What the Eurotwits would like George W. Bush to say

[Velociryx]

And I applaud that dialogue! The only dialogue I disapprove of is the one where one party holds "his end" from a safe distance.

If you and I both agree that there is a dangerous problem, but I'm not willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with you to solve it, then I have no business telling you how you should.

-=Vel=-

[Ned]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
"In Europe….no such creature, unless you’re a Lord or King. Regular guys never had a chance"

Nogaret, just to go very, very far back. I don't know, what did you learn about social mobility in the middle ages and early modern times?

Don't forget that Austrian paper hanger with the bad mustache and the short Corsican artillery commander.

[Garth Vader]

The kind of dialogue I disapprove of is the one where you tell me how it's going to be and if I have a problem I can get lost, especially if the solution is going to affect me.

Just as action is a two way street so is dialogue.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Garth:
Well....it's not as though we simply have knee-jerk reactions to things going on around us (if that were the case, then the planes would have been flying the hour after the WTC attack), but yes...at some point, you gotta quit talking and start doing....and if you don't, then it should come as no great shock when nothing changes....true?

-=Vel=-

Oh really? Why then did Bush jump on the war wagon immediately after securing Afghanistan? Why is he constantly repeating the mantra that "Saddam must be disarmed" even when there's been no proof that he even has anything? He doesn't want to listen to anyone, except for his lap dog Blair. He won't even consider any other viewpoint. Hell, even Stormin Norman has come out and said that there's currently no basis for a war.

And it certainly didn't take very long before American troops were on the ground in Afghanistan. Not that I'm criticizing, I feel that was warranted. But the current position on Iraq isn't, at least not yet. If the inspectors find proof that he has WOMD, then it will be. But not until then.

Whatever happened to the American concept of innocent until proven guilty?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Garth Vader
True, but many long term festering geo-political debacles have been caused by jumping in too fast and not thinking about the long term ramifications.

There has to be a middle ground between sitting on your thumbs, and jumping in without thinking.

I'd just like to Mtg's post.

War shouldn't be the first club out of the bag, but you shouldn't leave it in your trunk either.

Yes, and that's my main objection to the current policy. There's been viirtually no discussion on the ramifications of an American invasion of Iraq, they just want to go in and bomb the crap out of them.

What will be the consequences for Pakistan for instance? Musharrof is having a hard time trying to contain the large fundamentalist population there, many of whom are still supporting the Taliban and Al Qaeda. That's no doubt where Bin laden is hiding out right now. Is the US prepared for a possible civil war there if they invade Iraq. What will that do for world security if a fundamentalist regime gets their hands on a fully functioning nuclear program.

And what guarentees do we have that placing a puppet regime in Iraq after a war won't end up seeing a repeat of what happened with the Shah of Iran? Do any of the American patriots ever stop to consider the long term ramifications a war might lead to? No, they just want to go blow things up and kill people. They just want revenge for what happened on Sept. 11.

Well guess what folks, Iraq had nothing to do with that. You're misplacing your vengeance.

[Velociryx]

To Garth:

If you're risking your a$$ to solve the problem that you and I both agree is dangerous and in need of fixing, and I'm not willing to risk anything (but more than willing to cheer or boo you from the sidelines), then yep....you're running the show, and I'm along for the ride. If I don't like it, I can do something about it. Specifically, I can ante up and share the risk.

To Willem:

No proof that he even has anything? We KNOW he has stuff dude, and I'm betting (conjecture on my part) that the *reason* we know he's got it, and the *reason* there has been a reluctance to talk about it, is that WE SOLD IT TO HIM! We're prolly sitting on a pile of reciepts marked paid in full for X tons of Anthrax or whathaveyou.

Bad decision? You bet. But I'm betting that it's closer to the truth than anything else....Saddam was "our boy" for a while....almost no doubt in my mind that he bought more than conventional weapons from us.

Where Iraq is concerned, Saddam has NEVER been innocent, and neither have we. In this case, it's a purely dirty business, and we're taking out our own garbage. Sucks, but true.

-=Vel=-

[Garth Vader]

If I don't like it, I can do something about it. Specifically, I can ante up and share the risk.


Since I am just about finished for the day it's nice that we can end our pleasant conversation on something we can both agree with!

[Velociryx]

See you tomorrow man....I've enjoyed it!

-=Vel=-

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx

No proof that he even has anything? We KNOW he has stuff dude, and I'm betting (conjecture on my part) that the *reason* we know he's got it, and the *reason* there has been a reluctance to talk about it, is that WE SOLD IT TO HIM! We're prolly sitting on a pile of reciepts marked paid in full for X tons of Anthrax or whathaveyou.

You'd better tell that to Hans Blix then, he doesn't seem to agree with you.

[Velociryx]

Blix has SAID in his numerous reports that Iraq is NOT cooperating.

If he had no WMD's, then he can easily furnish the reciepts AND copies that confirm the orders for their destruction.

He hasn't done it.

And, he keeps playing games with the inspectors, enough to get Blix to SAY that Iraq is not cooperating.

What does that tell you?

If the stuff is destroyed, he could produce the confirmation orders and be done with it.

If it's not, he could stop playing cat and mouse.

We have observed this pattern of behavior before.....we can therefore, draw some conclusions about it, BASED ON what we know about the guy.

I agree...Blix *has stated* that he has found nothing.

He has also stated that Iraq is not cooperating.

That should be the end of the story.

The UN mandate says he either cooperates, or we twist his freakin' arm.

Our man on the ground says he's not cooperating.

What else do you want?

-=Vel=-

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Blix has SAID in his numerous reports that Iraq is NOT cooperating.

Not cooperating and actually having WOMD are two different things altogether.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx


The UN mandate says he either cooperates, or we twist his freakin' arm.

No! That's the mandate of the second resolution that's being drafted, the one that Bush has been trying very, very hard to block.

PS Does anyone have the exact wording of Resolution 1441 handy?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Ah, good. Seven pages of ****. Congratulations to all participants.

[Velociryx]

How 'bout a grain of common sense?

If he had nothing to hide, he would cooperate!

If there was no story to tell, he'd give the inspectors full access.

What possible reason, if he's about to get his arse kicked up one side of the block and down the other, could he possibly have for playing games?

The answer is that he's got them well-hid enough that he's convinced he can keep hold of them....we'll come charging in, make a general mess, but not be able to remove him from power (and even if we do, the control of the weapons will pass to his croonies), and when the dust settles, he's still got them.

If he didn't have any, the best move would be to come clean and cooperate.

If he had them, and didn't have a use for them in mind later, the best move would be to come clean and cooperate.

That's not what's happening though, is it? What does that suggest to you?

What it sugessts to me is that he has them, and is playing games to keep them in some form or fashion, even at the cost of his life and position.

-=Vel=-

[Provost Harrison]

Yeah, when someone confronts you with an objection and argument, this article shows the best way to put your point of view across, sarcasm, arrogance and stubbornness. The thing it fails to understand that no one loves Saddam either, but we certainly don't like the problems such a war could cause, the sheer casualties, and then there is the destabilisation in the region. It's like sticking your kn0b in a hornet's nest.