PDA

View Full Version : Surely it wasn't just about oil?


solotk
10th May 2003, 23:14
UN draft resolution: Full text

Full text of draft resolution the United States plans to introduce to the United Nations Security Council on Friday, co-signed by Britain and Spain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3012847.stm

12. Notes the establishment of an Iraqi Assistance Fund, with an international advisory board including duly qualified representatives of the secretary-general, the International Monetary Fund, appropriate regional institution(s) and the World Bank, to be held by the Central Bank of Iraq, and to be audited by independent public accountants chosen by the international advisory board;

13. Decides further that the funds in the Iraqi Assistance Fund shall be disbursed at the direction of the authority, in consultation with the Iraqi interim authority, for the purposes set out in paragraph 14 below;

14. Underlines that the Iraqi Assistance Fund should be used to meet the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people, for the economic reconstruction and repair of Iraq's infrastructure, for the continued disarmament of Iraq, and for the costs of indigenous civilian administration, and for other purposes benefiting the people of Iraq;

15. Decides that the Iraqi Assistance Fund shall enjoy the privileges and immunities of the United Nations;



Now, which nation will get the most IMMEDIATE assistance I wonder
:mad:

Flying Boat
11th May 2003, 07:13
It was about oil but it was also about a power crazed megalomaniac, a religeous fanatic, a people that were brainwashed to follow their leader without question daily, and a man who needed to try to settle a score for his father, for once trying to be better than him.

Yep, our transatlantic cousins & their leader.

I am not a pure anti American nutter because I believe that if they had Bill Clinton as their President, we, the world, would not have been subject to such crass ignorance & stupidity.

Not forgetting our present UK leader is a complete idiot (unless the US is guided by him & Israel is made to pay for their crimes against humanity) and a lapdog for his US zealot master.
(I am not a Muslim)

I would be willing to change my jaundiced view if no American companies were awarded lucrative, high profit contracts, especially with no awards going to the companies linked to the top 200 most powerful American politicians.

Go on the US administration, give the world a pleasant shock and act with, non-coreographed non-rehearsed, decency & morals.
Free Iraq and allow it to be rebuilt at the US cost.

By the way, I also believe that the UK & Spanish companies should not profit from this conflict.

:sad:

Kwasi_Mensa
11th May 2003, 07:20
US will be a full time OPEC member if the resolution will be accepted....

CAT1
12th May 2003, 00:21
.....and now Iraqi oil is traded in dollars rather then Euros.......any coincidence that all the "axis of evil" countries trade oil in Euros? Who's next?

tony draper
12th May 2003, 01:08
Game Set and Match. :ok:

solotk
12th May 2003, 01:38
When are the Americans going to hold their hands up and say "Ok, you're right, we've screwed the pooch so far, now tell us what you want, and we'll get it done"

Lifting sanctions is all very well, but that would mean declaring no threat from WMD's wouldn't it? Oooops they can't do that can they, that's why we went to war in the first place wasn't it?

Now we see an Ayatollah slipping in the back way, with the same ideas as Khoemeni, even though he says he hasn't. Yep, and I remember 1979 too, and another religious man saying all he wanted to do , was to reclaim Iran for iranians, and life would continue as before..

They've screwed it up, and they won't admit it. I thnk we're heading for open revolt. I said this earlier, The parallels with Yugoslavia and Tito are there, the guy in charge goes, and suddenly , you relaise he was sitting on Pandoras box all the time.

Now [the Americans and British] are claiming they will stop the sanctions, in order to get more wealth from Iraq than before," says driver Karim Taher. "We will be robbed if the sanctions stop. We don't want any barrel of oil to go out of Iraq without the observation of the United Nations."

Now that's the view of a Guy whose just spent 5 hours queuing for 3 gallons of Petrol, wonder what the rest of the country feels.

Before the usual suspects bang on just remember one thing. Any country is only 3 square meals from open revolt, our own petrol strike proved that. Now imagine feeling the same way with the temperature at 30 degrees in the shade, and an AK available?

Idunno
12th May 2003, 11:06
Yes indeedy, the Ayatollah has arrived, just as Jay Garner gets the push. Now the word is that Washington thinks they've been 'too lenient' and 'not firm enough' with troublesome elements (i.e. the Shia population of Iraq).
Yeah guys, lets get heavy handed. Maybe Saddam had it right all along, eh?

Paterbrat
12th May 2003, 17:14
Good heavens why just pick on stealing Iraqi Oil. Surely we can add re-election for Dubya, global domination, US Imperialism, big business, and expanding the need for a bigger military as well. I mean they all have to be logical progression don't they?

Regretfully freedom is borderline anarchy, and it depends quite a lot on most of us voluntarily keeping to the rules. This implies a disciplined and motivated society which at the moment patently does not exist in Iraq. Given time and helpful guidance they may well be able to achieve that state.

Sadly the critics want results yesterday. The peanut gallery is impatient petulant and in the main dissapointed that they were overridden, they will heckle and jeer and demand the impossible, and of course are 'free' to do so.

They remind one of motorists who assist the expeditious flow of traffic by the unstinting use of their horn; annoying, zero assistance and a massive pain in the rear.

Kwasi_Mensa
12th May 2003, 19:57
The US wants the UN to lift the sanctions, yet forbid the UN to help to rebuild Iraq or bring in the weapon inspectors again, making the task much easier and faster. It threatens within four months to abolish the system of subsidised food rations on which 60% of Iraqis depended before the war, and which they need even more now that the economy has collapsed. Not difficult to find the real agenda here, it awards the US almost total control over Iraq's oil revenues, which will be necessary after it leaves Saudi Arabia.

The dismissal of 2 of the top managers (Garner, Bodine) already indicates the chaos and the lack of proper preparation of the nation building...

Since the upcoming departure of the main WMD hunting force (75th Exploitation Task Force) we may assume that the hunt for WMD's is getting more doubtful? "We came to bear country, we came loaded for bear, and we found out the bear wasn't there." They might ask who looted the nuclear plants on which US troops did brake the (UN) seals. It might be in the possession of terrorists at this very moment...

Mr Brat I think it's not only the critics, but also the Iraqis themselves and Dubya himself who wants improvements fast.

Chaffers
12th May 2003, 20:52
Considering the predictions from our esteemed left wing conspiracists I reckon the yanks are doing rather well.

As I recall the casualties were going to run to half a million, Saudi, Iran and Syria were to have been invaded by now, London was due to be a smoking crater due to revenge attacks and Haliburton's board elected (by themselves) as the new world government. Israel was going to be kicked out of the Eurovision song contest for upsetting lefties all over the world, Bush outed as an alien with mind controlling powers (how else could a brother socialist like Blair be so misguided?), Cheney caught in a homosexual relationship with Galloway (why else would he be framed?), Saddam worshipped by every johnny foreigner arab as a martyr and Clinton re-elected after the French invade the US to restore world peace and culinary correctness.

solotk
12th May 2003, 22:27
:confused:

Not many if any left-wingers here. Plenty of Centre or centre right contributors though

Oh I'm sorry, it was humour :bored:

G.Khan
12th May 2003, 22:48
" or bring in the weapon inspectors again, making the task much easier and faster."

Don't think so, 'twas these same inspectors who wanted months, if not years more time to complete the job. Inspectors, I might add, that had first to be approved by Saddam Hussein, he refused to approve many of those originally proposed and only accepted the ones he agreed to!

Chaffers
12th May 2003, 22:49
We're talkng about politics, not football Tony. ;)

Kwasi_Mensa
12th May 2003, 23:46
Everything in perspective Mr.Kahn. If I remember well Blix was talking about some 2-3 months, taking into consideration that Saddam was still in power. The coalition is now in Iraq for 2 months with considerably more men power, with the last 5/6 weeks no restrictions at all!

The fact that the coalition specialists are now leaving the country do must have some meaning to you? Or are they going on holiday?

Furthermore I was mainly referring to UN human aid experience which is now desperately needed in Iraq.

Danny
13th May 2003, 02:05
One possible scenario is that they were moved before the conflict began. Cross posted from a simialr thread on the Mil Forum at: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87209
Some intelligence sources believe that Syria disposed of Saddam Hussein's WMD by moving them into eastern Lebanon for burial in the Beqaa Valley. It is possible that Iraq's biological weapons are there too. It's alleged they were interred deep under the heroin poppy and cotton fields in two of the most fertile regions of Lebanon: the valley stretching between Jabal Akroum, the town of al Qbayyat and the Syrian border, and the land lying between the towns of Al Hirmil and al Labwah between the Orontes River and the Syrian frontier.

The relocation of Iraq's WMD systems is believed to have taken place between January 10 and March 10 and was completed just 10 days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq. The banned arsenal, hauled in giant tankers from Iraq to Syria and from there to the Bekaa Valley under Syrian special forces and military intelligence escort, was discharged into pits 6-8 meters across and 25-35 meters deep dug by Syrian army engineers. They were sealed and planted over with new seedlings.

US secretary of state Colin Powell made several demands including one for a map with the coordinates of the pits holding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction when he visited Damascus on May 3rd. Washington is now waiting for President Bashar Assad to respond to the ultimatum. He was put on notice to report on the arsenal's whereabouts in Lebanon after he removed this hot potato from Syria.

The Syrians made a placatory gesture to Washington by speeding and upgrading the handover of Iraqi fugitives from the Saddam regime sheltering in Syria. On April 28th, Dr Rihab Taha, a microbiologist known as Dr Germ, was turned over to the Americans in Iraq. She had directed Iraq's biological weapons program. Also turned over was Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash, who headed Iraq's anthrax project. The surrender 24 hours later of Taha's husband, General Amir Muhammed Rasheed, director of Iraq's missile development program and best known by his nickname "The Missile Man", was announced.

There will no doubt be more news forthcoming over the next few weeks as the diplomatic manouvering settles down in light of the changing dynamics of the region. The Americans are sitting tight on valuable Iraq intelligence archives discovered at the intelligence headquarters in Baghdad and at various sub-departments. The only data released so far are a few leaks to the British media calculated to help Tony Blair stand up to anti-war campaigners (Galloway?) at home and around Europe.

America has distributed to its war allies some materials relevant to their national security but no decision has been taken as to documents attesting to the clandestine ties of collaboration maintained with the Saddam regime by a whole range of foreign government and public office-holders, academics, media figures, financiers and industrialists the world over, many deeply involved in sanctions-busting. By and large, Washington is not inclined to bare these secrets or make use of them at the moment, except in some notable cases. One is French president Jacques Chirac. Another is the head of the International Atomic Energy Commission in Vienna, Dr Mohammed ElBaradai, who led the nuclear weapons inspection in Iraq before the war.

BahrainLad
13th May 2003, 03:27
Sadly the critics want results yesterday. The peanut gallery is impatient petulant and in the main dissapointed that they were overridden, they will heckle and jeer and demand the impossible, and of course are 'free' to do so.

In any other conflict I'd agree with Paterbrat. However, strong evidence suggests that the US thought they could simply waltz into Baghdad, remove Saddam and leave. How else do you explain the US Army's woeful unpreparedness for peace-keeping activities, rather than war-fighting?

In any case, the US has now realised that they need to be in Iraq for the long term: with the introduction of military bases, a direct contravention of their position before the war started. At that point, they mentioned that Iraq could rebuild itself in the same way as Germany and Japan had done: but neglected to comment on the sizeable US military presence in each country.....58 years after the end of the war.

We don't doubt that the US are able to rebuild Iraq....but we doubt their passion for a lengthly process, in the face of rising anti-Americanism amongst the 'happy to be liberated' Iraqi people and mounting costs. The recent cock-up over Jay Garner and Barbara Bodine (who was fired over a telephone that had been installed 12 hours previously) do not bolster confidence. The Americans are wasting time that they do not have: solotk's comments on being 3 square meals away from revolt are perfectly correct.

Paterbrat
13th May 2003, 06:30
BahrainLad I would agree that the US was unprepared...for the swiftness of the collapse!

The fact that the eyes of the world are on them can in no way have escaped their attention, I would ascribe the swift and public departure of Jay Garner to that fact. The US administration does want results and is not prepared to wait too long for them.

Tony's comments demonstrate in fact exactly what the gallery want, immediate results, I would dispute however the three square meals away from revolt, people revolt with food on the table. The idea that the crowds who flock to the world monetry fund meetings to cause mayhem, or attend some of the big football matches, are starving, is frankly laughable. The mobs who tore up the centre of London over the poll tax were hardly your poor and oppressed. They had not been slaughtered imprisoned or killed for trivial or whimsical reasons, but still managed to trash quite a large area. There have been larger civil disturbences still over a hocky game in Canada.

Danny's post is extremely interesting, the likelehood of much detailed information has always been on the cards, the Iraqi apparatus much like the East Germans and other totalitarian states kept huge records. There has to be sizeable number of individuals and organisations who were sanctions busting and the revelations would indeed be fascinating, unfortunately we may not get to hear all of them, just yet.

As Chaffers pointed out the Appocalyptian predictions that were pouring out from the leftwing antiwar movement have singularly failed to materialise. It must have been quite dissapointing for them.

Hoping
13th May 2003, 06:53
Danny,

"If you think you can get away with cutting and pasting vast swathes of text, or linking to the BBC or CNN websites to make your point, think again. We'll bin it. Leave yesterdays Daily Mail or New York Times leader where it is, and give us your views."

Do you want this forum to turn into another Jet Blast or shall we obey the rules of this forum?

Idunno
13th May 2003, 07:12
BahrainLad I would agree that the US was unprepared...for the swiftness of the collapse!

Oh I see, a few months more of bombing might have helped in the re-building efforts.
Eh?:bored:

Sadly the critics want results yesterday. The peanut gallery is impatient petulant and in the main dissapointed that they were overridden, they will heckle and jeer and demand the impossible, and of course are 'free' to do so.

Paterbrat, I suggest to you that when you see or hear anything you don't like you can just stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, put your brain in neutral and sing 'Lalala...not listening...lalala...'

As Chaffers pointed out the Appocalyptian (?) predictions that were pouring out from the leftwing antiwar movement have singularly failed to materialise. It must have been quite dissapointing for them.

To quote Winston:
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

slim_slag
13th May 2003, 12:15
Oh Great,

Now they are saying the WMD were stashed in the Beqaa valley by the Syrians. Does this sound like we are being prepared for another one of these pre-emptive attacks on Syria and Lebanon?

Why not accept the possible scenario that they didn't actually exist? I have no idea whether they existed or not, but we know the US/UK governments have lied consistently in the run up to Gulf War 2 (e.g. Iraq looking for uranium in Africa). Given the fact that the US/UK governments have little credibility in this matter (or many more matters :)), I think we have to assume Iraq destroyed them like they say they did. Time will tell of course, but we appear to be heading for a WMD goose chase, taking out a bunch of sovereign nations on the way.

Kwasi_Mensa
13th May 2003, 19:21
BahrainLad I would agree that the US was unprepared...for the swiftness of the collapse!According Rummy the Great the war lasted only 2 days shorter then expected. So, at least to the Pentagon, it wasn't unexpected.
As Chaffers pointed out the Appocalyptian predictions that were pouring out from the leftwing antiwar movement have singularly failed to materialise. It must have been quite dissapointing for them.I'm afraid my prediction about the chaos and clueless performance of the US after the war (except for the oil business of course) and the continuing Al Qaeda activity (recent Riyadh bombing) is coming true. The promis that after the removal of Saddam's regime the world would be safer is unfortunately not true. Both Bin Laden and Saddam are still at large.

I'm sure the contents of 3 giant tankers being burried on the Beqaa Valley would have been noticed by spy satellites who can distinguish the brand on a package of cigarettes from 600 miles above?

I remember this story has been told by Sharon some months ago already, so obviously it's coming from the Mossad. Quite convenient when the US will go there and collect it. If there's an ultimatum to Syria, I'm sure the world would have known about it? Especially to prove the point for the war?

Paterbrat
14th May 2003, 03:07
Now how did it go... Lalalalalala...not listening Lalalala.
Hmm nope, sorry Idunno, but it doesn't seem to be working.
The fingers in the ears didn't do much either by the way. Now if it was helpful suggestions that you wanted, try taking a running jump off a high place, without a parachute or bungie cord, brings a real flush of excitement to the cheeks. Oh and I would not presume to advise the placement of your digits. Now Winston, great chap, good quotation, indeed things have been proceeding for a very long time and will continue to do so, but your point being?

Good points all Kwasi, regretfully the world never has and never will be a safe place. Anybody promising it is as foolish as those who believe that. I would venture though that both the gentlemen mentioned are possibly in a less favourable position to persue their avowed intentions while actively being hunted, that does tend to cramp ones style a tad, cuts down on ones freedom of action. But then again you may not agree with that assesement either, you rarely do. Doom and gloom, gloom and doom, but then there is plenty of that to be had anywhere, any day, any place and it's free. Not much fun and hardly inspiring, but plenty of it if one wants.
I certainly agree that any burrial may well have been seen, then again it may not, I have to believe there are not unlimited satellites or coverage. Nor do secrets come out immediately, we discover facts sometimes years after events have happened.
By the way what did happen to the 'three tankers'? Other than being shipped to the Beqaa Valley that is since you brought it up.
Oh heavens, the beeping, must move on.

Kwasi_Mensa
14th May 2003, 19:07
I'm glad you are in good health Herr Brat. Yet the centre of terrorist action seems to shift to SA. Unfortunately the world is less safe then before the Iraq war. The world seems to slide into an Israel/Palestina-like vicious circle of an eye for an eye, instead of tackling the real problems.

The pictures of pulling down Saddams statue are already faded away for the Iraqis, in the US the rage of victory still works as a giant memory blocker which prevents to focus on the real problems: capturing BL and Saddam, finding the Anthrax killer, protecting the US for another 9/11 kind of attack (the 9/11 investigation is held secret and failures to prevent it cannot be discussed), the ever inflating deficit, collapsing economy, jobs are being lost at a rate not seen in a half-century, aviation industry in coma. Bush' administration seems to be interested in only 2 things, make war and cut taxes.

BahrainLad
14th May 2003, 19:23
Humphreys was giving Jack Straw a good thrashing this morning on Today. Wouldn't have liked to have been Straw: he's on a very sticky wicket for refusing to condemn torture in Saudi Arabia.

But there was a small interchange about the still-elusive WMDs that were supposed to be on 45 minutes notice to fire. Straw said words to the effect that they didn't need to be found in order for the war to be justified. Presumably, it therefore boils down to how well you trust the Government. Is their assurance that they exist, in spite of all evidence on the ground, enough to give them the authority to wage war?

As far as I see it; the conflict over WMDs is a smokescreen. The real purpose is enhancing the US presence in a region that is responsible for countless terrorist attacks both in the region and abroad for the last 50 years.

In my eyes it's a very noble cause. Why can't the US admit to it?

Kwasi_Mensa
14th May 2003, 23:17
Bahrainlad, can I ask you: is the US in the ME region for the attacks or is it for the oil? And, did the attacks begin before or after the US/Israelian presence in the ME? If I remember well, the whole world didn't gave a sh!t for this huge sand pit inhabited by nomads and camels, until the first oil well was struck.

Chaffers
14th May 2003, 23:40
Can you name me a time when the Israelian's (sic) were not in the middle east? :confused:

Kwasi_Mensa
14th May 2003, 23:44
Chaffers, read BL's message and you'll see the answer :rolleyes:

Chaffers
15th May 2003, 00:12
So you meant Israeli rather than Israelite then? Either way Israelian is a very poor attempt. Please be more specific in the future. :rolleyes:

I take it that you are blaming either Israel or the United States for all of the terrorist acts committed by Middle Eastern people and states over the last quarter of a century or so? Clearly then you feel these attacks are justified. Maybe you should have joined the Palestinians cheering and dancing in the streets after 911.

Send Clowns
15th May 2003, 01:01
Kwasi

How can it be safer to leave in place a government which boasts of giving financial support to terrorists and allowed terrorists safe haven in its territory? The world is now a safer place in the long term. It will be even safer now one of the main funding sources for Palestinian terrorism has been removed, and so progress can be made in that area. Anyone notice how as soon as the Ba'ath party fell Israel announced a desire for a Palestinian state to be set up and recognised?

Kwasi_Mensa
15th May 2003, 01:13
Many of you just won't understand the law of action creates reaction. Chicken and the egg, cause and consequence, I smack your face and you smack mine. History learns that we never learn from history. You can't cure the illness unless you attack the cause.

SC, I simply disagree that the world is a safer place on the long term. how long is this term? We're looking here at 50 years already. And where did Israel announced a genuine desire for a Palestine State?

Send Clowns
15th May 2003, 01:46
Well, it was in all the major news sources in the UK a couple of days after Baghdad fell.

So you recommend appeasement? Like the appeasement we have been going through for ohhh ... those 50 years you mention? The helping of the peoples in whos name attacks are now perpetrated? The fact that despite the fact that the US was the largest supporter of independence in Afghanistan, and teh largest aid donor to that country terrorists allied closely with the Afghan regime attacked the WTC and Pentagon? That law of action and reaction? If we are nice to them they attack us, so let's ... be nice to them?

The only way terrorists have been prevented from operating in the past is by removing their support structure. That is what the US and other countries are doing.

We are attacking the cause. The cause is jumped up dictators and self-important islamic clerics who wish to gain politically. They do so by blaming anything that goes wrong on the US and Israeel, and by claiming that they are leading their followers through Islam.

solotk
15th May 2003, 02:45
Anyone notice how as soon as the Ba'ath party fell Israel announced a desire for a Palestinian state to be set up and recognised?

Yes I did , and did you notice how quickly Gaza was closed again after Colin left? :p

The fact that despite the fact that the US was the largest supporter of independence in Afghanistan, and teh largest aid donor to that country terrorists allied closely with the Afghan regime attacked the WTC and Pentagon?

Were they ? I thought they just wanted the Russians out , and latterly, to ram a bloody great pipline through the place. Largest aid donor?I know they are the largest building contractors, is that the same? In what respect are they the largest donors SC, Food, Military prescence, communications, medicine, what?

They changed the regime,installed a man seen by the Afghans as a puppet , they still don't control a lot of Afghanistan, Heroin is flourishing and it's fallen way down the agenda, as well as cutting the payments to the warlords, all guaranteed to keep the locals happy . As for terrorists allied closely to that regime, yes, and allied closely to the Saudi and Pakistani regimes as well.

There's a bloody great smoking hole in Riyadh right now, and people dead, because of the growing resentment of the locals to what they think is "Undue Christian interference and influence in our affairs"

The Americans have already hung a tag of "Al-Quaeda" on the terrorists, without investigation or research or even proof. You want to know why? Because that is what the Fox news public understand. You can't possibly tell them ...."Errrr we don't know who it is, we just have to assume a sizeable chunk of Saud doesn't like White Christians"

Just like the bomb in Bali, Al-Quaeda? My buttocks, try corrupt murdering b*stard Indo Armed Forces, who've been threatening the owner for months because he refused to pay "Protection" on his clubs, and on his airline. The place was blown up, and killed a lot of people, using MILITARY C4. Now where do you think that came from?


The only way terrorists have been prevented from operating in the past is by removing their support structure. That is what the US and other countries are doing.

Terrorists can be stopped by removing their support structure, and when was the last time that was absolutely true? Let me see, that would have been the Mau-Mau uprising.The ONLY way Terrorism is stopped, by killing the bastard terrorists, AND destroying their support structures. Kill them, keep killing them, until in the end, they realise they are never ever going to win. Cut off their money and equipment supplies, and stop being friends with their bloody financiers, who view you with contempt anyway.

The US and other countries, let's get this straight the US and Britain are NOT fighting a war on terrorism. Have you seen the latest news from Ireland? If anything, Blair is REWARDING terrorists, so is Bush, with his conciliatory statements to murderers and scum. "Oh you're in government now, we'll forget about the kneecappings, shootings and bombings, and the fact you're an unprosecuted gang of murderers.Statute of limitations? BAH!

I'll know that for a fact it's all garbage, when an Iraqi reconstruction contract gets awarded to a Bin Laden construction company.

How are they fighting a war on terrorism exactly, by invading Iraq? Amazing, so how come Hezbolla and "Al-Catchall" have RAMPED UP their operations recently? A last desperate throw of the dice, or are their real backers, the corrupt Kingdom of Hypocrisy pouring even more money at it? What we achieved by invading Iraq, was sending a clear message to the rest of the Middle East, especially the ones with fundamentalist nutters that they were next. So, they're exercising a first strike capability, just like we did.

We are attacking the cause. The cause is jumped up dictators and self-important islamic clerics who wish to gain politically

The cause is P*ss poor cold war foreign policy for years, and now we're reaping the benefits. Ayatollah Khomenei was a CiA/KGB agent, Osama was CIA, and now it looks like Saddam was suspect too.The Taliban were our mates during the Russian occupation, and controlled by Pakistan Military Int We supplied the WMD's to Iraq, they didn't just drop off the local date tree. Ernst Stavros Rumsfeld supplied light water nuclear reactors to North Korea, just to add to his WMD's to Iraq. We armed Saudi Arabia, and trained her Special Forces, no chance that these "Martyrs" (Pronounced: murdering scum) may have had significant military training, to explain the slick plan they utilised? Noooooooo we can never admit that, the Fox News public wouldn't know where to get their news from. The National Inquirer i guess. How many more regimes have we supported that torture and kill the IP? When we liberated Kuwait, the blood up the walls in one of the Kuwati police stations was blamed on the excesses of the Mabharrat, Bad bastards one and all. Except, when the analysis was made , it turned out the blood in that, and other locations pre-dated the invasion. Then of course, the stories come out about the disappearance of Palestinian "Guest" workers.

They're all at it SC, but as long as prople like you sit back, and are prepared to swallow all the junk they feed you at first glance,without any , or very little analysis , then they'll always be right won't they?

Paterbrat
15th May 2003, 05:55
I would have to assume that any source of information is tainted and presents 'the facts' in a way that most favours the views they hold. It has ever been thus and history is of course the collection of 'facts' from a particular viewpoint. Any information in this age of information overload has been 'spun' and the media industry churns out more and more of it everyday.
Being the curious creatures we are we devour great quantities and of course being opinionated we tend to clump towards that which conforms to our ideas. With the ammount being churned out there is little wonder that there is more than enough to furnish us all with something which validates our particular stand or opinion. Hence our present affiliations and causes which we valiantly defend and debate amongst ourselves. There are of course various events upong which the majority can agree, but human nature being what it is, one can almost garantee much that will be disputed.

I have regretfully come to the belief that strife and disagreement is almost a human condition which is a very gloomy assesment, but have been striving to think of some area of the world where they have had uniturrupted peace for any length of time. I tended to discount the N. Pole by reason of lack of population and concentration on survival in a hostile environment. Afghanistan for example has been in a perpetual state of warfare and turmoil, in fact I am not sure that they would know how to live without fighting one another.This part of the world has also seen trouble and strife since time began and I think that it will be a long time before it calms down, if ever.

G.Khan
15th May 2003, 10:26
"using MILITARY C4. Now where do you think that came from?"

According to The Australian newspaper the terrorist known as Amrozi is charged with providing a truckload of fertiliser, not C4.

But I don't doubt there has been collusion by the Indonesian military.