Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[Chandernagore]

Bush Ape Junior, The Great Leader, always had this God blessed vision of what US alliances should look like. He showed us the Golden path : an alliance should be unconditional ! Whatever his Heavenly Majesty Bush II does, good or bad, the faithfull allies must pay tribute.

There are those who think (oh, perish the thought) that an alliance should be something more than an exercise in Neocon administration ass licking. There are seditious people, here and now, who pretend that friendship should rest on a set of shared values, oh the heresy... ! The traitorous bastards dare to insinuate that if the Great Leader's policies become unacceptable and rest on a set of evil lies, one should not expect the allies to help.

Such lack of servile obedience is very disappointing but what else can you expect from those whining Eurolefties...

[Victor]

Please try to use a less offensive language. :nope:

[Chandernagore]

[quote]Please try to use a less offensive language. :nope:[/quote]

Wow, if you call that "offensive" you have seen nothing

Respect must be earned. It is not given. And this president, you know...

[Victor]

I agree with you, but some may not and this could eventually lead to an unpleseant discussion.

[Chandernagore]

Okay. I'm taking this very lightly but not everybody does so necessarily. Would not want to hurt someone :?

[Florin]

[quote]ha! good one.....but Ashcroft is one of those guys who won`t let totalitarian tendencies get in his way of doing things...no sir, my way is the right way[/quote]

I cannot grasp what you really tried to highlight. I do not understand if in the above quote you joked or you are serious.
Any additional thoughts, please?

[Indrid]

i was trying to come off as ironical towards the set of values someone like Ashcroft holds as democratic ones. i am afraid that the american political spheres are suffering from chronnic paranoia and a direct result would come the suspension of democratic (civil) rights of countries seen as - rogue or a direct threat towards the homeland.....when was iraq ever a threat? this is a answer that all those high and mighty political dudes in Washington are struggling to answer, and so far they are doing a pretty awful job.....to bad. is the land of the free turning into the land of the enslavers? ..enslavers is an unapropriate word,....i really cannot finnd a word to describe the evolution of the american political thought

[Chandernagore]

It's interesting to note that Sadr is willing to create a political party and try his luck at elections...but doesn't want to disband his army in order "to maintain a link between the religious steering wheel and the people" (bwahaha). Funny guy. Wants all options to remain open : democracy and the means to overthrow it if doesn't turn out as he likes. Democracy the oriental way...

[mabadesc]

In case anyone thought that the Irak situation would have been different if a democrat had been in office instead of Bush, here are some quotes made by some prominent democratic politicians, including Kerry:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18,1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens.. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D - MA), and others Oct.. 9,1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." >- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

[Florin]

Indrid, as a personal point of view, it could be even worse than your dark evaluation. After the progress made in the 60's and 70's, the democratic rights are under threat in the U.S., generally speaking. (However, one bad think coming from the 70's is the "Affirmative action".)

You see, it depends what are the sources of information. If somebody follows certain American channels or newspapers, of course "America the beautiful" it is still "Land of the free, home of the brave." If you follow other sources (mostly American, of course), the society where I live will evolve slowly, slowly into a dictatorship. This will not be spectacular, or in an instant. Just one step at a time, little by little.

I do not have time to write more.
Regards,
Florin

[Indrid]

QUOTE

\"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real\" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

i see America's next president is also going to be an ass


Florin: those steps seem more rapid than you assumed....at least as i see it anyway....but you are closer to the source than me so....

[Chandernagore]

Wow. What a list Mabadesc However I don't see many new elements in it. I understand that many democrats got caught in the blood fever or didn't dare to paddle against the flow at the time. Almost understandable, when you consider the bullying tendencies of this administration. Still, it's bad enough.

For the rest we read the same appalling red alarm warnings over a treath to the US which never was. The rock solid "proves" that Powell talked about at the UN were never shown. At first the given reason was security, but then later the whole thing was simply dropped (amazing). The WMDs have now gotten such a large definition that you have to be armed with bows and javelins to be excluded from the category and most modern states fall comfortably inside. Meanwhile, as a result of the US violating the UN charter and waging an unilateral war of agression, the countries which could be considered real treats (Korea, Iran...) are accelerating their programs.

Ah yes, I forgot : Saddam was a monster.
At the height of his genocidal action US and EU supported him 100%.

Maybe now we are to believe that the reason for invasion is that a president talked to the angels.

Mabadesc, what would be your own conclusion over the reasons for going to war ?

[Indrid]

QUOTE

Maybe now we are to believe that the reason for invasion is that a president talked to the angels.

:laugh: :laugh:

well Bush is a religious man....

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

i see America's next president is also going to be an ass

Indrid, I think that a lot of Western Europeans (like Chandernagore) falsely put their hopes in the US democratic party.

The truth is, - and you hit upon it - that American foreign policy remains pretty much the same regardless of the party in power. They are going to keep protecting the country's interests just as much.

What does indeed change with a new administration (and Florin can attest to this) is domestic policy.

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

Meanwhile, as a result of the US violating the UN charter and waging an unilateral war of agression, the countries which could be considered real treats (Korea, Iran...) are accelerating their programs.

This is priceless

I thought it was the UN's job to deal with Korea and Iran, not America's. What is the UN doing about Korea and Iran anyway? Zero, zilch, zip.

You make it sound like it's America's job to deal with Korea and Iran. But wouldn't you jump 10 feet up in the air and claim a "unilateral war of aggression" if the US threatened these countries?

Make up your mind, Chandernagore.