From: Eric Burgess < email@example.com >
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: the illegal war
I listened to Dubya (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html) trash the U.N. in order to justify his impending war on Iraq. After hearing the leader of the free world say that "the United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities" I did some research on the U.N. Resolutions. I included links to the sites from which I acquired the data.
Any war by the United States against Iraq without the explicit authority from the United Nations (ie. Security Council Resolution) is flatly illegal. Chapter VII Article 42 of the U.N. Charter (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm) explains that obtaining authority for war for the Security Council is not merely a political courtesy, but the law itself.
United Nations Security Council Resolutions:
#660 August 2, 1990 – “Demands that Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990”
#661 August 6, 1990 – Calls for economic sanctions on Iraq.
#678 November 29, 1990 – “Authorizes Member States…to use all necessary means” to make Iraq comply with” Resolution 660. War against Iraq is authorized by the U.N.
#687 April 8, 1991 – “Recalls” or cancels U.N. Resolutions 660, 661, and 678. Calls for the “destruction, removal, or rendering harmless” of “(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities; (b) All ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and repair and production facilities;” This clearly ends the legal use of warfare against Iraq.
#1154 March 2, 1998 – Threatens Iraq with “severest consequences” if Iraq fails “to act in accordance with the relevant provisions of resolution 687.” But the Security Council retained the authority to ensure implementation, making it the U.N.’s decision whether to authorize force.
#1441 November 8, 2002 – The current U.N. weapons inspectors are to report their findings to the Security Council. It will be up to the council, and not individual countries, to determine what next steps might be taken regarding Iraq. There is no authorization for war against Iraq by the U.N.
After reading the preamble to the U.N. Charter I think it is clear that the United Nations has lived up to its responsibility.
United Nations Preamble
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,
HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 14:56:52 -0800
Subject: Re: the illegal war
From: “Richard Winters” <firstname.lastname@example.org>
It’s interesting how people compare Saddam to Hitler. It’s also interesting that it was Germany which didn’t want its actions criticized or limited by the League of Nations, and which walked out rather than submit to those limitations. It is the Bush, not Saddam Hussein who refuses to acknowledge the authority of the world body to which it, ostensibly, belongs.
It is also Bush and his people who use the BIg Lie to demonize Hussein.
I would refer you to U.S. Marine Corps Historical Document FMFRP 3-203, Appendix B. This report was prepared by the U.S. Marine Corps in response to the deaths of Kurds by poison gas, at Halabja< Iraq, in 1988. The report clearly lays those deaths at the feet of the Irani forces. The gas was Cyanide, the gas of choice for Iran, and the physical evidence showed that it had come from Irani positions.
I have no doubt that Saddam is not a good national leader. What concerns me more is that, in order to cover itself with cover for its desired war, my government has had to lead a campaign of deception, outright lies, and demonization. This follows a precedent set by dictators, not by democrats.
From: “THE KID” <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: the illegal war
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:00:25 -0800
What the @#!& is going on in America?
Daily I am confronted with news of some type of idiotic behavior from my fellow citizens. It makes me wonder what goes on in the minds of the self-loathing American left. Were they dropped on their heads as babies?
Abused? Ate too many lead-based paint chips? Their blatant anti-Americanism is an insult not only to hard-working, decent folk like myself, but to the victims of 9-11.
9-11 changed life in America on many levels, I think everyone can agree on that. It’s impact touched us spiritually, socially, economically, and politically. Americans reacted by giving President Bush a mandate: Destroy Terrorism. We went into Afghanistan and did what the mighty Soviet Empire could not, we demolished it. Now we rebuild it. Like him or not, President Bush has done an excellent job of preventing further attacks on our country.
He has taken the attack to those countries that support terrorism, starting with Afghanistan and now Iraq. If he deems Iraq as being next on our list, then I’m with him. President Bush has drawn the ire of the left for being such a strong leader. They show their own political bias when they label him as being dumb. How can one who has become president of the most powerful nation in the world be labeled as dumb? Personal attacks are lobbed at him daily, but he has proven to be tough enough not to allow these attacks to deter him from his duty, to protect our country. I would prefer to have a cowboy in the White House as opposed to a Neville Chamberlain. You can’t reason with terrorists, you have to destroy them. A group that willingly murders women and children needs to disappear. I liken President Bush to Wyatt Earp in the movie “Tombstone”. In referring to the murderous red-sash-wearing gang called The Cowboys, Earp states “If it wears a red sash, I kill it”. That’s the kind of leader we needed after 9-11 and President Bush has not disappointed us.
If there is one weak spot in the war on terror, it’s taking our case to the UN concerning Iraq. After receiving congressional approval for action, President Bush should have formed his own coalition to remove Saddam Hussein. Obviously hindsight is 20/20. Who knew we’d face such opposition not only abroad, but here at home from the very vocal far left? Cries of “Iraq will be our next Vietnam” have rung partially true. The UN has proven to be the Vietnam-like quagmire we were afraid of, not the actual liberation of Iraq. That will be a quick war. As far as the UN is concerned, I am amazed daily to see extension of deadlines towards Iraqi compliance with UN Resolution 1441. The UN as an international forum of any type of significance is over. It’s time for the US to leave the UN. Obviously every country represented at the UN is acting in its own self-interest, as are we.
Those countries that have not been attacked by terrorists don’t have a vested interest in removing Saddam. For the left to accuse us of bullying other countries for support is politically naive. We were attacked, and now we’re calling in our IOUs. That’s why President Bush went to the UN in the first place. Now we’re seeing who has a stomach for this fight, and who doesn’t. I hope President Bush will toe the line and end this farce once and for all on March 17. Iraq is not disarming, plain and simple. To delay only invites greater chance of terrorists gaining chemical or biological agents from Saddam to use against the US and the West. The UN no longer serves our interests, so it is no longer relevant. To hear these anti-war protesters, they’d rather we surrender our autonomy to the UN. We should bury our heads in the sand, it’s not our problem. How do they come up with this stuff?
According to Webster’s, sedition is defined as “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority”. “Peace” protesters, and I use that term loosely, now endorse violence in their attempt to be heard.
Anti-war groups have desecrated a 9-11 memorial site and ransacked a convenience store, both events occurring in California. Messages emanating from these groups are calling for walk-outs at work and blocking traffic.
The only problem with this strategy is that none of these people seem to have jobs. Honest, law-abiding, gainfully-employed stiffs like myself don’t have the luxury of free time like these people do. After my 9 hour work day, I have chores to do at home as well as other civic commitments. That’s why you don’t see many Pro-USA Rallies. How can these Americans so easily forget the events of 9-11? Why do anti-war activists claim that liberating Iraq from Saddam’s rule will lead to more terrorism? If this is true, then doesn’t that confirm the fact that Saddam and terrorism are in bed together?
How can they argue that this is not a just war? Saddam is a supporter of terrorism, he’s murdered and tortured his own people, gassed the Kurds, and is therefore a logical next target after Afghanistan in our war on terror.
Germany and Japan became productive members of the international community after WWII. Speaking of Nazism, the radical left continues to discredit itself when they attempt to draw comparisons of President Bush to Hitler or desecrate our flag with swastikas. I agree with Dennis Miller when he observed that an asskicking is called for when you see a protesters desecrating the flag with a swastika. Nowhere in their rhetoric is Saddam Hussein likened to Hitler. What about the cheesy lawyer arrested recently in an Albany mall wearing a “Peace” shirt? The media have portrayed this as being a free speech issue, but failed to report that the lawyer, who knew exactly what he was doing, was actually HARASSING people, thus causing the infamous confrontation with mall security. The mall fired the security guard because of the backlash from the “peace” movement. What’s wrong with that picture?
Let’s talk Hollywood. After 9-11, so many of the Hollywood elite jumped on the bandwagon to raise money for the families of the victims. Where did they take a wrong turn? We have television president Martin Sheen and movie police captain Danny Glover virtually calling for an overthrow of the US Government. My personal Hollywood boycott list now numbers 99 with the recent addition of musician Chrissie Hynde and The Beastie Boys. Don’t these people have any business sense (Already assuming they have no moral sense)?
By speaking out in support of the radical left, by taking up the anti-American message of the “peace” groups, these entertainers have become social pariahs. By siding against their own country, they are losing out on money and opportunities due to the backlash they face from a very hostile public. I have already contacted VISA and MCI to protest their use of Sheen and Glover as spokespersons for their products, and have been informed by VISA that they will not be airing the Sheen commercial anymore. I recently say “Gods and Generals” at the movies and wanted to purchase the sequel, “Gettysburg” on DVD, but alas, Sheen starred as Gen. Lee in that movie.
Guess what? No DVD purchase for me (Robert Duvall played Lee in G&G, so no violation of my own boycott).
I’m going to wrap this up with some other observations of things that have been bothering me. Where does the Pope get off criticizing the US? Like he has any credibility after protecting pedophile priests. Also, cries of racial profiling continue to be hurled at the government, again, surprise surprise, by the radical left and the ACLU. Last time I checked, the “Let’s Destroy America Club” is made up exclusively of....Muslims!! Rather than be defensive, I suggest the Muslim community police itself more stringently and out those that are involved with terrorist organizations. Otherwise, don’t whine when/if we see attacks here in the USA and all them are rounded up and placed in internment camps for their own security and ours! Imagine the outcry if 19 men were picked up by the FBI on September 10, 2001.
Finally, can someone please tell that whiny snit Paul Begala that 9-11, not George Bush, should bear the majority of the blame for today’s current economic decline? If I hear him whine one more time blaming President Bush and his tax cuts for the state of our economy...I don’t want to kick in my TV.
Poll after poll illustrate the fact that the majority of Americans overwhelmingly support President Bush in the war on terror. There’s a vocal minority that just doesn’t get it. They want to bang their bongos, make their own clothes, fly to Iraq to be human shields, and voice their contempt for America. They’ll never get it, or at least until they find gainful employment, start a family, and come to grips with the fact that the US of A is the greatest country in the world to live in and they are a part of it.
With that power comes great responsibility. We did not start this fight, we were attacked on 9-11. However, we will finish this fight because it’s the right thing to do. The costs will be great, but we cannot shirk our duty, we cannot dishonor those that died on 9-11. That’s why we fight, to protect our freedoms and the freedoms of idiotic Americans everywhere...
Jon Alvarez Syracuse, NY
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 19:21:54 -0800 (PST)
From: “cesar castellanos” firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: the illegal war
your voice has been heard. its good to know that freedom of speech is being practiced in our society. despite the fact that i disagree with your opinion, i welcome the views of others, and therefore hear your voice. but FYI, there is a difference between fredom of speech and slander. i can only hope that ALL americans, including the “idiotic” (which 99% of the country is anyway despite their views on the war) ones, can respect the opinions of others, without resorting to childish name-calling. the only way we know we are right, is by hearing the views of others, and deciding for ourselves. thank you for sharing your views.
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 02:12:45 -0800 (PST)
From: "gumie bear” email@example.com
Subject: Re: the illegal war
I have been reading what every one is saying about the war and the UN and so. I am not a teacher nor a good speller. I do understand that saddam is a crazy mad man. A guy, that with time has rebuilt an army & started to rebuilt his weapons of mass distruction. I understand that we needed the UN to make it legal. I just don’t think that the UN has the balls anymore. I and many other americans think that saddam is playing with us. He is using the useless UN to buyd time. He was tring to make a Nuke. He was helping (i am not going to spell this right) al-quida. Does any one know for sure? No but there is a lot we don’t know. With technology today we can cut the civilian casulties down. This was still nessasary to stop him. What happens when we let him go about his business and then he makes his weapon and uses it to hit us? Then we all pay the price.
I say hit them now and kill everyone that ever said a bad thing about us. Then when we are done, we can send over millions of dollars that we don’t have to help them get bigger and better then ever. Look at Japan. They can’t beat us in a war. But they could buy us first.
My biggest concern and a lot of other peoples concerns, why are we spending money and things we don’t need. Why are paying actors 20 million a picture and teachers 30k?? What is that? How much did Micheal Jordan make in his prime?? Why can’t we look at where the problems really are?
So where does it end? I belive that there will always be a Crazy sick man trying to rule the world.
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:18:09 -0800 (PST)
From: "Eric Burgess” <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I write to you merely to point out the irony of you protesting protesters. The “blatant anti-Americanism” that bothers you to such a degree is actually Americans exercising their First Amendment rights. It is the same right you enjoyed as you composed your message. So, in answer to your opening question of “what the @#!& is going on in America?”, well, we are acting like Americans. Thanks for the reminder, though.
Since I’m here I might as well respond to the rest of your thoughtful and eloquent message. I agree that the war on Afghanistan has “wreaked incredible havoc and destruction,” but your comparison of the U.S. war to the Soviet aggression is utterly misguided. The 1979 Soviet invasion was a preemptive war against Islamist terrorists by a threatened government. If you had used the current U.S. attack on Iraq instead I would have much more respect for you in your understanding of history. Bush is acting less like the leader of the “free world” and more like a leader of a repressive regime that whimsically wields his power without thought to world opinion or future consequences. There is one comparison that does work: The “Bush Doctine” of pre-emptive attack hearkens back to the “Brezhnev Doctrine,” a Soviet policy introduced by Leonid Brezhnev, which stated:
"When forces that are hostile to socialism and try to turn the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country concerned, but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries."
Sound like anybody we know?
Even though he is the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, you excuse Bush’s cowboy tactics; but how “dumb” is it to act like a high plains drifter in the civilized world? In your attempt to justify Bush’s attack on Iraq you explain, “You can’t reason with terrorists, you have to destroy them. A group that willingly murders women and children needs to disappear.” I need only to point out that human rights atrocities committed by the U.S. in Nicaragua, Libya, Grenada, Haiti, Colombia, Indonesia, Chile, Guatemala, Vietnam, El Salvador, Korea, Panama, the Phillipines, and various countries in Africa, just to name a few (if you want facts on any or all these references, just ask). The United States has been committing terrorist acts from 1899 to this very morning in Iraq. As the saying goes, Jon, those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks. 9/11 was a rock thrown back.
Why do you hold such disdain for the United Nations? You make it seem as if Bush went to the UN for authorization for war as a courtesy. This is international law. When he failed to get the support he chose to start a war against the UN’s wishes; hence, an illegal war. You say, “Now we’re seeing who has a stomach for this fight, and who doesn’t.” Jon, the United Nations was established after the world had been through two wars that devastated the global psyche. Please read the preamble to the UN Charter http://www.un.org/Overview/Charter/preamble.html which explains that the main reason for such an institution is “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” The United States, as civilized people, should have been able to avoid war, especially when UN weapons inspectors had free reign in Iraq for weeks and found nothing that would implicate Hussein. This is not a “just war,” which is precisely why so many major countries are against it.
You offer the definition of sedition as “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority” yet you conveniently omit the rest of the definition which reads “especially in the violent overthrow of the government.” I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that this was an inadvertent omission, not just another distortion of facts in order to better illustrate your point. Yet again, your ignorance shines through when you accuse the protesters of not being “honest, law-abiding, gain-fully employed” citizens. Does that mean that the war supporters holding flags and “Support Bush” signs fall into the same category? You, of all people, should understand that, just as you passionately believe that America’s involvement in Iraq is right, others believe with just as much fervor that our nation is wrong. This strong belief has drawn many to the streets to let America and the world know that they do not support this act of aggression. Look in the mirror before you heap insults upon those with whom you disagree.
May I again point out the irony of your Hollywood boycott. Sure, you may stickin’ to the celebrity man but you are also hurting the economy by not exercising your consumer power. The worse the economy gets the worse it looks for Bush. A debate on his impotent tax plan does not have a place in this discussion but I would be happy to take it up at any time.
When you say that “we did not start this fight, we were attacked on 9-11” all you need to do is take a moment and understand why anti-American sentiment is so rampant throughout the world, especially in the Middle East. If the Saudis were setting up military camps next the Lincoln Memorial and the Statue of Liberty, you would be one of the first to come out against them as “invaders” and, depending on the depth of your patriotism, maybe even employ violence to expel them. Walk a mile in a Muslim’s shoes and then talk to me. Yes, we were attacked, but because our Imperial acts over the past century, we have been asking it. Before you blow your top and accuse me of political blasphemy, read a history book.
Jon, your denigration of peace protesters who “bang their bongos” is ironic since you are doing some bongo banging of your own. The only difference I see is that you have bought into the propaganda and good-ole boy charm of Bush while ignoring the well-documented past actions and self-serving, exploitive policies of the United Sates of America. I’ll say it again: Those that fail to ignore the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:48:05 -0800 (PST)
From: "Joseph Vasquez” <email@example.com>
A Dear Jon Letter from
The Anti-American American
In recent days I have heard various conservatives, republicans, democrats, and yes, even liberals, bandy around the “anti-american” epithet as freely as a Salem pre-pubescent would cry “witch!” What makes one “anti-american?” The answer is quite simple: vocally oppose war on Iraq, deplore the imperialistic aims of this administration, reject the new manifest destiny, feel compassion for your fellow human begins, dare to speak out against a tyrant at home, and dispute the loss of personal freedom. I wish to declare that, at this moment, I am anti-american.
The president says that war is his last option, then why did he run his 2000 campaign with the promise of ridding the world of the incorrigible Saddam? Why did he stack his administration with a flock of chicken hawks who have been chomping at the bit ever since big daddy Bush decided to leave Saddam in power (and, consequently, allow for the massacre Kurdish and Shiite populations)? War is the first resort of the bully. Prior to September 11, the Los Angeles Times ran an article that predicted Bush II would eventually turn his focus to Iraq and unfinished business. It is unfortunate that the article is not rerun and that I had not the foresight to clip it, but alas, I did not realize the import of it until the famed “Axis of Evil” speech. We are told that Iraq and other “rogue nations” are plotting our demise. This may be true, and a brief history lesson would prove the logic behind such animosity (after all, why did Saddam have free reign throughout the cold war?), but will reacting in a manner that verifies our enemies’ accusations improve matters any? Maybe, if one accepts the logic behind the phrase “kill them all, let God sort them out,” then it would follow that if we kill enough people there will be no one left to oppose or threaten us, but that sounds like genocide to me. Why do our young have to tie up the loose ends of old men whose version of diplomacy is/was motivated by the doctrine that might is right, and we are always right? No, war is not necessary. I am anti-american.
The recently authored “Bush Doctrine” proposes that the United States spread democracy, liberty and a free-market economy to all nations, as if these three concepts must go hand in hand. True, democracy is good. Liberty, I’ll take that too please. Free-market economy? I don’t think the president was thinking of the financial well being of foreign nations. In fact, isn’t part of the problem we are now facing (global terrorism, rogue nations/leaders) because of our free-market approach to the world? Aren’t those our companies employing children, destroying habitats, and bribing dictators all in the name of the almighty profit margin? And aren’t those our companies laying off Americans to move their factories to poorer nations in order to better their end of year reports? Who is putting our working stiffs out of work? Immigrants? No . . . it is the economic elite, the upper class. If that’s free-market economy, then I say burn the market down! Change the system so it fits the needs of the people. The Bush Doctrine reminds me of the proverbial “White Man’s Burden” that defined the British Empire’s outlook on the world: England must help the darkies. Is it time for an American Empire? No. I am anti-american.
I hate the comparisons of Bush II to Hitler as much as the Pat Buchanan does, but Bush II is proving himself quite a menace to the world. No, you say? Think about it: What nation is ready to bomb at least any nation without provocation (suspicion, not matter how much intelligence is gathered, is not provocation)? What government is threatening an entire region with destruction unless it sees things its way? What country has told the entire world, including centuries-old allies, that they are “either with us or with the terrorists?” You guessed it! And why? Because American life is so precious! We fear another September 11, and rightly so. I hated seeing the footage of the towers burning and eventually falling. I watched it live, as did many others, and it hurt. After all “every man is a piece of the continent, a part if the main.” Isn’t the life of an Iraqi housewife equal to that of an American doctor? Shouldn’t we weep just as hard at hearing the news of a Palestinian child caught in crossfire as we do when we learn of an American serviceman falling off an aircraft carrier? The tyrant at home does not care. It seems, too, that much of the public does not care either. Isn’t the effect of the current “shock and awe” campaign an act of terrorism (it aims to terrorize the people of Iraq so that they do not fight the invasion)? If we loose but one life to violence, the Earth is the less. I am anti-american.
I do not think I need comment on the Patriot Act and the legislation that it is sure to inspire. No, rather, I would like to state two points: 1) I hate Saddam and think he should be removed. What he has done to his people is indeed horrendous. But, I will not support “regime change” since this is a regime that was supported by us. There is not enough water in the oceans to wash our hands. His people must take care of him, just as Gandhi vanquished the British (remember him?). By the way, there is no comparison between Saddam and Hitler. The 1991 War stopped Iraq’s Nazi impression so give it a rest. He needs to go. His people need help, but bombing a nation with 21,000-pound bombs does not sound like liberation to me. 2) The French are not our enemy. I have been to Paris, and yes I encountered some rudeness, but I also visited Winslow, Arizona and was given the cold shoulder. My affinity for the French resides in the three words at the heart of the French Republic: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. True, these are high ideals, but isn’t it noble and just to want a world where all people are created equal and treated with equal respect? The French aren’t perfect. I know that France may have its own economic interests in mind, but since they seem to be the leading country against the tide of war, I stand with them! I stand for justice, personal freedom and basic human decency! I am anti-American.
I hearken back to the image of the United States as a city upon the hill, a shinning example to all nations of what a democratic republic could be. I hear the call of Whitman and Thoreau on the wind as I walk to work each morning trying to figure out how to educate my students so they can create a world where fighting is truly never the answer. I feel the passions of Patrick Henry welling up within me as I hear or read about the unpatriotic nature of protestors in this nation. I weep whenever I think of King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and continue to hope, in spite of all that I see. I fear for the soldiers sent to the Middles East, North Korea, etc. I am against unchecked aggression. I am anti-American!
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:44:35 -0800 (GMT)
From: “Karrie Hensley” <firstname.lastname@example.org
Is it possible for Americans to look at their country objectively?
As a new member of the mailing list discussing the “illegal war” which began with the inane congressional aciton regarding “freedom fries” I feel it’s time for me to respond briefly.
What most saddens me about the war in Iraq is that most Americans I talk to do not think it’s important to understand why our country would blatantly defie the laws set forth by the United Nations. Americans continually respond that Saddam Hussein is evil and must be destroyed at any cost. What boggles my mind is that these same individuals have no basis for this assessment. How did the American mind-set switch from the threat of Al Queda and Ossama Bin Laden to Saddam Hussein and Iraq? Maybe I’m the one who’s misinformed but I don’t understand why it’s o.k. for my country to have weapons of mass destruction (and a history of using them) and it’s not o.k. for another sovereign nation to have them?
I’m also unclear why my country finds it necessary to change policy and laws whenever it suits them. Don’t we teach our children that if you are part of a group and the group by majority decides on a course of action, you must go along with the group even if you don’t agree with it? I’m sorry but I tend to look at things in their most basic form in order to get my head around them and the basic logic that has been presented to me by my country’s leaders just doesn’t work.
Perhaps America just believes that because we are the biggest and strongest nation we can do whatever we want regardless of what anyone else thinks. If this is the case, we better be prepared for more uprisings and lives lost because the rest of the world will not sit around forever doing nothing. Somewhere, sometime we are going to push the international community too far and then we will learn (perhaps in our own backyard) what world war III looks like.
From: “Brian Day” <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: the illegal war
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:21:25 -0800
Yeah! What they said!!!
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 03:37:45 -0800
Subject: Re: the illegal war
From: “JAX BOX” <firstname.lastname@example.org> |
Interesting, you call 99% of Americans “Idiotic” yet a few words later you say “respect the opinions of others, without resorting to “Childish” name calling” not to mention how condescending your tone was towards Jon's point of view. I'm sure you feel the same about anybody else's view that isn't the same as yours. But I digress.
I guess all those “Idiotic” (oops! Childish name calling, my bad) people (the other 1%?) who are “Enthusiastically Dissenting” (I call it breaking the law once they decide to obstruct traffic illegally) by blocking peoples cars who are on their way to or from work or defacing property and wasting tons of money that they are constantly bitching about being wasted by making the cities send more officers to break up all of that “idiotic” nonsense (my bad again) costing the city more by having to send extra officers out there to control these “Enthusiastically Dissenting” people.
These are the same students from the public school system which my tax dollars are going to, that I work hard for. I'm sure 99% of them really don't have a clue as to why their out there to begin with other than the fact that they can get out of school for the day and act like they're at some mid afternoon Rave and think it's “Hip." It's actually pretty funny/sad that when they actually get on camera and are asked why they are out there, once they open their mouths it just shows that they really should back in the classroom, and that they should start paying attention a little bit more so they can get a real “Edjumakazun." (For further proof, look at these videos) http://www.brain-terminal.com/video/nyc-2003-02-15/quicktime-hq.html http://brain-terminal.com/video/sf-2003-03-15/quicktime-hq.html And as far as all the other (Dissenters) people out there who aren't students, don't these people have jobs? It looks like these “Tree hugging, Birkenstock wearing, Save the Caribou, Che wannabe's” are the same people who are bleeding the U.S. dry by using the food stamps and the welfare system to deprive the people that actually need it, when they should be out there getting a job instead of blaming the “System” for their laziness. Someone needs to tell them that the “Age of Aquarius” has long been played out and to quit bugging me every time I go into the local “7-11” by standing out in front and asking me for “Some spare change." You want spare change? Get yourself a Spare Job!
"Enthusiastically Dissent” all you want, Light all the candles you want, sing Give Peace a Chance all day and night, and dream all you want about hoping our country will become the “Socialist” Utopia you all yearn for. I'm sure all your burned out hippie, still living in the sixties, Trotsky Worshiping college professors who filled your head with their Liberal/Socialistic views that you obediently bought into and are now regurgitating them as your own beliefs, yeah, I'm sure all their hearts are swelling with great pride as they watch all of these protests going on. Dissent all you want, but just do it without infringing on my rights and views, and let me decide for myself by not “Enthusiastically Dissenting” in front of my car when I have the green light!
COMMUNISM HAS ONLY KILLED 100 MILLION PEOPLE... LET'S GIVE IT ANOTHER CHANCE!
BTW, would all of you illegal war protesting people be saying the same things and feeling the same way if “Gore” would have been elected?
(Stop with the “Hanging Chad's and how it was stolen, just answer the question) Because you did have your chance when “Bill the Bomber” was the President and he was waging his “Illegal Wars” which were not sanctioned by the U.N. on Baghdad and Bosnia among other countries (Shall I go on?) but there was nary a peep out of any of you or the Limousine Liberal Hollywood half wits either. Calling President Sheen, Calling President Sheen... hmmm no answer.
HOLLYWOOD ACTIVISM... NOW THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT!!!
I doubt you would. And I'm glad he wasn't elected because I don't think I could drive to work everyday with Saddam's portrait on the wall of every building I pass to get there knowing that “Gore” dismantled our Armed Forces (I don't think you Liberal Ladies would like it very much if you had to be subservient to men while wearing a “Burka” (unless of course it said DKNY on it) now would you? and remember “N.O.W.” would not even be able to exist) or who actually cared about what the U.N. has to say whose members (France, Germany, China, Syria and Libya) don't want us to take Saddam out because once we get into Baghdad and find all the weapons he said he never had (he did say that he didn't have any weapons right? so why did those SCUDS have to be shot down?) which will all have “Made in France, Made in Germany, Made in China” so how illegal can this war be? Will you say anything about that? I doubt that too!
The U.N. is a Farce! Preamble Schmeamble! That is “Why so many countries are against it" The U.S. is held by the letter of the law but these other countries aren't?
For nearly 60 years, the United Nations has marched relentlessly towards its vision of a socialistic, one world government, all the while being financed by U.S. taxpayers. (e.g. all the “Enthusiastic Dissenters”)
The U.N. has become worthless. This collection of dictatorial and predominately Muslim regimes routinely condemns Israel, but refuses to enforce its own disarmament resolutions against Saddam Hussein. It has no purpose other than to restrain the United States from doing what it cannot find the courage to do. Its human rights committee has been taken over by human rights abusers. Its disarmament committee is soon to be chaired by Iraq. In Zimbabwe, hundreds of thousands of Africans are facing starvation at the hands of their own thuggish government, but the U.N. stands by silently. And how come France has their troops in North Africa and nobody say's anything about that? And once again, why are they there? But I digress.
We contribute 25% of the U.N. budget since its inception, but it's not enough. No matter what we do, the U.N. continues its attacks on U.S.
interests and sovereignty, while we continue to pay their bills. It's time we put a STOP to this nonsense.
Has anyone noticed that the United Nations and a lot of the countries around the world are saying, “Hey, U.S., when it comes to North Korea, that's your problem which you have to deal with unilaterally. This is not something for the UN to get involved with, since we botched the inspections.” I find it amazingly contradictory. When it comes to the North Koreans, the U.N. may as well not exist. Once again, a farce.
And I hope we never go back to the UN. Why would we want to re-empower the French in deciding the postwar settlement? Why would we want to grant them influence over the terms, the powers, the duration of an occupation bought at the price of American and British blood?
France, Germany and Russia did everything they could to sabotage our policy before the war. Will they want to see it succeed after the war? Of course not, but they're already trying to weasel their way into landing contracts to rebuild Iraq. Yes, we lost at the U.N. Badly. But that signal defeat had one significant side benefit. For the first time, Americans got to see what the U.N. truly is. The experience has been an eye opener. The result has been an enormous and huge shift in American public opinion regardless of what the Liberal media says.
America finally had a look inside this joke called the U.N. The image of the ``U.N.'' as a legitimating institution had always been deeply sentimental, based on the U.N. of their youth UNICEF, refugee help, earthquake assistance. A global Mother Teresa. That's what they thought of the U.N., and that's why they held it in esteem and cared about what it said. Now they know that the ``U.N.'' is not UNICEF collection boxes, but a committee of cynical, resentful, ex-imperial powers like France and Russia serving their own national interests and delighting in frustrating America's without the slightest reference to the moral issues at stake. The American public (Everyone who is not a Liberal/Democrat) understands that this is not a body in which to entrust American values or American security. The hypocrisy is stunning. But the deeper issue is that the principal purpose of the Security Council is not to restrain tyrants, but to restrain the United States
The Security Council is nothing more than the victory coalition of 1945. That was six decades ago. We need a new structure to be born out of the Iraq coalition it should be with allies who helped us, who share our vision and our purposes. Not with France, Germany, Russia and China, who see us as the threat and whose singular purpose will be to subvert any victory. There were wars and truces and treaties long before the U.N. was created, as there will be after its demise, there is no need to formally leave the U.N., if we just ignore it, Without us, it will wither away.
And God forbid that we capture Saddam alive, the ACLU will probably rush to represent him and defend his rights as a “Human Being” and deny he ever committed any war crimes (Killer, rapist, torturer, of hundreds of thousands of people, and that's not even counting what his sons have done) and present him as being “Misunderstood” or a victim of the 9/11 propaganda. Will you still put your faith in the U.N. to tell us how to run our country?
Will you change your mind once you start seeing the evidence that you haven't seen one “Iota” of showing Saddam's link to Al Qaeda? (He has said he isn't linked to them, yet he said he had no weapons either coughSCUDScough) Will you speak out when you see the proof of all the inhumane things that Saddam has done to his own people and actually hear from those he has tortured? (How's that Olympic team of their's doing BTW?) Do you speak for those people too? How much longer can you throw out that typical Liberal/Democrat/Marxist/socialist rhetoric?
“It's all 9/11 propaganda” “Don't believe the right wing media...
yada yada yada”
Or you can just stick with the most common one that the former President, Mrs. Hillary Clinton has used to death... “It's a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!”
But then again it's Blood for Oil. Brilliant! Bravo! Such clever slogans. If we are so hard up for oil, why didn't we just take what we should have when we were in kuwait in “91?” They needed us to save their collective asses, so who would have stopped us from just taking it? I'm still paying over $2.00 a gallon for gas, yet they have have never given us a break on the price of oil yet the French have a sweet deal with Iraq (Is that one of the reasons they vetoed us every time?
hmmmmmm) which enables them to buy oil at 40% below the market value with “Euro Dollars” (another great example of “America come and help us” and once we do, “NOW GET THE F*** OUT! You guy's are Evil Tyrants and Imperialists!). And as far as being imperialistic, exactly which countries are we forcibly occupying now?
But we're the “Big Bullies" Funny, but I've never heard of or seen a “Bully” ever ask permission to kick someone's ass or to take their lunch money before? But yet in this “RUSH TO WAR” since 9/11, (Propaganda to you guy's and probably in about 30 years from now, you'll probably deny it ever even happend just like alot of people now say there never was a “Holocaust”) which has now been over a year and half, we tolerated the U.N.'s shenanigans and waited... a year and a half? Some “RUSH TO WAR”
You need to understand, we are hated because we are the greatest Country in the world. Everyone wants our freedom, way of life and everything else that goes with it. And don't kid yourself, if they could be in our position they wouldn't feel guilty about it “One Iota!" Can you tell me why if we our so despised by every other country on earth, why do all these people from these other countries want to move here? Why does our way of life intrigue them so much, enough to make them want to live here yet when asked about their feelings for us, they despise us? Even though they live here and enjoy the life of an American (Sounds like Liberal ideology to me, always wanting it both ways”) Go live in their country (any other country for that matter) and try to use the freedom that this great country gives you and act the way you act here and see how fast you'll miss this great country, you'll be home faster than a “Human Shield!”
You hate it so much? Leave. What do you do if you don't like the house or apartment you live in? You buy a different one or move to another one, you don't like your job? Quit and get another one. You're disgusted with this Country? You hate what it stands for? You believe we deserved 9/11? (Or as someone said earlier “Think of it as a Rock thrown back” yeah I'm sure that's exactly what those people and their families thought it was that day as they got the news that their loved ones were murdered on 9/11! Nice Analogy! I'm sure you would say the same thing, and feel the same way if any of your loved ones were killed that day too. “Oh your Mommy was murdered, but that's O.K. because we deserved it, so as you grow up and she's not around to be a part of your life, just “Think of It as a Rock Thrown Back” whenever you miss her.) In"F'ing"credible!
You all believe we’re the big bad Imperialistic Aggressors whose image is tarnished and are worried about what other people think about us.
It must be torture for you while your sitting in Starbucks reading old issues of “Pravda” while listening to “90.7 KPFK” on your radio, just seething about how ashamed you are to be an American. (I mean, we have been terrorists since 1899) It must be so hard for you wake up everyday in this TERRIBLE COUNTRY and go on with your everyday life knowing how horrible it is (OH THE SHAME!) to actually live in this country. Then just leave this Horrible place aned live in a country that is on the same page as your myopic views.
Deep down I know all the loyal card carrying Liberal/Democrats are hoping that we fail miserably and that there is a tremendous loss of life (our troops included) because that is the only way your actions and ideology will be justified (Liberal Situational Ethics at it’s best) , because none of what you’ve hoped for or predicted has happened. Awwww too bad :(
USA USA USA, SHOCK AND AWE SHOCK AND AWE SHOCK AND AWE, USA USA USA
MAY GOD CONTINUE TO BLESS THIS GREAT COUNTRY AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN IT.
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:24:04 -0800
Subject: Re: the illegal war
From: "Eric Burgess" <email@example.com>
it's clear why you enjoy the pentagon's war strategy since your e-mails follow the same pattern: "shock and awe." you immerse a few shaky "facts" from fox news/cnn in a deluge of xenophobia and self-righteous indignation regarding any view against the war-mongering administration. "no blood for oil" is a simple slogan because it just as simply sums up the bush/cheney/halliburton agenda. it seems a bit hypocrital, though, to criticize the use of slogans, then turn around and bust out with "america: love it or leave it." remember that for every one american killed by international terrorism, american military action ("terrorism", by definition) has claimed thousands more. again, i respect your views, but they all seem to come from the same sources.
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 19:46:24 -0800
Subject: Re: the illegal war
From: "JAX BOX" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
My Dearest Eric,
yes I'm really enjoying this war. I'm enjoying that our troops are in harms way with the potential for many lives to be lost on both sides including civilians, serving their country that you have every right to trash and bash as you are. I'm enjoying the fact that we treat their armed forces as they should be when they surrender or are captured, yet they torture and shoot our captured troops execution style.
Yet you refuse to even think that this is what has been going on in this country for years and that the U.N. never did anything to stop it, and now that it's happening to our troops you'll still say, that's why we shouldn't be there, those troops deserved it for "Terrorizing" this despicable regime. You and your Comrades were probably whooping it up when you heard that one of our soldiers killed one of our own and wounded fifteen by lobbing 3 grenades in their tent. Whoopee! You should be proud of yourselves! I'd bet everything I have that the ACLU is already preparing to defend this guy from being charged of treason and shot by a military court.
And how about now that we're finding out how the Russians had technical advisors in Baghdad all this time showing them how to use radar jamming equipment that Iraq was prohibited to have? They've been selling them to them the last two years even when they said they weren't. Let me think, wasn't russia one of the main ones in the U.N. screaming that we shouldn't invade Iraq? I wonder why? Let's see, France and China and Syria have been to so you think they have something to hide to?
Doesn't it strike you as a bit hypocritical that these iraqi ambassadors who go on tv and condemn us, when yet they do this to their own people and have been for years? And now for the world to see, our captured troops (actually mechanics who they think made a wrong turn).
Probably not because as usual you have your Bleeding heart Blinders on and refuse to recognize the fact that Saddam has been doing these things for years.
And as far as shaky facts, where do you get yours from? Are you sitting in with the military leaders who are in charge there? are you in iraq right now? I haven't seen you as a correspondent on t.v. since the war started, so who say's you know anymore than I do about the facts of this war? You?
Every time I put some facts up here or I should say "Rush to the History books and cut and paste" facts up here, who are you to say they aren't true? Hell you don't even have cable television! You have access through the internet just like I do. So Excuse me if I don't run my facts by you every time before I post them.
For you information I don't just log on to fox news or cnn (don't you know that CNN is a liberally biased station? oh that's right, you don't have cable) on either the internet or the television until I read everything from both sides (Right and Left) of this debate. And I admit that's all I have to go on, but so do you and all of my other "Fans" who are in on this debate. So what makes your facts any better than anyone else's?
So if by saying my facts are shaky "Because You Say They Are" and calling me "Self Righteous" (Now that's the pot calling the kettle black, Mr. "Think of it as a Rock Thrown Back at us" because we deserved it! Actually that's the Stupidest thing I've ever heard!) don't even patronize me by saying "I respect your views, but they all seem to come from the same source" because you don't!
And as far as saying "America, love it or leave it" I never said that as a slogan, I just told you that if you don't like it here, it is your American right to leave. I didn't tell you to, I just said you can if you want to, it's your choice.
You just can't seem to grasp that if you're going to protest under the delusional notion that we deserved to have 9/11 happen to us, a lot of people will not appreciate it, so stop your whining about others who don't appreciate your views, you don't appreciate theirs. Thats the chance you take no matter what you protest.
And how do I respond to "Deluge of Xenophobia" towards me? Is that what your opinion is of me as long as you've know me? Being a mutt myself (Mexican/Sicilian/American) and knowing what it's like to be discriminated against, do you really think I have a fear of foreign people? Call me an "I.A." again, but don't say that I'm prejudice against other races you "Honkey!" j/k... I have clients who are of the muslim faith, and are from that part of the world and I'm not afraid of them nor do I dislike them because they are. But you don't know that.
In response to Dick's earlier response, (unfortunately, I won't be able to answer all of my "Fans" responses individually due to the overwhelming responses) Dick I respect the fact that you were actually involved in the vietnam war which because of LBJ who escalated our involvement because of the Gulf of Tonkin "Non" incident which yes, even i know was way wrong!
But in no way can I agree with your sympathy for Saddam. "Perhaps Saddam is too human to unleash biological and chemical terror" are you kidding me? why don't you "For once not think, with Left-wing rhetoric." Too Humane? Gassing and killing hundreds of thousand of his own people? Too Humane? He just got through shooting are "Mechanics" execution style and parading their bodies all over the world. Too Humane??? Spare me! He is as crafty as a fox and knows that if he uses them 1) he will lose the sympathy from people like yourself and the U.N. who buy into his lies. 2) He knows that there will be no way he could ever be justified in using them and besides he's been saying for years he doesn't have any right?
And as I'm typing this, it was just confirmed that a huge 100 acre chemical weapons factory 90 miles south of Baghdad was just found. But how could that be? Saddam the Humanitarian said he doesn't have any of those plants, the so called U.N. inspectors who needed more time to look where Saddam let them look couldn't find them, that damn Right Wing War Mongering Propaganda!
I guess now it proves that they've always had them. How much more proof do you need? I'm sure you'll think of something.
But first let me have Eric confirm if all the major television newscasts facts are correct or not, I've tried to call him but I think he's on the line with the leaders of the coalition so we might have to wait awhile to see if "His" sources can find out if any of these things are shaky or true.
Now let me ask you a question Dick, have any of your relationships with either friends, family, girlfriends, co-workers or anybody for that matter, have they ever changed or ended as the years go by? Meaning, at first you and whoever the other person was got along great. Then for whatever reason, it just got worse quicker than the French surrendering in World War II? You don't think relationships never change?
I'm not denying who put Saddam in power, but once he became despotic then he needed to go. Just like a marriage gone bad where let's say it's so great the first year, then the next years the husband is physically abusing the wife, but yet nobody but the wife knows, because to his friends and neighbors he's such a swell guy but to his wife who knows better, he's a brutal coward. Relationships Change.
You're more than welcome to go the PC route in touting Frances so called "Agony of Occupation" but they just laid down like the Weasels they are. I'm sure you admired the actions of the "Vichy Regime" who fought against our allied troops during world war two because they too were Right Wingers. Go ahead and tell me how noble the "Vichy" were and what they did was justified. I'm sure you can.
Once again I respect the fact that you were in a war and actually know what it's like to be in one, where as myself and the other people here don't. But if i'm correct in what you were trying to say at the end there (You lost me at "Vicissitudes" there), was, just because I never fought in a war, people like myself should only listen to those that have just because we haven't been there? If that's correct, then I should believe the leaders of our military forces because obviously many of them have been in wars before too and i'm sure many of them had a higher ranking than you did. I'm not trying to be flippant here with you, I'm just asking.
Now that all these Right Wing Propaganda lies will start being proven wrong, what other Left Wing Propaganda will you come up with to refute them?
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 20:08:24 -0800
Subject: Re: the illegal war
From: "Eric Burgess" <email@example.com>
amid all the opinions and facts, there is one thing we can all agree on:
a dead marine is a dead marine.