View Poll Results: Do we support USA in Iraq or Sort out Mugabe in Zimbabwe
Yes support USA
15
11.72%
No Sort out Mugabe
113
88.28%
Voters: 128. This poll is closed
IRAQ or ZIMBABWE
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cheltenham, Gloucestershire
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Myrddin
If you are in the habit of giving your money to African charities then you're a silly boy. OK, it might make you personally feel better, but that's about it.
I have worked in Arica for a number of years and I will thoroughly back up the old saying that "giving aid is - poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries".
I have personally seen, out there on the front line of poverty, staggering amounts of corruption and fraud. Never again will I give money to any charity that sends money to Africa.
If you are in the habit of giving your money to African charities then you're a silly boy. OK, it might make you personally feel better, but that's about it.
I have worked in Arica for a number of years and I will thoroughly back up the old saying that "giving aid is - poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries".
I have personally seen, out there on the front line of poverty, staggering amounts of corruption and fraud. Never again will I give money to any charity that sends money to Africa.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sexwale hits out at African corruption
Quentin Wray
September 02 2002 at 08:03AM
Johannesburg - Mining boss, former Gauteng premier and struggle activist Tokyo Sexwale yesterday launched a stinging attack on corrupt African leaders, accusing them of running their countries' treasuries for their own account.
Speaking at the Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD), Sexwale said some of the continent's political bosses were running "kleptocracies" rife with nepotism and corruption.
The BASD is an official parallel event to the UN's World Summit on Sustainable Development.
Sexwale did not name any current politicians, but pointed out that former Zairean dictator Mobuto Sese Seko's net worth had been the same as his country's national debt.
""""""""""""""
"Sexwale did not name any current politicians, but pointed out that former Zairean dictator Mobuto Sese Seko's net worth had been the same as his country's national debt"
LET THAT SINK IN.
Quentin Wray
September 02 2002 at 08:03AM
Johannesburg - Mining boss, former Gauteng premier and struggle activist Tokyo Sexwale yesterday launched a stinging attack on corrupt African leaders, accusing them of running their countries' treasuries for their own account.
Speaking at the Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD), Sexwale said some of the continent's political bosses were running "kleptocracies" rife with nepotism and corruption.
The BASD is an official parallel event to the UN's World Summit on Sustainable Development.
Sexwale did not name any current politicians, but pointed out that former Zairean dictator Mobuto Sese Seko's net worth had been the same as his country's national debt.
""""""""""""""
"Sexwale did not name any current politicians, but pointed out that former Zairean dictator Mobuto Sese Seko's net worth had been the same as his country's national debt"
LET THAT SINK IN.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK Percy, you wouldn't give to any charity that sends aid to Africa, so do you support the cancellation of Third World debt instead, or are you happy just to see them starve?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I. M. Esperto
Indeed, black people are well represented in the 'revolving door' of the US poverty trap, as are Hispanics and whites. And they're all your fellow Americans, my friend.
One of the 'same folks' is also your Secretary of State (and probable future President).
Let's face it, just like Mugabe, you're a racist bigot, trying to hide behind a very thin veil of respectability.
Indeed, black people are well represented in the 'revolving door' of the US poverty trap, as are Hispanics and whites. And they're all your fellow Americans, my friend.
One of the 'same folks' is also your Secretary of State (and probable future President).
Let's face it, just like Mugabe, you're a racist bigot, trying to hide behind a very thin veil of respectability.
Last edited by Scud-U-Like; 3rd Sep 2002 at 00:00.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cheltenham, Gloucestershire
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackoniko,
OK. So we seem to be cancelling a lot of third world debt....and do you know what's going to happen now? All the countries that have had their debt cancelled are going to start campaigning for the west to give them more money..."not a gift you understand, just give us a loan. We have just had a change of government and we are now very responsible. We will pay it all back when we have sorted out our finances".
Every time we hand out the money the bloke in charge loads most of it into his Swiss bank account before he gets deposed in the next military coup.
Nowadays I have actually begun to think that our expectations of the Third World are too high. A Western civlisation is an extremely highly-tuned and complex machine. It's like giving your ten year old son the key to your Volvo. Should we be foisting our beliefs for the way to run a society on developing countries?
Discuss.
OK. So we seem to be cancelling a lot of third world debt....and do you know what's going to happen now? All the countries that have had their debt cancelled are going to start campaigning for the west to give them more money..."not a gift you understand, just give us a loan. We have just had a change of government and we are now very responsible. We will pay it all back when we have sorted out our finances".
Every time we hand out the money the bloke in charge loads most of it into his Swiss bank account before he gets deposed in the next military coup.
Nowadays I have actually begun to think that our expectations of the Third World are too high. A Western civlisation is an extremely highly-tuned and complex machine. It's like giving your ten year old son the key to your Volvo. Should we be foisting our beliefs for the way to run a society on developing countries?
Discuss.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting letter in the Zimbabwe Independent:
http://www.theindependent.co.zw/news...day30/472.html
http://www.theindependent.co.zw/news...day30/472.html
Percy,
Just so I'm clear, your answer is "Let them starve" then? No aid, no charity, no debt cancellation. I'm guessing you won't give up the subsidies on which your farmers rely (and which make it impossible for third World farmers) nor will you clean up your industrial act if it entails extra costs for your manufacturers or tax-payers.
Interesting yesterday at the Conference, I thought. All the Western/European concentration on the plight of the white farmers allowed Mugabe to present his policies as being Zimbabwean land for the Zimbabweans, and to present us as being Colonialists. And he got applause for it, and validation from other African leaders (notably Namibia's Sam Nujoma).
Had we spent more time and energy opposing what he was doing to Black Zimbabweans, maybe other Black leaders would have pointed out what sort of Black Zimbabweans are actually getting the re-allocated land - eg Mugabe's wife, chums and cronies.
Just so I'm clear, your answer is "Let them starve" then? No aid, no charity, no debt cancellation. I'm guessing you won't give up the subsidies on which your farmers rely (and which make it impossible for third World farmers) nor will you clean up your industrial act if it entails extra costs for your manufacturers or tax-payers.
Interesting yesterday at the Conference, I thought. All the Western/European concentration on the plight of the white farmers allowed Mugabe to present his policies as being Zimbabwean land for the Zimbabweans, and to present us as being Colonialists. And he got applause for it, and validation from other African leaders (notably Namibia's Sam Nujoma).
Had we spent more time and energy opposing what he was doing to Black Zimbabweans, maybe other Black leaders would have pointed out what sort of Black Zimbabweans are actually getting the re-allocated land - eg Mugabe's wife, chums and cronies.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good description of the problem appears here:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newsl...50305&set_id=1
Are the people the solution, or part of the problem?
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?newsl...50305&set_id=1
Are the people the solution, or part of the problem?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cheltenham, Gloucestershire
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonicko
You may also recall that when Iddi Amin was president of the Organisation of African Unity (true!) he also used to get applause from all the other African heads of state whenever he got up to speak.
During my time in Africa I discovered that the African 'mental mindset' is totally different to ours. They worship power and virility above all else, and by doing what he is doing Mugabe is exibiting both of those qualities (in an Africans eyes).
And no, I'm not against sending aid to Africa...as long as it's not my money.
I finally left Africa carrying with me a very personal gift. Hepatitis.
You may also recall that when Iddi Amin was president of the Organisation of African Unity (true!) he also used to get applause from all the other African heads of state whenever he got up to speak.
During my time in Africa I discovered that the African 'mental mindset' is totally different to ours. They worship power and virility above all else, and by doing what he is doing Mugabe is exibiting both of those qualities (in an Africans eyes).
And no, I'm not against sending aid to Africa...as long as it's not my money.
I finally left Africa carrying with me a very personal gift. Hepatitis.
Jackonicko
You clearly have no understanding of Africa at all. Nothing the West said or did would make any difference to what happend at the conference. The African nations are racist period, tough for a bleeding heart like yourself, but FACT.
People will starve to death with or without your help. What do you propose? Do we keep giving money until we too are in poverty? Whilst they have another five babies and destroy several more farms and then their leaders can retire to some mansion in Switzerland? Or maybe we could finance a few more luxury jets?
Until african countries show the will to live in harmony with us, why should we bother with them? We have given, now they need to show some initiative. You can bleat on about the past, but whilst you do that you are allowing Africa to continue on its course of self-destruction.
People will starve to death with or without your help. What do you propose? Do we keep giving money until we too are in poverty? Whilst they have another five babies and destroy several more farms and then their leaders can retire to some mansion in Switzerland? Or maybe we could finance a few more luxury jets?
Until african countries show the will to live in harmony with us, why should we bother with them? We have given, now they need to show some initiative. You can bleat on about the past, but whilst you do that you are allowing Africa to continue on its course of self-destruction.
Over 1000 posts and I bought this Personal Title to try and tell my mother the embarrassing news that I am a closet Jazz fan.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Manchester
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things are starting to look rather interesting for the first time in ages around the world. My first reaction to hearing about another attack on Iraq was astonishment. I couldn't see how either he UN or (at the very least) Saudi Arabia could be persuaded to back the US in a policy which appeared out of nowhere.
Sure 911 gave Bush a mandate to beat up on anyone remotely connected with terrorism (not to mention the Israeli's a weapons free roe) but no link to Hussain has been offered.
So where does Bush's mandate, or even reason come from? Such things have little or no hope of being passed in a UN resolution (laughably described on here as international law) at the best of times and without the slightest chance of foreign basing, overflight rights or even respectable deep water access anything other than a token raid looks unlikely. Surely they arn't thinking of landing in the gulf with only carrier borne air and long range assets?
The interesting thing though is that Bush appears to be totally committed to action now, Blair would not be posturing otherwise. Lets face it a few more tomahawks are not going to cut the mustard after all the rhetoric so basically something has to give, and I think Mandella hit the nail on the head. Is Bush prepared to destroy the UN in order to depose Hussain?
Getting back to the original poll it is a shame the option of both was not given as this would be my preffered option. The Zimbabwe case sells itself easily on many grounds. Preventing economic collapse with the associated human suffering (Sierra Leonne anyone?) would make some lovely headlines and protect not only our citizens residing in Zimbabwe but also our interests in the region.
It would also send a nice loud message to any other tinpot dictator who thinks he can order the rape and murder of Her Majesty's Subjects and rid the world of one of its longest surviving despots. Putting the place back together a la Smith could also be profitable (no exit strategy required ORAC
).
However if Bush does decide to go in we should back him to the hilt as well. I think the world could do with a healthy dose of realpolitik from the States.
Sure 911 gave Bush a mandate to beat up on anyone remotely connected with terrorism (not to mention the Israeli's a weapons free roe) but no link to Hussain has been offered.
So where does Bush's mandate, or even reason come from? Such things have little or no hope of being passed in a UN resolution (laughably described on here as international law) at the best of times and without the slightest chance of foreign basing, overflight rights or even respectable deep water access anything other than a token raid looks unlikely. Surely they arn't thinking of landing in the gulf with only carrier borne air and long range assets?
The interesting thing though is that Bush appears to be totally committed to action now, Blair would not be posturing otherwise. Lets face it a few more tomahawks are not going to cut the mustard after all the rhetoric so basically something has to give, and I think Mandella hit the nail on the head. Is Bush prepared to destroy the UN in order to depose Hussain?
Getting back to the original poll it is a shame the option of both was not given as this would be my preffered option. The Zimbabwe case sells itself easily on many grounds. Preventing economic collapse with the associated human suffering (Sierra Leonne anyone?) would make some lovely headlines and protect not only our citizens residing in Zimbabwe but also our interests in the region.
It would also send a nice loud message to any other tinpot dictator who thinks he can order the rape and murder of Her Majesty's Subjects and rid the world of one of its longest surviving despots. Putting the place back together a la Smith could also be profitable (no exit strategy required ORAC
).However if Bush does decide to go in we should back him to the hilt as well. I think the world could do with a healthy dose of realpolitik from the States.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Granted Chaffers there is a lacking of realpolitik from the major players these days. It makes me laugh though with the rhetoric floating aroung about Saddam having the capability to....and is in the process of aquiring WMDs!
Anyone remember Operation 'OPERA'? When on 07 1555 Jun81 F-15's and F-16's of the IDF departed Etzion AFB enroute to Iraq's Osiraq Nuclear Plant. If you recall this raised a number of questions of interpretation regarding international legal concepts. Those who supported the action cited Article 51 of the UN Charter stating that Israel had engaged in an act of 'legitiamte self defence.'
Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Those who opposed the actions of Israel countered that Israeli claims about Iraq's future capabilities were hasty, ill-considered and the response ill-conceived. In essence they asserted that the very notion of anticipatory self-defence be rejected by the UN Security Council. Further more the Security Council adopted UNSCR Resolution 487, which unanimously condemned the strike
http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLU...df?OpenElement[/URL]
Are we not at a similiar junction as we speak? I await due response..................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
AUDAX OMNIA PERPETI
Anyone remember Operation 'OPERA'? When on 07 1555 Jun81 F-15's and F-16's of the IDF departed Etzion AFB enroute to Iraq's Osiraq Nuclear Plant. If you recall this raised a number of questions of interpretation regarding international legal concepts. Those who supported the action cited Article 51 of the UN Charter stating that Israel had engaged in an act of 'legitiamte self defence.'
Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Those who opposed the actions of Israel countered that Israeli claims about Iraq's future capabilities were hasty, ill-considered and the response ill-conceived. In essence they asserted that the very notion of anticipatory self-defence be rejected by the UN Security Council. Further more the Security Council adopted UNSCR Resolution 487, which unanimously condemned the strike
http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLU...df?OpenElement[/URL]
Are we not at a similiar junction as we speak? I await due response..................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
AUDAX OMNIA PERPETI
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DuckRogers -
Here's the full story on this.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/be2...2560df00653995!OpenDocument
It was on 7 June, and the A/C were F4's. The plant was built and operated by the French, and a French scientist was killed.
Initial reports stated the A/C still bore USAF markings, but that story somehow dissapeared down the memory hole.
Iraq had the right to operate the plant, and Israel had no right to attack it, no more than the USA has any right to attack Iraq today.
Here's the full story on this.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/be2...2560df00653995!OpenDocument
It was on 7 June, and the A/C were F4's. The plant was built and operated by the French, and a French scientist was killed.
Initial reports stated the A/C still bore USAF markings, but that story somehow dissapeared down the memory hole.
Iraq had the right to operate the plant, and Israel had no right to attack it, no more than the USA has any right to attack Iraq today.
Guest
Posts: n/a
IME
Definitely 6 x F15's flying escort and 8 x F16's carrying 2 x 1000Kg bombs. No F4's took part in the raid i am afraid to say, see IDF home page and down load the story.
Any comments Chaffers?
-----------------------------------------------------
Special Cheese Service
Definitely 6 x F15's flying escort and 8 x F16's carrying 2 x 1000Kg bombs. No F4's took part in the raid i am afraid to say, see IDF home page and down load the story.
Any comments Chaffers?
-----------------------------------------------------
Special Cheese Service
Over 1000 posts and I bought this Personal Title to try and tell my mother the embarrassing news that I am a closet Jazz fan.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Manchester
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you've missed my point in amongst your conpiracy theories Esperto. When dealing with the security of sovereign states talking about rights is absurd. Do you honestly believe that Bush needs the 'right' to attack Iraq?
Granted there are parallels Ducky, but the Israeli's did not announce their intention to strike at Iraq on CNN. Bush has the opportunity to show the UN up for what it is.
Whereas a resolution (yet another one) condemning Israel is merely water off the ducks back; the UN is simply impotent when it comes to the States. An attack on Iraq despite howls of protest from the UN would make it clear where the real power lies. A real "who's yer daddy" moment.
Granted there are parallels Ducky, but the Israeli's did not announce their intention to strike at Iraq on CNN. Bush has the opportunity to show the UN up for what it is.
Whereas a resolution (yet another one) condemning Israel is merely water off the ducks back; the UN is simply impotent when it comes to the States. An attack on Iraq despite howls of protest from the UN would make it clear where the real power lies. A real "who's yer daddy" moment.
Guest
Posts: n/a
posted on wrong thead due to coffee famine..
Unfortunately whether we think it is good or bad, whether we think it's justified or not, we're going.
We're going , because we've been forced into the position, by a man whose sum diplomatic and political skill, can be written on a very small postage stamp. That no appreciation has been shown , for the "End game" or the domino effect of unsupported military action against Iraq, underlines the fact.
The brief for Op. Granby, was the liberation of Kuwait, full stop. That was the UN resolution, and that is why we were there, with the popular support of the Arab world. There seems to have been a lot of talk of "Finishing what we started" from Spamside.
We finished what we started in 1991, according to International law, and UN resolutions.
The western allies and others, have been asking for proof of Iraq's complicity in 9/11 and proof of production of WMD's for offensive purposes. Neither has been forthcoming.
However, we are told, that the "proof" will be available soon.
Bull****.
What we are going to get, is Lies, Damned Lies and statistics and Fairy stories to justify the action. As Mard Mark says , this is a case for the UN, not America.
Was I the only one that noticed the reaction of the Marines, when Rumsfeld briefed them last week?
As any serviceman will tell you, if you are not interested, or believe someone talking to you is full of crap, then you'll be severly disinterested, and, you'll show it. What I saw on that news segment, was a LOT of very not convinced Marines, while Donald tried to justify Op. Impending Doom.
Now contrast that, with the Marines when GWB senior was talking to them, about liberating a country. Or Bill Clinton briefing them on why the weight was going to fall on their shoulders, when it came to revenging attacks on US interests worldwide.Plenty of "Let's Go"
The whole thing sucks. There has been NO production of Intel, no concerted effort to get the Allies on side. Period.
Blue Eagle makes the point, that maybe it's because we can't trust our potential allies enough to show them this. Yes, I agree, if what we were showing them , was a map with lots of little arrows. We're supposed to be showing them proof that will motivate them.
The simple fact, is we can't rely on Saddam to die of natural causes, or a convenient Car accident, before we run out of oil, or our relationship with Saudi Arabia deteriorates to the point where our oil supplies are threatened.
We went into Afghanistan, to root out the terrorists ostensibly. New pipelines for American oil interests, I'm sure weren't a factor. I'm sure the Taliban didn't get a kicking, because they had granted the pipeline rights, to an Argentinian company, after telling a US conglomerate, that they had the rights.
The American public, in the latest polls, are withdrawing their support. They, as we do, wanted a war against TERRORISM. A war, where we destroyed all of the nasty little cells that cause this cancer. So far, we have seen ZIP evidence of that. Nothing at all. PIRA continues fund-raising, Saudi interests continue funding extremism, and Osamam Bin-Laden is still driving a Taxi in Birmingham.
What we have had/having , is a series of actions, that will ultimately benefit American economic interests AKA campaign fund contributors. It stinks. It stinks, because Bluppet is torn between showing he is a strong leader and a supporter of our "Special relationship" with the Spammies, and common sense.
I remain in favour of Military action being taken against suspected weapons stockpiles and production facilites, we have enough satellite intel to justify that, and I remember, the Israelis, didn't waste any time bombing his reactor project. I am utterly not in favour of Rumsfeld, and that evil know-nothing Oil company stooge Ms.Rice., and their coterie of evil bastards, who have the President they want, because they bloody well engineered him into the White House.
I am not even prepared to bet, that there won't be a terrorist spectacular on 9/11/02. I hope and pray fervently that there is not, but the world holds it's breath, because, I can absolutely guarantee, if there is an atrocity on that date, there will be a convenient neon sign that says "Iraq did it", pointing at the carnage.
First things first, let's get the inspectors in, under a UN mandate, that we WILL take military action, if they're kicked out again, and make sure they absolutely know that. I would personally, base a fair sized force in a neighbouring country,or a CV task force whilst the inspectors are there, to underline the fact we absolutey will get medieval, if UN resolutions are not followed.
But as i write this, my shoulders are once again hunced in resignation. No matter how noble we want this cauxe to be, at the bottom of it all, is Big Money interests, profit and Presidencies
P3
We're going , because we've been forced into the position, by a man whose sum diplomatic and political skill, can be written on a very small postage stamp. That no appreciation has been shown , for the "End game" or the domino effect of unsupported military action against Iraq, underlines the fact.
The brief for Op. Granby, was the liberation of Kuwait, full stop. That was the UN resolution, and that is why we were there, with the popular support of the Arab world. There seems to have been a lot of talk of "Finishing what we started" from Spamside.
We finished what we started in 1991, according to International law, and UN resolutions.
The western allies and others, have been asking for proof of Iraq's complicity in 9/11 and proof of production of WMD's for offensive purposes. Neither has been forthcoming.
However, we are told, that the "proof" will be available soon.
Bull****.
What we are going to get, is Lies, Damned Lies and statistics and Fairy stories to justify the action. As Mard Mark says , this is a case for the UN, not America.
Was I the only one that noticed the reaction of the Marines, when Rumsfeld briefed them last week?
As any serviceman will tell you, if you are not interested, or believe someone talking to you is full of crap, then you'll be severly disinterested, and, you'll show it. What I saw on that news segment, was a LOT of very not convinced Marines, while Donald tried to justify Op. Impending Doom.
Now contrast that, with the Marines when GWB senior was talking to them, about liberating a country. Or Bill Clinton briefing them on why the weight was going to fall on their shoulders, when it came to revenging attacks on US interests worldwide.Plenty of "Let's Go"
The whole thing sucks. There has been NO production of Intel, no concerted effort to get the Allies on side. Period.
Blue Eagle makes the point, that maybe it's because we can't trust our potential allies enough to show them this. Yes, I agree, if what we were showing them , was a map with lots of little arrows. We're supposed to be showing them proof that will motivate them.
The simple fact, is we can't rely on Saddam to die of natural causes, or a convenient Car accident, before we run out of oil, or our relationship with Saudi Arabia deteriorates to the point where our oil supplies are threatened.
We went into Afghanistan, to root out the terrorists ostensibly. New pipelines for American oil interests, I'm sure weren't a factor. I'm sure the Taliban didn't get a kicking, because they had granted the pipeline rights, to an Argentinian company, after telling a US conglomerate, that they had the rights.
The American public, in the latest polls, are withdrawing their support. They, as we do, wanted a war against TERRORISM. A war, where we destroyed all of the nasty little cells that cause this cancer. So far, we have seen ZIP evidence of that. Nothing at all. PIRA continues fund-raising, Saudi interests continue funding extremism, and Osamam Bin-Laden is still driving a Taxi in Birmingham.
What we have had/having , is a series of actions, that will ultimately benefit American economic interests AKA campaign fund contributors. It stinks. It stinks, because Bluppet is torn between showing he is a strong leader and a supporter of our "Special relationship" with the Spammies, and common sense.
I remain in favour of Military action being taken against suspected weapons stockpiles and production facilites, we have enough satellite intel to justify that, and I remember, the Israelis, didn't waste any time bombing his reactor project. I am utterly not in favour of Rumsfeld, and that evil know-nothing Oil company stooge Ms.Rice., and their coterie of evil bastards, who have the President they want, because they bloody well engineered him into the White House.
I am not even prepared to bet, that there won't be a terrorist spectacular on 9/11/02. I hope and pray fervently that there is not, but the world holds it's breath, because, I can absolutely guarantee, if there is an atrocity on that date, there will be a convenient neon sign that says "Iraq did it", pointing at the carnage.
First things first, let's get the inspectors in, under a UN mandate, that we WILL take military action, if they're kicked out again, and make sure they absolutely know that. I would personally, base a fair sized force in a neighbouring country,or a CV task force whilst the inspectors are there, to underline the fact we absolutey will get medieval, if UN resolutions are not followed.
But as i write this, my shoulders are once again hunced in resignation. No matter how noble we want this cauxe to be, at the bottom of it all, is Big Money interests, profit and Presidencies
P3