If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Yes, but it had a valid reason for doing so.
It was at war at the time , facing guerilla attacks. The best way of stopping thwm was using chemicals to destroy the forests they hid in. Your figure of 1.1 million is very suspicious.
Why? The US has complete superiority without the need for nuclear weapons.
Cold war treaties for a cold war world.
Oh so a war justifies anything then does it? I look forward to your change of heart regarding evil Saddam's use of chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war then...
Well, why don't we just get the US to nuke any country that poses it a problem? That way the civilians would have been spared years of agony and not a single 'good guy' would have been lost.
Provided that the oil reserves weren't damaged Matadore, would you have supported the US if it had dropped a few nukes on Iraq instead of waging a conventional war? And if not, why?
And by the way, the 1.1 million figure is correct. I’ll post the link tomorrow.
Because nowadays the life of a single soldier is considered a price too high to pay. The fact that the spineless chimp has forbidden TV stations from showing footage of returning coffins confirms that nowadays any American death is a death too many.
And by the way it's not me who says it. The US has been saying for the last two or three years that it is studying the use of small nuclear bombs in battle.
Well, what are a few thousand civilians and a small environmental catastrophe next to the life of a few US soldiers eh?
Oh yeah? I wonder if you would have been so complacent if instead of the USA it had been Russia or- horror of horrors- scary communist China who announced they were going to build themselves an anti-missile shield while at the same time re-starting their nuclear weapon development programmes... :rolleyes:
Face it, and admit it while you're at it: That idiotic buffoon has made the world a far more dangerous and volatile place than it was four years ago.
The bombs saved the lives of millions of Japanese as well as American troops. Dont deny it, you know its true.
What? If this is true then why is Bush risking the lives of America troops at all?
You are too attached to the Cold War world of treaties and multilateralism. In order to provoke real change in the world you have to make sacrifices andtake tough decisions.
Since you like the Republicans so much you must be aware of their extensive and prolific links with the weapons and oil industries. The wars Bush has taken his country into (killing hundreds and injuring tens of thousands of his own people, let alone foreigners), the new arms race he has created, the destruction of good relations between old allies and the increased level of conflict and tension worldwide have all been the price we've had to pay for the neo-cons endless greed and dangerous thirst for absolute power and dominance.
May we never again have to endure such evil, corrupt and dangerous bunch of murdering lying bastards as the "leaders of the free world."
the stuff these guys are finding is from the program that was abandoned
Oh... the equivocation continues... it don't count, unless it was made last week.
Glad THAT has been clarified...
Oh, the humiliation, to die from a weapon that was made a decade ago, rather than new production. The mortification will haunt us for all eternity...
Freerepublic
Comment#11? That would be me. I had the temerity to say: "Libya had nuclear weapons??" One post, one suspension of posting privileges. Not expecting to get them back anytime soon either. Can anyone show me a 'lefty' website that prickly?
Wasn't that Clinton?
immigration changes
Kinda reminded me of LBJ's civil rights changes during Vietnam
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,923715,00.html
Tis another diversionary political ploy to deflect attention away from the myriad of exposed duplicities, corporate cronyism and foreign policy blunders committed by this admin.
Your list of Bush’s achievements is impressing.
Summarising this all ( though you have included only “good” things there, right?) I may say that it illustrates American policy, a road on which America is rolling down and that warm place in what it’s rolling quite well.
Following conclusions may be made:
1. Even neo-conservatives can do not so bad things sometimes ( randomly) like rejecting Kyoto and modest tax cuts.
2. Trying to save their conservative image neo-cons have to do some popular though practically meaningless gestures like banning abortion and saving those odds and ends of the Second Amendment Americans still have. ( of course Bush have no intention to restore the 2nd Amendment. It supported the right of citizens to have any weapon available at the time, not pistols only, and were made to protect them not from burglars but from the Government itself. If American Constitution wasn’t a piece of toilet paper this would mean Americans could have machineguns, tanks, missiles, submarines, jet-fighters…and use it against tax collectors)
3. This all can’t change the main course of America toward more Socialism. More State’s spending, more State’s programmes, more State’s control, more rules, restrictions, regulations, more redistributing wealth from one groups to others. Some things as NoChildLeftBehind, Medicare reforms, Patriot Act, forcible establishing democracy overseas ( World Revolution using communist jargon), attempts to control family through constitutional acts, donations for religious organisations, fingerprinting foreigners etc are measures any communist dictator would be proud of. In some things Bush even goes further like restoring sea piracy. Now American Navy can add proudly scull and bones to stars and stripes.
CIA Was With UN in Iraq for Years,
Ex-Inspector Says
'In the book, Ritter provides a detailed description of his work for the United Nations, which began in 1991 and ended last summer when he resigned in part in protest over what he described as the Clinton administration's meddling in the work of the inspectors. In repeated interviews since his resignation, Ritter has alleged that the administration hindered the arms inspections out of fear of direct confrontations with Iraq.
Ritter says in the book that the CIA became actively involved in inspections in 1992, the year after the United Nations began weapons inspections in the search for evidence of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq. In the book, he says that he and a senior CIA official -- identified in the book by a pseudonym, Moe Dobbs -- worked closely together "to plan the operational and intelligence support for the largest and most complex inspections ever undertaken by Unscom." Ritter said that beginning in the spring of 1992, "Dobbs and his men provided seasoned personnel who could operate vehicles, organize logistics, run communications -- simply put, the kind of people you want around you in a difficult situation."
The agency played its largest role, he said, in an inspection in June 1996, when nine "CIA paramilitary covert operators" were placed on a team seeking to inspect compounds maintained by the elite Iraqi Republican Guards. The compounds were believed to be hiding evidence of Iraq's programs to build chemical and biological weapons. The Iraqis tried to block the inspection, resulting in a standoff that lasted several days and brought swift condemnation of Iraq by the United Nations.
That same month, Iraqi dissidents made a coup attempt against Saddam. The coup failed, and Ritter said he later became suspicious of the timing of the coup attempt and of the presence of an Unscom inspection team that included several of the agency's employees. "There was no proof of Dobbs' involvement, but there was a strong set of coincidences," he said. "The inspection was directed almost exclusively at Special Republican Guard sites; the coup plotters were from some of the same units we were trying to inspect."
While working for the United Nations, Ritter, a former Marine intelligence officer, was paid by the Defense Department; he was considered to be on loan to Unscom. "We have reminded Ritter of his responsibilities, and we just leave it at that," said David Rigby, a spokesman for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Pentagon agency that had Ritter under contract. The Pentagon has argued that under his contract, Ritter is required to submit the book for a security review if it contains any information, classified or unclassified, about his work for the United Nations.
Ritter and his lawyer have said that the Pentagon's demand is an effort to intimidate him into silence and that the contract cannot be enforced since it expired last year.'
Back to the actual topic of lies, here's an interesting window into the integrity of the head honcho behind the militant posture of the current regime...
Rumsfeld caught in his own lie
heheh
People say 9/11 was a horrendous act, and I agree, it was,and then they scream for justice and all that other bullshit. The sad truth is that 9/11 is probably the best thing that ever happened for Bush because he has been able to gather the support of the american people by broadcasting his propaganda about "the war on terror" and divert their attention from the country's economy, which is quite frankly in the shit.
Have you ever watched an american news channel? It makes me sick how they actually get away with that amout of worthless propaganda... if any of that was screened on the BBC in the UK there would be an outcry!
And isnt it funny how killing litterally millions in Vietnam is OK because they were at "war", but its not ok for terrorists to kill hundreds in the 9/11 attacks? WHAT BULLSHIT!!!!
If anyone says the attacks on Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan or whatever other third world country the us feel like invading is justified, then as far as im concerened they are saying the 9/11 attacks were justified, and infact the terrorists are freedom fighters.
The sad thing is that most people dont read up on this stuff, or gather thier information from first class publications such as "The Sun".
And these terrorist attacks, in all thier inhuman butchering sadism, would not have ever happened if the damn americans had followed the god damn geneva convention like everybody else, but its too much to ask.
Israel was created pretty much in an unlawful manner, but the americans were all for it, because the loss of human life not just for the short time, but also during generations of fighting, is ok for them, as long as they have a nice westernised state along with hundreds of nuclear missles and military supplies right smack bang in the middle of the middle east, should they feel like invading another country.
ANYONE who says any of the wars started by those stupid arseholes in the whitehouse is justified is not only misguided, but deserves my pity for not being able to see past the lies and propaganda that is the governments of both america and the uk.
wow it feels good to rant...
It seems Bush and Osama play in the same team.
What we have here is the definitive example of the ignoranace of youth, emboldened by the likes of you, regurgitating the pablum spoonfed, by the likes of you... carrying on the legacy of... you.
Do you have any thoughts about the half million people killed and 600,000 severely injured/deformed by Agent Orange alone?
You should, some of them being your own comrades.
How noble of your government to use the chemical indiscriminately even though it was fully aware of the side effects :rolleyes:
ok say 9/11 was a hundred thousand, it still does not come anywhere near the amount of innocent people the americans have killed...
remember, the american government has been toying with world politics for a long time, and even if they havent killed themselves, theyve aided killing, for example, the whole mess with Israel, or giving weapons to the Afghans to fight against the Russians...
Look at good old Osama, he was behind 9/11, but how could such a man achieve such an act? Could it be his training from the CIA?? Yes it most certainly could. The CIA trained him to be able to put together attacks such as 9/11, but they wanted him to use these skills on the Soviet Union.
So infact we can blame 9/11 on the Americans, who take the blame for all of the other killings listed before.
9/11 is just a form of poetic justice... America's killing spree finally hit them, and they dont like it.
A crude, biased and predjudiced analysis, made by someone with little or no understanding of international relations and diplomacy.
You hurt my feelings!!!!:crying:
Now is it that i have no understanding of international relations or YOU only have a narrow minded biased opinion of national relations that result in a basic form of the good old "we are western, we are right" idea thats been going on for hundreds of years? :rolleyes:
While I can't argue that the use of Agent Orange was a good decision by the US government, there is debate as to whether or not the side effects were "known" to our government.
Today, veterans are compensated (I believe) for Agent Orange-related illnesses.
However, at the time, AO was used for the specific purpose of defoliating the trees in Vietnam so that landing strips could be created for our military personnel, as well to destroy wooded havens that could put our troops at risk during the Vietnam War. An attempt was made to only use it in non-populated areas, however, unfortunately, sometimes it did not happen that way.
So the goal was not to maliciously hurt people, it was to help our troops win the War. Not a very well-thought out decision, but not a purposeful and knowing attempt to harm people through chemical poisoning (not the Vietnamese nor our own guys).