Hey, Belfast is better off under English rule. Those Orangemen are so full of it they wouldn't last a minute under a free and independent government.
M > -----Original Message----- > From: Heald, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 11:01 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: From the Washington Post: Halliburton's Deals > Greater Than Th ought > > > I don't have anything you don't man. I guess I just look at > this invasion differently than most. I think there were lots > of good reasons for going in there. > > What is my main reasoning, well I think Gee W's papa didn't > go far enough the first time through. > > I think that the oil that was locked in that country had a > lot to do with our invasion, but I don't really think that's > bad per say. Our industry and defense rely on oil. > > Training and supporting our enemies in most countries means > giving them some Aks and money. Now Libya, Syria and Iran > have gone much further, and at times should have been > attacked as far as I am concerned, but that was during the > Cold War and would have probably escalated quickly. Iraq had > camps with full size aircraft so g's could practice hijacks. > Not too friendly in my eyes. > > As for trying to kill him, well first time around we played > with the kid gloves. They could have killed him several > different times if they wanted to, but simply killing him > doesn't stop his kids and the rest of the Baathists from > carrying on his "good work" :) So it takes something more. > > Another point, not necessarily something nice to think about, > but something to consider. As east and west grow further > apart, it's not so bad that we gave the Arab street a black > eye. If you look at some of the mutual security pacts that > are proposed right now you have a very serious threat to our > security, but those pacts haven't really gotten much play > since we took down Saadam. > > While there is no direct proof of cooperation with Al Queda, > there are second and third level links through other > terrorist organizations, such as those involved in Israel. > The meeting between Iraqi intel and an Al Queda operative did > take place, and (was it the czechs?) still say they are sure > it took place. Now obviously Osama-mama and So-Damn Insane(sorry it's > Friday) would have had issues with each other. Osama is a > radical Muslim and the way that saadam lived would have been > repugnant to him, however the enemy of my enemy............., > or maybe better the evil you know than the one you don't. I > don't claim to know their motivations, but not all of Al > Queda is as dedicated to Islam as the big boys. Look at how > many of the hijackers spent their last hours, drinking and > getting laid :) > > Finally I have to say, I am a bit tired of hearing about > human rights, and freedom for the Iraqi people. There are > far more deserving places IMHO, if that what we are really > talking about (one island one republic one Ireland!!), or > places that have treated their citizens much worse (Cambodia, > Africa in general). We don't care about human rights really. > That's for the papers. > > I have to say man, this is not the company line, rather my > personal opinions. I strongly disagree with many things in > this administration. The invasion is not one of those > things. Now if you want to talk about how they have basically > destroyed privacy as we know it and the right to defend one's > person and property you'll get my full support. > > Those who know me here can tell you I am no one to just go > along. Anyway time for chow. > > Pieces dawg :) > > Tim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Marwan Saidi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 10:36 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: From the Washington Post: Halliburton's Deals > Greater Than Th ought > > > > 1. He supported our enemies with money and training. > > As have many other nations that we have NOT attacked. > Including some of our allies. > > > 2. He attempted to kill a former president > > How many times did we attempt to kill him? It's ok if we do > it but not if someone tries to return the favor? > > > 3. His troops routinely engaged our aircraft in the no fly zones. > > I will give you that one. However, how many aircraft and/or > aviators did we lose? > > I am not, by any means, a Saddam apologist. I just get upset > when people try to feed others the company line, which is utter BS. > > The administration attacked another sovereign nation on the > basis of flawed intelligence regarding WMD. They used fear of > these weapons to garner public support. They hinted at > culpability in the 9/11 attacks (which WERE a smack in our > face, and by the way, where is Osama anyway?). If they had > been a bit more honest about the whole thing, perhaps those > of us who use our right to question our government's actions > would not be so skeptical. > > All I am saying, Tim, is that you come across as a smart man. > You have experience in the military and work at the State > Department, so I will not profess to know more about what is > going on in the world than you. And I would never argue the > Constitution with you. However, your reasoning that "he > smacked us first" doesn't fly with me. > > If there is more evidence that he did do so, then the > government needs to release it. Don't give me any crap about > national security, just show us the evidence. Not the Colin > Powell - fuzzy satellite images - scratchy recording > evidence, but real, hard evidence, and I will quietly go > away. I just don't think that we have any. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
