The dossier

[KernelPanic]

The long awaited dossier (c. 450Kb)

[sporkme]

ooo  ooo  did they use the words "shit" "for" "brains" and "saddam" in the same sentence?

[Calum]

they say things like 'we don't know' and 'saddam has really been a naughty boy before so we think he might do it again' a lot.

Seems like largely spin, on the part of No 10 Downing street, however i agree that saddam is a ruthless criminal who cannot be trusted in any way, i think that it is not good to insinuate things unless you have irrefutable evidence (and sure there's some evidence, so fair enough). I think that those who would like to be seen to be on the side of right and goodness (or whatever) should always make double sure of everything and be very careful about things like gathering evidence and so forth. That is why i think the inspectors thing is very important. I do think a lot of timewasting is going on though and that Iraq should be made to let the inspectors do their job.

Bombing is not the answer, however a strong military policing presence for the duration of the inspecting might be a good idea.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]

[zooloo]

It's all a bit Saddam "could".  Not can.

An interesting article from the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,794759,00.html

On the other hand George W Bush is a religious fanatic (Evolution the work of Satan!) who does have chemical weapons, who does have biological weapons, who does have nuclear weapons and (this is the important bit) he has the means to deploy them.

Also GWB is actively seeking a war, after all in his funamentalist Christain world this is "End times" and he is quite willing to make it so.

To counter any suspicion that I am anti-American I'd like to add that Tony Blair is sucking GWB's arse.

When war isn't government policy we don't have war - see Europe.

[voidmain]

Hmmm, I should have known Scott Ritter was involved in that article. If you know a little about Scott Ritter you know that anything you hear from him really can't be taken seriously. He flip flops (probably for money) and just loves media face time.

Scott was a UN inspector who was sent to Iraq after the Gulf war to seek and destroy weapons of mass destruction etc.. In 1998 he made this statement:

 

quote:This most recent Security Council resolution on Iraq is only reflective of the continuing pattern of confrontation and concession. I cannot see how the recent resolution did anything more than delay the inevitable. Iraq has paid no real price for telling one lie after another and continuing its obstruction of the weapons inspection teams. If Iraq chooses in the future to allow the resumption of inspection activity, will it be rewarded with yet another round of "comprehensive reviews." The danger the objectivity of such a review. The track record of the Secretary General on Iraq is mixed at best.

I believe that the world, especially the Congress of the United States, must pay close attention in the weeks and months ahead to keep the process of disarming Iraq honest. If recent history is any guide, there will be many pressures placed upon the Special Commission, most behind the scenes and as such out of public view, to make compromises of substance concerning Iraq's unfulfilled disarmament obligations. The credibility of the United Nations and the United States is at stake here.

Full text here: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1998_h/ws915981.htm

Now what has changed since he made this statement?  He hasn't been to Iraq since prior to making this statement. How could he possibly have any more information about Iraq's weapons? Why would he be so afraid of them doing bad things before and not now? Could it be the $400,000 he got from Iraq to make a movie? Dunno, but Scott Ritter has been "out of the loop" for many years now and is by no means an expert on what Iraq has today or what our governments know about Iraq. The information you could get from Ronald McDonald would be as good as the info you get from Scott Ritter.

And the GW being a religious fanatic comment. Right, and he's going to send Santa Claus on a secret mission to drop a nuke on Bagdad. Belonging to a religion does not make one a religious fanatic, gimme a break... Making an equally stupid comment about Tony Blair in no way proves you are not anti-American, not that it matters.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

[Calum]

yeah, careful zooloo, don't say anything about those lovely americans!            

still, i think comments about being a religious nutter are valid opinions (however not opinions i actually hold), considering this whole palaver is definitely heavily influenced by the whole christian vs muslim thing.

I wish it wasn't but there it is (and i am a member of neither religion so i'm not taking any sides there.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]

[voidmain]

In my opinion "holy war" is just an excuse. BTW, who actually threatens/partakes in a "holy war" whatever the hell that is. I don't believe religion enters into the mix anywhere when it comes to Iraq. I don't even consider Saddam to be a religious fanatic let alone Bush. I do believe he (Hussein) is an evil lunatic but not a religious fanatic.

[Calum]

i suppose i have to say you are right because i agree with all the things you said just then.

Still, when people use religion as an excuse, religion is brought into the mix whether it deserves to be there or not. How much religion affects the conflict is down entirely to how much people take it seriously in the context of a holy war.

I agree totally with the idea that if not for religion people would find some other excuse to have a war, however i think that if people tell themselves they are fighting a holy war, they will bend the rules of their religion so as to tell them how to fight that war.

I don't know. I agree with everything you just said though.

I have never heard of either saddam or bush being religious nutters.

[hm_murdock]

America sucks.

As "young adults"... we're told how important we are to the future of the nation, then in the same breath, we're told that we're worthless because we haven't "earned respect for ourselves".

Sorry guys, but when do I have to EARN respect? I thought it was due to me as a human being.

I was told by one individual that it's "my place" to suffer through financial hardships and school debts as a "young adult".

I told said individual to suck my proverbial cock.

edit: to make this post on topic... Saddam and Bush both seem to be the kind of guys that would use religion as an excuse for war. Saddam would play on anti-Christian sentiments to make his people hate us, and Bush would use our fear of Islam to get us to join the army and help kill 'em all.

I say we replace war with a bunch of rooms with VR booths where guys just play FPS games. Nobody gets hurt (aside from maybe carpal tunnel) and when it's over... nobody really gives a fuck.

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: The Jimmy James ]

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by The Jimmy James:
America sucks.

Compared to what? I've been all over the world and I would choose to differ.

   

quote:As "young adults"... we're told how important we are to the future of the nation, then in the same breath, we're told that we're worthless because we haven't "earned respect for ourselves".

So who's telling you this? "earned respect for ourselves" to me would imply "self-respect". Self-respect would be you having respect for yourself, believing in yourself. In which case what anyone else thinks is irrelevant. But self-respect usually has to be present (among other things) in order to gain the respect of others.

   

quote:Sorry guys, but when do I have to EARN respect? I thought it was due to me as a human being.

I certainly do not believe respect is a basic human right as it is an internal feeling. One person can not be forced to respect someone else. It is true that respect is earned, but not in the concious way that you work a job to earn money. You earn someones respect by your actions. Someone might earn respect just by being a good person, a hard worker, a helper/giver, etc. But it's not like that person has "set forth to earn respect", it's natural to them.

   

quote:I was told by one individual that it's "my place" to suffer through financial hardships and school debts as a "young adult".

I told said individual to suck my proverbial cock.

Doesn't sound like either person in this example is starting out on the right path of earning the other's respect.

   

quote:edit: to make this post on topic... Saddam and Bush both seem to be the kind of guys that would use religion as an excuse for war. Saddam would play on anti-Christian sentiments to make his people hate us, and Bush would use our fear of Islam to get us to join the army and help kill 'em all.

I say we replace war with a bunch of rooms with VR booths where guys just play FPS games. Nobody gets hurt (aside from maybe carpal tunnel) and when it's over... nobody really gives a fuck.

Yes, life certainly would be a peach if this were possible. I would be more than happy to hear any ideas on how to make this happen (or any other idea on how to attain world peace short of getting rid of all of the world's people).

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

[Master of Reality]

quote:Originally posted by The Jimmy James:
America sucks.

Everywhere sucks.

[pkd_lives]

The Isle of Wight sucks more more more.

[badkarma]

quote:Originally posted by void main:
I do believe he (Hussein) is an evil lunatic but not a religious fanatic.

hey ... I feel the same way about bush....

[Pantso]

quote:Originally posted by BadKarma:


hey ... I feel the same way about bush....

Right on BadKarma     . I also believe that Bush is potentially as dangerous as Saddam Husein. To me they are the two sides of the same coin      

Sadly, everything is being done for power, political and financial    !

[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: Panos ]

[voidmain]

I don't know "why" it's done, all I know is too many people died too close to home and I'm willing to do whatever it takes to prevent that from happening again, no matter how fruitless that may be. Making sure Saddam doesn't have nukes is a step in the right direction if you ask me. 757's do enough damage as it is.