a drill team much less a credible military force. The economy of Canada from all economic sources suggests serious problems. And, due to the policy of nearly completely open borders the social safety net of welfare is nearly bust. "

Lets deal in facts (from the Royal Bank of Canada) ... when the tide rises all boats float:
www.rbc.com...

Canadian manufacturers confidence muted
April 29, 2004
"Canadian manufacturers expressed their uncertainty about the outlook for the second quarter of 2004 ... The likely sources of concern include the run-up in the Canadian dollar in the past year, as well as a growing fear of raw material shortages due to increased global demand."

"The advance real GDP numbers for the first quarter showed that the U.S. economy expanded at an annual rate of 4.2%, right in line with the 4.1% growth over the fourth quarter"

"However,... Stimulative monetary policy, a rapidly growing U.S. economy ... and continued strength in housing markets are the prime reasons to expect the resumption of an upward trend in (Canadian) economic activity this year."

www.td.com...
"� Sideswiped by a $6 billion deterioration in fiscal balances since the spring 2003 budgets were brought down, Canada�s governments are now facing a combined deficit of $3 billion in fiscal 2003-04"

As for the Immigration "success" of Canada?
www.canadafirst.net...
I think this about sums it up -

And the military:
www.mapleleafweb.com...


[Edited on 4/29/2004 by Border Guy]

[Edited on 4/29/2004 by Border Guy]