A Personal Peace Practicum [Archive] - Love-Scent Pheromones Forum

Whitehall

04-03-2003, 03:56 PM

Here\'s one idea of a peace practicum for war protestors. Note that I do NOT personally endorse this method.

Going around about protestors is this little step by step \"how to\":

With all of this talk of impending war, many of us will encounter \"Peace Activists\" who will try and convince us that we must refrain from retaliating. These activists may be alone or in a gathering.....most of us don\'t know how to react to them. When you come upon one of these people, or one of their rallies, here are the proper rules of etiquette:

1. Listen politely while this person explains their views. Strike up a conversation if necessary and look
very interested in their ideas. They will tell you how revenge is immoral, and that by attacking the
people, we will only bring on more violence. They will probably use many arguments, ranging from
political to religious to humanitarian.

2. Then hit them in the nose. Knock them to the ground.

3. When the person gets up off of the ground, they will be very angry and they may try to hit you, so be careful.

4. Very quickly and calmly remind the person that violence only brings about more violence and remind
them of their stand on this matter. Tell them if they are really committed to a nonviolent approach to
undeserved attacks, they will turn the other cheek and negotiate a solution. Tell them they must lead by example, if they really believe what they are saying.

5. Most of them will think for a moment and then agree that you are correct.

6. As soon as they do that, hit them again. Only this time hit them much harder. Square in the nose.

7. Repeat steps 2-5 until the desired results are obtained and the idiot realizes how stupid an argument he/she is making.

8. There is no difference in an individual attacking an unsuspecting victim or a group of terrorists
attacking a nation of people. It is unacceptable and must be dealt with. Perhaps at a high cost. We owe
our military a huge debt for what they are about to do for us and our children. We must support them and
our leaders at times like these.

Andy

04-03-2003, 04:10 PM

8. There is no difference in an individual attacking an unsuspecting victim or a group of terrorists
attacking a nation of people. It is unacceptable and must be dealt with. Perhaps at a high cost.

You are so right ... but where\'s the link to the actual war ?

MadDoctor

04-03-2003, 04:35 PM

> You are so right ... but where\'s the link to the actual war ?

Well, one could always accost people that might have secret plans to protest something and attack them preemptively... ?

Watcher

04-03-2003, 09:53 PM

Heres the link
Saddam huinseen and his cronies do the following
Use chemical and biological weapons on kurds in 1989 and in IRAN previously. Supplied by the USA, FRANCE and RUSSIA and GERMANY. Saying enough.
Ok now he attacks IRAN, KUWAIT, fires scuds at saudi arabia and isreal. Its a one state socialists state with several torture etc. Enough reason to end his regime.
What whitehall is saying is completley a way to get through to the war protestors, try it with a gun for more effect.
Now tell me we should leave him in power. A quick hand over of power to the UN would be more transparent and an open slaver to all global corparations for re-construction work within IRAQ instead of US republicaian linked to vice president oil comapnies and their subsidaries. This wont happen and this rort will continue, but for the greater good of a democratic IRAQ i say this might just be OK.

Andy

04-04-2003, 05:01 AM

Don\'t you feel ashamed talking about attacking your own people because they have a different sight of things ? What you are actually talking about is a direct attack on somebody.

I\'d have to shoot you, your family and your neighbors because you might hit me in the future to give you a Personal War Practicum.

Have YOU seen war ? .. no ? .. I have .. Have YOU seen falling soldiers right next to you ? .. no ? .. I have ... Have YOU seen friends you\'ve been in the Army with for years teared apart by AP-mines ? .. no ? .. I have.
Pussies like you don\'t know what war means .. you have NO IDEA. There\'s nothing glorious, nothing clean. There are dying more civillians than shown in your little nice clean TV shows that have done nothing but slipped out of a pussy from the wrong side. Please stop talking bullshit till you\'ve been down in iraq or somewhere else where bullets are flying a few inches away from your head.

I\'d like to take everybody that thinks war is something good in any way down there for just a week.

[edit]
I\'d go down there again if I had too, under german or us-american command again, but I\'d never attack somebody that thinks war is a bad thing, because it is dammit.

franki

04-04-2003, 05:23 AM

from Whitehall:
<< Note that I do NOT personally endorse this method. >>

Lucky

04-04-2003, 07:16 AM

Andy,
I haven\'t been to Iraq and know very little (nothing) about it. I didn\'t want the US to go to war, but certainly support our troops now that they are there.

Since you say you\'ve been there (and I\'m curious as to why you were there), please give us your opinions on the following:

- How did the Iraqi people feel about this *liberation* effort? How great a role does \"fear of Saddam\" play in the average Iraqi\'s life?
- Is their land (oil wells) privately owned?
- Were the Iraqi people economically compromised before the 1981 war?
- How much of this is about Israel?
- Do the Iraqis equate the US preemption in Iraq to the terrorist activity in the US? Do you? Should we?
- Bottom line... why are we over there, what\'s the real deal?

Thanks.

Elana

04-04-2003, 12:10 PM

Andy....you need to relax.

Lucky

04-04-2003, 12:19 PM

Has Andy been on vacation since I came onboard? I don\'t know him.

Whitehall

04-04-2003, 01:07 PM

This war started 9/11/01. If you think that the choice is war or not, you\'re not thinking straight. The Department of Homeland Security will neither win it nor put an end to the threats of future attacks. We can not leave decisions as to war and peace to the warriors.

The point of the practicum is that no matter how bad war is (it\'s the most evil part of our nature, I agree), sometimes we have no choice. The war is on and I will not apologize for preferring it be faught in Baghdad rather than Brooklyn or Burbank. The question is not \"war or no war,\" but rather where and when do we fight to protect ourselves.

If you no longer wish to defend us and your term of enlistment is up, you may leave the messy work to someone with more courage, strength, and patriotism. You have our thanks for your prior service.

Thankfully, we have volunteers who will do what needs to be done.

\"If war be the remedy of my enemy\'s choosing, I say, give it to them.\" Wm. T. Sherman

Andy

04-04-2003, 03:26 PM

Ok ... I calmed down already ... didn\'t mean to be attack somebody here but I just can\'t hear this patriotic crap anymore. Do you know that many soldiers would like to go on patriot shooting before heading for their mission on the battlefield ? Nobody hates war more than soldiers do, but that\'s their job. They are fighting for something they believe, may it be peace, freedom or even just loyality.

I\'d like to talk about the Iraq, but I can\'t. I haven\'t been there with desert storm and I haven\'t been there in the actual war, but I\'ve seen many battlefields some official \"i.e. former jugoslavia\" and some not so official. I just can\'t talk much more about this topic.

@Whitehall

If you got the expression that I actually barked at you I am sorry. English is not my native language and I am lacking of training, since I haven\'t really spoken or written it some years (except here and a few letters to friends in the states).

Ok ... now start over again :

Dear Whitehall /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

The war in Iraq has nothing to do with the 9/11 ... There is no link between Saddam and Bin \"loadmyasswithdynamite\" Laden. Saddam could have been disarmed without force because the whole Iraq was laying down spreading all legs. The local economy was destroyed before this war and they were still building new houses that have been destroyed.
The people are still suffering ... and that after so many years. Saddam himself could have been easily taken out by snipers, again without making the civilists down there suffer. The CIA came close enough to uncover secret plans and biological weaponry .. but not close enough to take Saddam out? Moslems aren\'t bad people you know ... it\'s just like everywhere in the world, as soon as a smart, greedy and powerthirsty man shows up things get messed up. Because the education level is so low down there much more follow this stupid bullshit than in the western world, but it\'s still not the majority, most are just howling with the wolves not to get eaten by them. But the situation changed. There was a lot of hope among the civilian citizens that the UN would help to ease their pain. But now they (USA and Britain) are causing them to suffer. The people are actually fightin for their homes. Let me give you an example :

You are living in a nice quiet quarter of a little town, your leader is a dictator. You can\'t do anything against his politics, you can only hope they let you be in peace. Your country is still destroyed from a former war and it\'s almost impossible to build up things because of an embargo. There are not enough resources to build up things, the infrastructure is still down. Now you hear that your dictator is about to be disarmed soon and everything works quite fine. Inspectors came into your country and you heared that they started to destroy \"illegal\" weaponry. Everything was fine and things developed well. Suddenly the inspectors are beeing extracted from your country and enemy troops are landing ... out of sudden .. not beeing threated or attacked in any way. You can\'t understand what\'s going on, but you still hope to be freed, though you are full of neverending fear. Next thing you hear is, that an enhanced daisy cutter wiped out your complete family on the other side of town, along with thousands of civilian people and buildings within a 600 meter radius you just started to build up with your sweat and dirt, just because your dictator placed troops somewhere in that area.

This might happen every day since the use of the daisy cutter has been authorized. You are facing two foes now ... your dictator .. and reckless enemy troops that are destroying everything in sight that might be a good target. You just have no choice but fighting with the somebody who\'s actually trying to protect your land, no matter what his motives might be. You are saying goodbye to your wife while taking the belt of explosives ......

I\'d defend you and everyone that needs to be defended in any case. Because I believe our concept of a free democratic world order. But I fear that\'s not what\'s behind the war this time. I would like to be wrong in the end, I never wished to have the false impression than this time, but I fear this won\'t happen.

Andy

04-04-2003, 03:35 PM

Whitehall

04-04-2003, 03:54 PM

Andy,

Where are you from and what battles did you participate in?

I understand that this can be a very emotional topic for many people. It\'s OK.

Many of us here in the US do think that 9/11 and Iraq are connected. OBL initiated and carried out the specific act and maybe Saddam was not part of the deal up front. However, the problem is that Saddam would now have (had?) the capacity to use OBL and the like as delivery methods and OBL had the ability to get better tools and succor from Saddam. Together, they poise a huge threat to us.

The Mideast is a huge mess. The trends are that it will get worst. We have to break these trends and push them in directions that offer less threat to us and the West. Their population is exploding, their educations are becoming more fundamentalist and less real \"education\", their politics becoming more radical, and their vision less realistic.

The US government has had to take a gamble with history. We all hope it pays off for everyone.

MadDoctor

04-04-2003, 05:49 PM

Your post reminded me of some of the veterans I\'ve known. John, who I knew as a fellow martial artist, had been paratrooper in Vietnam. The guy was as tough as nails, but one day he told me that he had recurring nightmares. He had driven most of the images from his mind, but one he could not shake. His group had been ordered to surround a village while some went in and lit all of the houses on fire. His job was outside, to shoot anyone who fled from the burning huts. He followed his orders, and gunned down a beautiful young woman who was so pregnant that she could barely run. He remembered her face as she lay dying, how she seemed to be pleading \"Why?\" with her eyes, and how he had no answer, so emptied the clip of his M16 into her body. Having told me this, John spent the next few minutes sobbing into his hands. He had never talked much about Vietnam with me before, and he never brought it up again.

Today also happens to be the 35th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., as well as the 36th anniversary of the speech he gave at Riverside Church ( http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/speeches/Beyond_Vietnam.pdf (\"http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/speeches/Beyond_Vietnam.pdf\") ).

Part of that speech strikes me as particularly apropos decades later.

\"This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote:

\'Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the hearts of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism.\'\"

Food for thought.

belgareth

04-05-2003, 08:48 AM

Whitehall,

First I’d like to say that I resent your implication that those who oppose this war are not as patriotic as those that do. Your accusations are a direct attack on their obligation to voice their opinion regarding our government’s actions.

Many of us who oppose this attack on Iraq are at least as patriotic as you and regard this war as naked aggression using disingenuous excuses for what appears to be an attempt to control another country’s natural resources. In your arguments for this war, you use a lot of supposition that is not supported by any concrete facts linking OSB and Saddam Hussien.

Using the military for apparently comercial gain rather than against a direct attack, at the expense of an already suffering economy, is about as unpatriotic as one can get. The loss of a single life for any other purpose than self-defense is a crime! If and until somebody presents solid evidence that Iraq was actually preparing to provide weapons of mass destruction to our enemies to use against us, there is no excuse for our military to be in Iraq. Rather, I feel we should be concentrating on hunting down and executing every last member of Al Queda, they are the ones who attacked us!

It is easy to call me a coward or unpatriotic. You can spend all day jumping to unsupported conclusions and claiming I am not thinking straight if you like. But show us one single piece of hard evidence to support the link that justifies this war. So far, neither you nor the government has done that. For that reason, many very intelligent, patriotic people are opposed to this war.

proteus

04-05-2003, 10:17 AM

Well said Andy, MadDoctor and Belgareth. I have a brother in the military (infantry) who\'s on standby to go to the Persian Gulf. Many of his friends in the 101st Airborne Division are already in Iraq.

We talk with him about this war and he just sees this as his job, something he signed up for and he will go if he is ordered there. He doesn\'t like discussing whether the war is justified or not and often says if he doesn\'t go if called, it just means perhaps one of his buddies or fellow soldiers will go in his place. So they serve and because of this I support the troops and feel that by opposing this unjust war of aggression that I am supporting these troops who should not be misused in this way.

As for these gungho war types who have never served/fought in any combat situation and question the patriotism of those who oppose this war - they make me sick. I hope you\'re willing to volunteer your sons,daughters, brothers or sisters to this war and put some actual deeds behind this cheap armchair bravado.

Whitehall

04-05-2003, 02:42 PM

Guys,

Get a grip on you emotions and read my words. I did NOT say that anyone who opposed the war was unpatriotic although some protesters clearly are that. I did not question your patriotism - JUST YOUR JUDGMENT.

As to our soldiers, if they are not primarily motivated by patriotism, we should not let them serve. Otherwise, we will develop a mercenary caste not dedicated to the principles of American gvernment and that would only lead to trouble. Read your history of the Praetorian guard. We have an all-volunteer military - they are bound, while under oath and arms in the US military, to follow all lawful orders of the Commander-in-Chief, ie the president. If you can\'t do that at all times, don\'t join. Legitimate civilian authority, the president and the Congress, have authorized this war.

As to my right and obligation to formulate and advocate an opinion on military matters, I\'ll remind you that I am a citizen of the US of A and therefore have the responsibility to be informed on foreign affairs, of which war is but one facet. While I\'ve rubbed shoulders with the military all my life, the core of my position are my views on the broader issue of America\'s position and conduct in the world. That view has to be formulated by civilians. If the people who represent me in the federal government tell our military to go to war, they had better damn well do it. If they don\'t like it then they can decide to not re-up. I will note that 70% of the American public supports this war so I\'m not alone. As some wise man said, war is too important to be left to the generals - or to the privates.

I will note that my eldest son is again considering enlisting in the Army, specifically the 82th Airborne. He\'s got a BA in history from Berkeley, BTW. This is a big decision for him. I\'m not telling him to sign up but I do tell him that the profession of arms is an honorable one and that I would be proud if he served. Since this path would have him go to OCS and eventually put him in charge of a platoon of combat infantrymen, I caution him that he should only sign up if he understands that the responsibility for those men would be in his hands and that he must dedicate himself to the highest achievement he can reach. Also, he must understand that that his courage would be tested in battle and that he could die. Like the parents of the Roman Republic, I also expect him to return either carrying his shield or being carried on it.

If all this still leaves you sick, Proteus, gag on it.

franki

04-05-2003, 03:28 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
I will note that 70% of the American public supports this war so I\'m not alone.

<hr /></blockquote>

At this point I start to feel uncomfortable, uncomfortable about the media especially. I mean, take a look at the thread Bivonic started about Al-Qaeda. If a lot of people are ill-informed (you have said something about \"people not taking the time to inform themselves\" well before this), how can they make a fair judgement?

Everyone has to trust governments, media, the UN etc to make a picture of what is going on in Iraq and the rest of the world, because we can\'t find out about it on ourselves. This gives the media and also politicians a hell of a lot of responsibility and I hope they are taking that responsability seriously, regardless of whether they are pro-war or anti-war.

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

MadDoctor

04-05-2003, 05:04 PM

In a recent poll, Americans were asked how many Iraqis there were among the 9/11 hijackers. Only 17% knew that the correct answer was zero. Scary, eh?

-----

\"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.\"

-- Theodore Roosevelt, 1918

belgareth

04-06-2003, 04:54 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Guys,

Get a grip on you emotions and read my words. I did NOT say that anyone who opposed the war was unpatriotic although some protesters clearly are that. I did not question your patriotism - JUST YOUR JUDGMENT.

<hr /></blockquote>

Whitehall,

That\'s quite alright, I certainly have been questioning your judgement on this issue. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

My statements, although reflecting my obvious irritation, were not emotion based. I asked for the proof, the smoking gun, the direct connection between Bagdad and OSB. Nobody has provided that! There are lots of ifs and maybes and possible connections but they are very short of facts. While I agree that Saddam Hussien is a viscous criminal and needs to be removed, I do not agree that it is our right or responsibility to do so. We are basically saying \'Ok, you guys won\'t play our way? Well were the biggest bully on the block and we are going to force you too play our way.\' This is being done at the expense of millions of people who are suffering from a dead economy in this country. Our priorities are wrong! We are not and should not be the world\'s police force. Nor should we force our ideals down another country\'s throat. If we believe in freedom of choice, it must be for everybody, not just here at home.

As for the 70% who supposedly support the war, that is a questionable figure and I think you know that. Regardless of that, I am a little surprised that you, of all people, are all that concerned with what the majority thinks. You have struck me in the past as an individualistic thinker. My opinions are certainly not directed by the majority.

**DONOTDELETE**

04-06-2003, 02:23 PM

If you were irritated than your post had to reflect that and the other emotions that occur from being irritated by someone.

As far as removing Saddam goes if we do not do it no one else will. The apparent consequences that would occur from Saddam being in power were increasing; the United States had to do something before Saddam\'s reingn of terror spread. The United States is ond of the few countries who actually are trying to help the sick, poor people around the world and we supply over 50% of the money to the United Nations. Have you ever thought about that, or do you only see what you want to see because of your own hatred toward something or someone else. A person who looks at the facts from both sides of the table realizes that America is trying to help people around the world reap the benifits of freedom. Its easy for someone whos free to run his mouth off. Don\'t you realize the Iraqis do not have that freedom. Saddam runs a dictorship he has modeled after Stalin and Hitler. Can you imagine what would have occured if the Allied Nations had no courage, no bravery, no ball. Its sometimes good to be idealist, although in the long run to surive, for the world to flourish we must be realist about our ideals. France hasn\'t progressed out of the ages of romanticism. Thats why our opinions differ with them

Gerund

04-06-2003, 03:09 PM

*********************
belgareth:

As for the 70% who supposedly support the war, that is a questionable figure and I think you know that.
*********************

That\'s absolutely right. It\'s now up to 80%, as CNN reported about 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. (The report also thought it sufficiently noteworthy to mention that even 2 out of 3 liberals now support the war.)

Elana

04-06-2003, 03:13 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

That\'s absolutely right. It\'s now up to 80%, as CNN reported about 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. (The report also thought it sufficiently noteworthy to mention that even 2 out of 3 liberals now support the war.)

<hr /></blockquote>

I heard that today too

MadDoctor

04-06-2003, 08:39 PM

Wow, only another 10 points, and it will match the percentage by which the German voters approved Hitler\'s position of Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor in 1934. As it is, 80% is the exact same rating that Bush Sr.\'s 1991 war got, but that still wasn\'t enough to get him reelected.

The average American is both fickle and uninformed. In a few months, everything will be different. In the next election, most of them won\'t go to the polls, and most of those who do won\'t vote the way they would today.

In short, who cares?

Lucky

04-07-2003, 05:49 AM

THE THINGS WE DO FOR PEACE....
read below, anything sound familiar?

---------------------------------------------------------
Proclamation by Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of the Reich, to the German Army, September 1,1939.

The Polish State has refused the peaceful settlement of relations which I desired, and has appealed to arms. Germans in Poland are persecuted with bloody terror and driven from their houses. A series of violations of the frontier, intolerable to a great Power, prove that Poland is no longer willing to respect the frontier of the Reich.

In order to put an end to this lunacy, I have no other choice than to meet force with force from now on. The German Army will fight the battle for the honour and the vital rights of reborn Germany with hard determination. I expect that every soldier, mindful of the great traditions of eternal German soldiery, will ever remain conscious that he is a representative of the National-Socialist Greater Germany. Long live our people and our Reich!

belgareth

04-07-2003, 05:54 AM

Natedog:

Of course my irritation shows. I am still asking reasonable and logical questions and not getting answers. Our government’s excuse for invading Iraq is the link to Al Queada. Please tell me what that link is. Not guesses and suppositions, facts! Please define the direct threat to the US, other than their control of their natural resources which they have every right to control, just as we do ours. For the record, I sat on the fence about support for this war for a long time but the contradictions bother me more every day. We are still not the world’s police and we still have millions suffering in our own country that we are not taking care of while we concern ourselves with other countries. Doesn’t charity begin at home? How do you feel about the jobless in this country? The homeless and hungry right here at home? Do you go out and bust your own budget to feed and shelter them while leaving your own without a roof over their heads? If not, why should the US do so?

Even if your statement is valid, why Hussien and not one of the many other despots? Is he the only mass murderer out there or the worst? Or is there some other factor we should know about?

Gerund:

Alright, 80%. What was the margin for error? Who conducted the poll? Do they have a bias? If so, what is it? How was the poll conducted? What were the actual questions and answers? How were the questions phrased? What are the demographics of the respondents? What percentage is supporting the soldiers, not the reasons for the war? You are making a blanket statement that has no meaning. As an extreme example of meaningless statistics, did you know that almost every mass murderer in the last 100 years ate carrots in the month prior to committing their crimes? So? It doesn’t mean a thing without all the other factors.

Throughout history leaders have whipped up the population to a war frenzy through propaganda and hysterics that had little to do with the real reasons for the war. I am not opposed to removing Saddam Hussien from power. I am opposed to hyperbole, hysterics, histrionics and meaningless excuses.

Have you ever done a content analysis on a political speech? It’s entertaining. Once you sort out the chaff and meaningless verbiage you often come up with little to nothing said. Most speeches are written to appeal to emotions rather than logic or reason. I prefer to try and look at the logic.

In any event, I am not comfortable simply following majority opinion, I rather think things through for myself. For that reason, former supervisors and psychological evaluations have referred to me as detached and very logical. Almost every performance evaluation I’ve ever had notes that I tend to put my feelings aside and look at issues clearly, coming to logical and well reasoned decisions. There is no reason to believe my thoughts now are any less logical or well reasoned. If you can give me answers to my questions that are supported in facts, I am perfectly willing to change my mind. So far, that has not been done.

hoodas

04-07-2003, 06:50 AM

belgareth, good points on the validity of the 80% stat. The media throws out stats right and left, and most people don\'t really look at them closely to make sure that the numbers are really saying what they are saying.

My other comment on the war is if Saddam is really a threat to the U.S. and has a link to Al Qaeda, why is this war being called Iraqi Freedom? I remember a few months before the war, Bush was saying that Iraq needs to allow inspectors in, but then the tune was changed to Iraq is not fully disclosing everything, and then the tune changed to we need a regime change, and now the focus is on freeing the Iraqis, c\'mon lets get real if we are really freeing the Iraqis then there a whole list of countries that need to be rescued, how come we aren\'t freeing all of those countries? If we are to be the policing the world, I say we should at least be fair and do it everywhere.

belgareth

04-07-2003, 06:57 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
I remember a few months before the war, Bush was saying that Iraq needs to allow inspectors in, but then the tune was changed to Iraq is not fully disclosing everything, and then the tune changed to we need a regime change, and now the focus is on freeing the Iraqis,

<hr /></blockquote>

Good point. It was obvious several months ago that no matter what they did, we were going to attack. The Iraqi government could have invited our congress to set up shop in Bagdad and we would still have said is wasn\'t good enough. That\'s part of the reason I do not believe what our government or the news organizations are telling us. We\'ve been lied to from the begining.

**DONOTDELETE**

04-07-2003, 07:26 AM

Ok, rather or not your questions are reasonalbe and logical still remains to be seen. Well if you want to see a link it is there, take for instance head al queada leaders getting direct passage into afghanistan for protection and medical asistance. The war is not just a war on terror its a war for humanity, for the rights of people everywhere to live free free from totalitarian dictarship brutality and terror. If your setting on the fence then why are your arguements so blantantly wrong. Is it that physcological you just don\'t want to accept the fact that for freedom sometimes we must take up arms. I am sorry but this is where i don\'t understand people with your point of view because, you are so idealistic its as if you have seperated yourself from all the problems that will always esist in some manner or from and someone will always have to police them. Well i guess we can all sing songs and dance ane pretend we live in a Utopian society
]

belgareth

04-07-2003, 07:44 AM

Natedog:

Al Queada leaders got free passage into Afganistan? What does that have to do with attacking Iraq? Shouldn\'t we be attacking Afganistan instead?

Dancing and singing? Not likely. I volunteered to wear a uniform and prepared to fight. By pure chance, I was not involved in any conflict. The military discharged me early for injuries I recieved while serving my country.

I said I was sitting on the fence, that was past tense. We have been lied to repeatedly and impossible demands kept being made. The war was going to start no matter what happened. Please spare me the rant about a war for all humanity. We are acting as the bully and against the wishes of much of humanity. If my arguments are so blatantly wrong, address them with reason and facts. That is not so much to ask, is it? I am willing to listen, are you?

Elana

04-07-2003, 09:11 AM

Breaking News...
It appears that huge vats of chemical weapons have been discovered.

BassMan

04-07-2003, 09:28 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Breaking News...
It appears that huge vats of chemical weapons have been discovered.

<hr /></blockquote>Do you have a link to the article? I\'m not finding it on the web networks.

Elana

04-07-2003, 09:31 AM

It\'s just coming out right now on Fox and CNN. The pentagon will not confirm until the tests are completed.

Elana

04-07-2003, 09:32 AM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0 (\"http://www.foxnews.com/story/0\"),2933,83449,00.html

BassMan

04-07-2003, 09:34 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0 (\"http://www.foxnews.com/story/0\"),2933,83449,00.html

<hr /></blockquote>Thanks!

EXIT63

04-07-2003, 11:14 AM

Fox news is just a shill for braindead Republicans. And besides, the CIA is planting the stuff to justify the war for oil and American imperialism. And just because Al queda has a base in Iraq doesn\'t mean they\'re connected to 911. Remember, Wolfowitz and Perle are both Jews and everyone knows the Israeli lobby is running things in Washington. I sure do hate America. But don\'t say I\'m not patriotic.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/895392.asp?0bl=-0 (\"http://www.msnbc.com/news/895392.asp?0bl=-0\")

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm (\"http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm\")

Elana

04-07-2003, 11:21 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Fox news is just a shill for braindead Republicans. And besides, the CIA is planting the stuff to justify the war for oil and American imperialism. And just because Al queda has a base in Iraq doesn\'t mean they\'re connected to 911. Remember, Wolfowitz and Perle are both Jews and everyone knows the Israeli lobby is running things in Washington. I sure do hate America. But don\'t say I\'m not patriotic.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/895392.asp?0bl=-0 (\"http://www.msnbc.com/news/895392.asp?0bl=-0\")

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm (\"http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm\")

<hr /></blockquote>

Them damn Jews /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

MadDoctor

04-07-2003, 11:22 AM

Per later reports, the \"huge vats\" appear to be one 20-gallon barrel, one 50-gallon barrel, and around a dozen or so small rockets (5\" diameter, 15 mile range, 40-year old design, the trucks that carried them kept 40 ready to fire at a time) with chemical warheads.

To put this in perspective, this amounts to 1/40 of 1% of the chemical weapons that Iraq had at the time of the first Gulf War. Or to look at it another way, Germany fired 110,000 chemical rounds during 2 days of the battle of Verdun: the amount found so far in Iraq would have lasted them under one minute.

Three years ago, the Pentagon said that it had somehow misplaced 1,300 billion dollars. If they can do that, I can easily understand how the Iraqi military could have misplaced 1/40 of 1% of its chemical weapons.

Elana

04-07-2003, 11:24 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Per later reports, the \"huge vats\" appear to be one 20-gallon barrel, one 50-gallon barrel, and around a dozen or so small rockets (5\" diameter, 15 mile range, 40-year old design, the trucks that carried them kept 40 ready to fire at a time) with chemical warheads.

To put this in perspective, this amounts to 1/40 of 1% of the chemical weapons that Iraq had at the time of the first Gulf War. Or to look at it another way, Germany fired 110,000 chemical rounds during 2 days of the battle of Verdun: the amount found so far in Iraq would have lasted them under one minute.

Three years ago, the Pentagon said that it had somehow misplaced 1,300 billion dollars. If they can do that, I can easily understand how the Iraqi military could have misplaced 1/40 of 1% of its chemical weapons.

<hr /></blockquote>

Phew...I am so relieved /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

hoodas

04-07-2003, 11:29 AM

This will be yet another report that will be blown out of proportion by the media and then they will show results of some new poll showing that its ok to go to war.

Elana

04-07-2003, 11:31 AM

We shall see. If it turns out that there were only enough chemical\'s to kill a few thousand people, does that mean that we shouldn\'t be making a big deal about it? We aren\'t done turning over stones.

hoodas

04-07-2003, 11:36 AM

Well in the grand scheme of things, I would say we shouldn\'t make a big deal about it. I was just implying that the media blows everything out of proportion and then puts some stats to along with it as if to justify the blowing out of proportion.

MadDoctor

04-07-2003, 11:53 AM

> Well in the grand scheme of things, I would say we shouldn\'t make a big deal about it.

Agreed. In WWI, for example, a conservative estimate of the amount of chemical weapons used by the Germans against the French is around half a million rounds, each containing several pounds of agent. If one assumes 5 pounds per shell as a reasonable average, that means that it took over 300 pounds of chemical agent for each French soldier killed (they had 8,000 gas deaths total in WWI). If the Iraqis did about as well as the Germans, the amount found would have killed 1-2 people.

franki

04-07-2003, 11:59 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
If one assumes 5 pounds per shell as a reasonable average, that means that it took over 300 pounds of chemical agent for each French soldier killed (they had 8,000 gas deaths total in WWI). If the Iraqis did about as well as the Germans, the amount found would have killed 2 people.

<hr /></blockquote>

Don\'t forget that about 5000 Kurds got killed in chemical attacks by Saddam and \"chemical Ali\" (that is the guy who was killed in Basrah a few days ago).

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

hoodas

04-07-2003, 12:04 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Don\'t forget that about 8000 Kurds got killed in chemical attacks from Saddam and \"chemical Ali\" (that is the guy that got killed in Basrah).

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

<hr /></blockquote>

I\'m not sure that the chemicals used on the kurds should be accounted for here. I mean this war is (supposedly) because Saddam supposedly still has weapons of mass destruction not necessarilty for actions that he has taken in the past since I think the world would agree on the actions he has taken in the past.

franki

04-07-2003, 12:10 PM

At least those attacks prove that none of these weapons should be in the hands of Saddam.

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Elana

04-07-2003, 12:10 PM

hoodas

04-07-2003, 12:14 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
At least those attacks prove that none of these weapons should be in the hands of Saddam.

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

<hr /></blockquote>

Absolutely, can\'t disagree there. It does not necessarily justify the steps being taken currently (in my opinion), but nevertheless you are correct in your observation.

upsidedown

04-07-2003, 12:14 PM

Absolutely Franki.

Imagine if Saddam let terrorists have the gas? What would happen if they let it loose in a confined public area in this country instead of out on an open outdoor field?

Whitehall

04-07-2003, 12:15 PM

I suspect that we will not find huge caches of chemical and biological weapons nor the scientific and engineering cadres that produced them. We should find oneseys and twoseys but not the bulk.

I\'ll bet they were all taken to Syria or sold on the black market.

The reasoning is that Saddam and his inner circle were told, rightly, that the chem/bio armaments would not make much military difference against the American and British armies as both have adequate NBC protective equipment and training.

Our big fear has not been his use of chem/bio on the battlefield but its use against civilian target with no protection.

MadDoctor

04-07-2003, 12:30 PM

Naturally the kill rate is higher when used against unarmed civilians who have no protective equipment! They got to \"cropdust\" the town with helicopters, something no equipped soldier would be hurt by, and something no equipped soldier would tolerate.

Andy

04-07-2003, 12:40 PM

Let me get this right ...

Saddam and the Kurds have been actually in war, right ?

I just can\'t understand why throwing gas at people is worse than throwing a-bombs, napalm, or daisy cutters on people.

MadDoctor

04-07-2003, 12:59 PM

\"Smoking gun\" WMD site in Iraq turns out to contain pesticide:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030407/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_wmd_030407175243 (\"http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030407/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_wmd_030407175243\")

**DONOTDELETE**

04-07-2003, 01:08 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Our government&#8217;s excuse for invading Iraq is the link to Al Queada. Please tell me what that link is

<hr /></blockquote>

Well dont you remember you ask for link i gave you one! You were the one who said that was the reason for invading Iraq. Do you even know what your talking about before you type or shouldn\'t you know what question you asked or do you really want to know the truth. Are you just asking questions trying to find the negative or what. You asked for it you got the link What does being enlisted have to do with dancing and singing , i know lots of people in the milatary. From what i have observed just because you are in the milatary doesn\'t make you less likely to dance and sing. The links are there man even al queda operatives are fighting with suddams paramilatary groups. All i can say is open your eyes man. I can\'t believe people are dumb enough to still say this is about war.

MadDoctor

04-07-2003, 01:26 PM

Looks like we\'re influencing other countries military policies, India and Pakistan (both nuclear powers) now claim a right to attack at will.

\'India has right to pre-emptive strike\'
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/04/07/stories/2003040704741200.htm (\"http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/04/07/stories/2003040704741200.htm\")

`India a fit case for pre-emptive strikes\'
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/stories/2003040804981100.htm (\"http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/stories/2003040804981100.htm\")

Andy

04-07-2003, 03:11 PM

This is no surprise. In fact I\'ve been waiting for something like this, but my thoughts went more into the direction of north korea. Do you have a clue what happends to the States in case they are using the methods of the US-government ? They aren\'t strong enough to start an open war like the States did in Iraq now, they will have to do one hard blow, because they know there won\'t be the opportunity for a second. I fear they are mad enough to do it, in fact north korea is a far more realistic threat to the US than Iraq has ever been. I guess they are just lucky because they aren\'t having so many natural resources. I really hope things like this will never happen, not only because we are allies, but friends. We\'ve been sharing the same ideas and values for decades, though some people tend to forget or overlook this too easily. Please, please open your eyes and educate yourself and build up your own! opinion. I am actually watching a lot of different media, almost everything is propagandistic, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
At least we should stop fighting our own little wars. There are much bigger problems to solve. there is no place for fighting around in discussions. We should talk, because it\'s important. But everyone of us is polarized by our favorite media. I\'ve seen that all around the world, USA, Australia, Germany, Italy, France, the brittish empire, the arab countries, everyone is starting to hype their own version as the ultimate one. Damn, we have to start to think global. Earth is a really small place in fact and we have to learn to live together and not against each other. I am for sure none of these new age guys, but I feel so sorry for the world right now. We are constantly killing our brothers and sisters. In fact we are a huge family but people are just to blind to recognize it. Every war is about $\'s and $\'s only. Face it. It doesn\'t matter which side is the \"good\", which side is the \"bad\" one, because it\'s a pure subjective view of things. The loosers are always the citizens of the world. OMG, I sound like a new age hippie, but I just had to say what I had to say.

**DONOTDELETE**

04-07-2003, 03:15 PM

I\'m glad to hear it, Andy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

EXIT63

04-07-2003, 03:20 PM

Bruce, I think it\'s time to change the name of this forum from Open Discussion to Humor. Reading these posts makes me LMAO!!!!!

Andy

04-07-2003, 03:58 PM

<blockquote>In Antwort auf:<hr />
Bruce, I think it\'s time to change the name of this forum from Open Discussion to Humor. Reading these posts makes me LMAO!!!!!

<hr /></blockquote>

Do you think this is funny in any way? You have to be a really sick person if you are able to find the faintest hint of humor or entertainment in this discussion.

belgareth

04-07-2003, 04:44 PM

War is nothing more than armed robbery writ large.

Tom Clancey

Andy:

You are so right.

**DONOTDELETE**

04-07-2003, 04:45 PM

Lol yeah it did the same thing to me for awhile but then i was like what are some of this guys thinking. lol but yeah i know what you mean. Sometimes though i really feel bad for someone and want to try and help them. I guess its the stain glass window theory. We all have points of view that may seem biased or wrong to someone else. Thats the great thing about America we are free to be whatever we want to be , even if that is an idiot.

EXIT63

04-07-2003, 06:32 PM

Sick
Yeah I\'m sick allright. Sick of a bunch of liberal pussies who care more about murderers and rapists than they do about Americans.

And if we incinerated a million commie, America hating N Koreans in one shot. The world would be a better place.

Wars are all about money. How much did we make on the Marshall plan?

Why don\'t you cram your globalism up your ass.

franki

04-08-2003, 02:00 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
How much did we make on the Marshall plan?

<hr /></blockquote>

It is generally accepted that the USA eventually made a profit from this, because

1. A lot of the money was spend at american companies
2. The USA got a prosperous Europe to trade with

Franki /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Andy

04-08-2003, 02:38 AM

You are comparing urine to uran, that\'s what I call distorted perspectives.

Why did you bring up the Marshall Plan in this context? The \"European Recovery Program\" aimed at, increasing production facilitating European economic integration and cooperation ,controlling inflation and expanding European foreign trade. This wasn\'t pure charity of cause. But it was a good deal for both sides and the war prior to the Marshall Plan was really needed. Hitler attacked many countries with made up reasons while people have been suffering in the own country. This reminds me of something ...

quote:
How much did we make on the Marshall plan?

How much did you ? What have you done on the Marshall plan that you are able to refer to it as \"we\".

Globalism is nothing you can cram up your ass like your favorite toy. Would that alter it\'s value for you ? We just have to learn quick to solve our problems without fighting. We have no choice because we\'ll blow ourselves from the surface of the earth otherwise.

*sigh* .. and your first post sounded so promising. I respect your opinion, but this topic is just not funny. People are actually suffering and you are laughing, so you think this is the right way to handle things ? Have you laughed on 9/11 ? No ? Why not ? Because it was a building in your contry ? Only a cerebral lightweight is able to laugh at anything in this context.

Lucky

04-08-2003, 07:52 AM

Common sense tells me that it is diametrically impossible to gain peace through war...no matter how grand the goal.

EXIT63

04-08-2003, 07:58 AM

Lucky says

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Common sense tells me that it is diametrically impossible to gain peace through war...no matter how grand the goal.

<hr /></blockquote>

You are mistaken. It\'s the only way.

MadDoctor

04-08-2003, 10:47 AM

As you\'ll recall, CNN was kicked out of Baghdad a couple of days after the war started. This was because a CNN journalist received information that the Al Rasheed Hotel (where all the journalists were staying) was to be targeted by the US, and decided to move to the Palestine Hotel for safety, encouraging others to do the same. All of the journalists did move, but this upset the Iraqi press handlers, who asked CNN to get out.

In the last day, US jets have bombed the facilities of Abu Dhabi TV and launched missiles against the Al Jazeera offices in Baghdad, killing a journalist and injuring a cameraman. Thay also shelled the Palestine Hotel, killing at least one Reuters reporter and injuring several others. Earlier they bombed the Sheraton in Basra, where Al Jazeera were the only tenants. Draw your own conclusions.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/08/otsc.irq.brahimi/ (\"http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/08/otsc.irq.brahimi/\")

Lucky

04-08-2003, 11:28 AM

Exit,
I honestly wish I could believe that. It would be so much easier.

Whitehall

04-08-2003, 11:31 AM

Yup, Baghdad is a mightly dangerous place these days. The US reports that our troops were taking fire from one hotel and shot back. In another one, Iraqi officials were holding meetings inside.

Seems the Saddam regime has added hotels with foreign journalists as their latest cover - used to be just hospitals and schools and mosques. I don\'t think hotels are covered under the Geneva Conventions.

Still, condolences to the non-combatants are in order.

EXIT63

04-08-2003, 01:01 PM

Lucky says
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Exit,
I honestly wish I could believe that. It would be so much easier

<hr /></blockquote>

Actually, it\'s not easier. It\'s much harder.

It\'s easier to talk about it for ten years and take no real action. It\'s harder to have the guts to actually do something. It\'s hard to go against world opinion. It\'s hard to proceed when your own countrymen are against you. Look at Tony Blair. Do you think it\'s easy on him. Believe me it\'s not. And when the President sends troops into battle. It is ABSOLUTELY the HARDEST thing he will EVER do.
Think about it. He doesn\'t want 19 year old kids to come home wearing a toe tag. Those kids are our most precious asset. Unlike those morons in Oakland.

Anyway, you can talk about it until your blue in the face, (and we did). The FACT is is that Saddam HAS been in violation of UN sanctions for years. Nobody wanted to do anything about it. It takes real leadership to do something about it and no it\'s not easy.

The War on Terror began when we were attacked on September 11th. And it will continue for several more years. It will be fought on many different fronts and in many different ways. Some militarily, some not. (The less militarily the better). Whether or not there is a direct connection between 911 and Iraq is irrelevant. The fact is that Saddam does support terrorism and he is a threat to the region and the world. Is he the only threat? No. By removing him we are doing the region and the world a favor. The UN is not going to do it. France, Germany, etal came right out and said that they would not support us. They just wanted to talk about it for 5 more years. I would prefer if we spent those 5 years cleaning up the rest of the terrorists.

As much as we would like to think that we are above violence, we\'re not. The truth is the world is governed by the aggressive use of force. And actions speak louder than words.

And for those who don\'t want to take action. I would ask you to remember what happened when we were attacked on September 11th. 3000 Americans died that day. And what was their crime?

They got out of bed in the morning and they went to work!

MadDoctor

04-08-2003, 01:31 PM

In Afghanistan:

“Al-Jazeera’s office is in the heart of Kabul. The building is the only one to have been hit so it looks like it was deliberate.”
-- Muftah Al Suwaidan, Al-Jazeera London bureau chief

Commenting after the Kabul bombing, Nik Gowring (BBC) said British Special Forces personnel had contacted him and stated that \"...journalists are legitimate targets where they are inconvenient.\" Gowring added \"It seems to me that a very clear message needs to go out that this must not be allowed to continue.\"

\"I still believe the decision to exclude our office from the coverage was taken weeks before the bombing.\"
-- Ibraham Hilal, Al-Jazeera chief editor

April 2, Basra:

\"The shelling of the Basra Sheraton mirrors a similar incident during the Afghan war, when al-Jazeera accused the US military of deliberately targeting its Kabul office, despite having told the Americans where its reporters were based.

In November 2001 al-Jazeera\'s base in the Afghan capital was destroyed by a US bomb that also damaged the nearby BBC office.

At the time the Pentagon denied it had deliberately targeted al-Jazeera, but said it could not explain why the Kabul office was hit.\"
( http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0 (\"http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0\"),7493,928144,00.html )

The Al-Jazeera building hit with missiles today was in a densely-populated residential neighborhood far from any combat. The military now says that the attack was accidental, a mistake. No explanation has been given for the bombing of Al-Jazeera in Basra, for the attack on Abu Dhabi TV today, or the bombing of the Journalist\'s Union building. That\'s why the International Federation of Journalists are noting that \"It is impossible not to detect a sinister pattern.\"
( http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0 (\"http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0\"),7493,932458,00.html )

Yeah, it\'s very dangerous in Baghdad if you\'re an independent journalist.

Lucky

04-08-2003, 01:49 PM

I do choose to believe that civilized people SHOULD be *above violence*. It\'s horrible that I feel ashamed to believe this war is not necessary and will not affect terrorism.

Andy

04-08-2003, 02:16 PM

I fear it will affect terrorism, but not in the way it\'s meant to.

Lucky

04-08-2003, 04:26 PM

Andy,
Exactly.

belgareth

04-08-2003, 04:28 PM

I have the same fear. Most extremists will regard our attack on Iraq as an affront and try to get even.

Whitehall

04-08-2003, 06:10 PM

To quote Osama bin Laden:

\"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse.\"

Now, who\'s the Clydesdale and who\'s the Shetland pony?

**DONOTDELETE**

04-08-2003, 06:11 PM

Whose dick\'s bigger, that\'s what I want to know.

Gerund

04-08-2003, 08:06 PM

*******************
Belgareth:

You are making a blanket statement that has no meaning.
*******************

Duh! I was making a blanket statement contradicting your blanket statement. I thought that was obvious, and that perhaps you\'d see the irony. I can see now that I was mistaken.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Or something like that.

Gerund

04-08-2003, 08:09 PM

*********
MadDoctor:

Three years ago, the Pentagon said that it had somehow misplaced 1,300 billion dollars.
*********

Wow. How much is the total military budget?

MadDoctor

04-08-2003, 10:44 PM

> I have the same fear. Most extremists will regard our attack on Iraq as an affront and try to get even.

An enlightening practice is to try out a little foreign journalism and see how people on the other side of the world are seeing things. One of the best Internet sites (in English) for the purpose is http://www.arabnews.com (\"http://www.arabnews.com\") in the land of our ally (or lapdog, from the bin Laden perspective) Saudi Arabia. These folks have been watching news uncensored by Army media police, and they are outraged in the extreme. Terms like \"genocide\" and \"crime against humanity\" keep cropping up, along with articles on, for example, the world\'s top Sunni cleric declaring that suicide attacks against the US/UK forces are allowed under Islamic law. We turn on the TV and see a military spokesperson saying how the last attempt to bomb Saddam Hussein had been \"very, very effective.\" They turn it on, hear that British intelligence is saying that Saddam is still alive, and watch this scene (as reported by the Washington Post) as it happens:
\"Some neighbors gazed at the crater. Others helped civilian workers recover the bodies. At one point, a man called out, \'They found something! They found something!\' Neighbors ran to help. In the rubble was the mauled torso of 20-year-old Lava Jamal. Moments later, a few feet away, they found what was left of her head, her brown hair matted with blood.

They put both in white blankets trimmed with blue and left them against a nearby wall, where flies soon gathered. Sitting in a chair down the road, her mother cried uncontrollably into her hands, and then vomited.

Less than an hour later, another scene unfolded. This time, there were no shouts. Atef Yusuf had found his nephew, 6-year-old Raad Hatem. He lifted the boy\'s body, coated in a gray dust except for the gaping wound on the back of his head. For a few minutes, he swayed with the body, back and forth, wailing. Then he stumbled to another blanket and wrapped it around the boy\'s body.

\'Is he a military leader?\' he asked. \'Are all these people military leaders?\'

His eyes red, he went back to work. Still underneath the rubble were his six other nieces and nephews, he said.\"

Coverage of US troops detaining al-Jazeera staff and firing on a car with al-Jazeera markings (this before the missile attack on their Baghdad building):
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24917 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24917\")

Troops threatening Kuwaiti TV reporters covering civilian deaths in southern Iraq, confiscating their tapes:
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24955 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24955\")

\"War Against Iraqi People\" http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24875 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24875\")

Various PNAC members in the administration calling for change of government in Syria even as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is saying that \"there is no evidence\" that Iraq transferred any WMD to Syria or any other country:
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24933 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24933\")

Indonesian president condemns the US as living by \"the law of the jungle\":
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24888 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24888\")

Indian parliament officially deplores US war: http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24969 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24969\")

Iraqi opposition wrest control of a town from Hussein loyalists, but are told by CIA to vacate under threat of bombing:
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24944 (\"http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24944\")

If you look elsewhere, say India:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?artid=42801038 (\"http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?artid=42801038\")

Pakistan:
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=21440&PHPSESSID=9816e951eb07cf317571b 00e5c1da5c9 (\"http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=21440&PHPSESSID=9816e951eb07cf317571b 00e5c1da5c9\")

South Africa:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=79&art_id=vn20030402055637437C6 41977&set_id=1 (\"http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=79&art_id=vn20030402055637437C6 41977&set_id=1\")

All of these countries are our friends, or at least they were. So much of the world is turning against us... how can this be good?

\"Razek al-Kazem al-Khafaj showed an AFP photographer the coffins he said held the bodies of his wife, his six children, his father, mother and three brothers and their wives. \'Which one of them should I cry on?\' Khafaj said, before throwing sand in his face \'so I don\'t have to see\' the remains of his 15 relatives before him.\"

How many suicide bombers are we making?