Features

El Blanco · #1

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

Imagine, sending human shields to places that would actually be targeted.

ItalianStereotype · #2

HAHAHAHA HAHAH HA HAAAHHA, i find that funny mostly because that was a ridiculous thing to do in the first place.

BombsBurstingInAir · #3

They can go back to their college campuses now.

KevinTheOmnivore · #4

Yeah! They sure as hell better get a J-O-B before they EVER have an opinion on their country AGAIN! They have NO excuse, Dennny's is hiring ALL the time!

I think we should in fact give examinations again when people vote, but THIS time, if they are critical of America, they should get a big fat F.

I mean, why can't these hippies emulate our VP? He had NO problem finding a job when he left public life. He did GREAT things w/ that company he ran....

BombsBurstingInAir · #5

yeah, he is a good business man. What's your point big daddy?

KevinTheOmnivore · #6

That's my point. Cheney earned his right to speak out against Iraq, cuz he had a job with HALIBURTON! God Bless it, dirty hippies.

El Blanco · #7

The point isn't that they disagree. Thats part of what this country is about . My point was that they had a chance to put their money where their mouth was, and they backed out.

What exactly were they there for if not to shield targets of American bombs? Do they honestly think we aim for hospitals and orphanages?

KevinTheOmnivore · #8

Sorry Blanco, my response was more for bombs and his typically smug response towards anybody who doesn't agree with the President.

But since the question was raised....

Quote:

What exactly were they there for if not to shield targets of American bombs? Do they honestly think we aim for hospitals and orphanages?

Baghdad is an air tight city with 5 million people in it. The military doesn't have to bomb those places, they will hit places with many civilians anyway. And hospitals could be targeted, because, those are the kind of places Saddam will keep alll of his stockpiles of nukes and weapons, right?

BombsBurstingInAir · #9

Big Daddy, is smug so bad? is HALIBURTON so bad?

El Blanco · #10

But the human shields were all over Bagdad. Why did they get choosy when they were sent to power plants, which the city also needs? Not cool enough? Couldn't take pictures of little babies to send back home a validate themselves?

KevinTheOmnivore · #11

Hey, guess what? Much like I'm sure you will take the luxury to sit back in your warm home and cheer for this war o CNN over a bowl of popcorn, people AGAINST the war actually have the right to not go commit suicide for their feelings.

Honestly, I see little utility in acting as a human shield. All it means is one more dead person. And there are many human shields who will go where the trouble is. Good for them, that's their right. But I won't criticize those who choose not to stand out there any more than I criticize folks like you and bombs who will be taping it on your VCRs.

And bombs, call me big daddy again, and you're getting spanked....naughty boy. And no, Haliburton is wonderful, just don't bash France again for investing in Iraqi oil, ok?

KevinTheOmnivore · #12

Godfrey Meynell is a silly looking bastard.

El Blanco · #13

I am not cheering for this war. I think it nessacery. There is a difference.

I am not belittling them for not being human shields, I am belittling them for saying they would, and then backing out. They plaster their faces all over the news and then decide they don't want to.

KevinTheOmnivore · #14

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

I am not cheering for this war. I think it nessacery. There is a difference.

It took (correct me if I'm wrong) over a year for the inspections in South Africa to be completed. These inspections have gone on for not even 6 months, and people like you have declared them futile and unsuccessful. I truly believe you would be happier to see inspectors pulled out and bombs dropped in. This seems to be completely contrary to logic, at least at this point in time. Yet you don't think you WANT this war...?

Quote:

I am not belittling them for not being human shields, I am belittling them for saying they would, and then backing out. They plaster their faces all over the news and then decide they don't want to.

That's fine, but then you should also belittle warmongers such as Dick Cheney and President Bush, who when their time was called for, respectively got themselves in very safe positions, ie. coast guard or whatever. It's a two way street.

El Blanco · #15

South Africa didn't take ten years to just work with the inspectors. Hussien has been pulling this for over 10 years. When do you get to say the inspections are futile? And the inspectors keep finding things he said he didn't have.

And do you really think I like the idea of someone who never served in combat is Commander-in-Chief? I just happen to think he is doing the right thing in this instance.

BombsBurstingInAir · #16

Big Daddy sure is in a foul mood today. And I won't be watching the war.

KevinTheOmnivore · #17

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

South Africa didn't take ten years to just work with the inspectors. Hussien has been pulling this for over 10 years. When do you get to say the inspections are futile? And the inspectors keep finding things he said he didn't have.

In 1998, President Clinton pulled the inspectors out to enact Op. Desert Fox (ie. bomb people). Hussein wouldn't let them back in because the UN inspection team was being asked by the U.S. to do things "other" than inspecting.

Same year, Scott Ritter went before Congress and chastized the government for not taking inspections seriously. He was blown off. If you want to fault the success of inspections, fault all sides involoed.

Also, please explain where inspections have thus far gone wrong. Obviously, Iraq hasn't cooperated the best it could, but keep in mind how well the U.S. or other major powers might respond to such a request. Iraq is currently destroying their illegal missiles under the supervision of inspectors. Now, I'm sure, tather than viewing this as a success for inspections, you immediately dismissed it as a "ploy" of siome sort. I'm not saying you have no argument for war at all, what I'm saying is that you shouldn't hide just how badly you want it.

Quote:

you really think I like the idea of someone who never served in combat is Commander-in-Chief?

You haven't seemed bothered by the idea until it was brought up just now.....

Bombs: It must be because I don't have a "career," or maybe because my Carly Simon CD is skipping.

*spank*

El Blanco · #18

Quote:

In 1998, President Clinton pulled the inspectors out

And the previous 7 years?

Quote:

Scott Ritter went before Congress and chastized the government for not taking inspections seriously.

What did he do to Saddam for stonewalling? Why should Congress have taken it seriousy if they weren't happening?

Quote:

If you want to fault the success of inspections, fault all sides involoed.

Yes, we and the UN are at fault for putting up with this bullshit for this long.

Quote:

please explain where inspections have thus far gone wrong.

You mean, when they happen unobstructed?

Quote:

Iraq is currently destroying their illegal missiles under the supervision of inspectors.

You mean the ones they said they didn't have? And it will be a success when all of the WMD are destroyed or the inspectors finished and unhindered report and find nothing.

Quote:

I'm not saying you have no argument for war at all, what I'm saying is that you shouldn't hide just how badly you want it.

So, I can have an outlook, but sharing it makes me a warmonger?

KevinTheOmnivore · #19

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

And the previous 7 years?

Before they were pulled out, inspections seemed to go pretty well, at least according to those who had been inspecting. Not to mention we blew the hell out of Iraq in the Gulf War.

Quote:

What did he do to Saddam for stonewalling? Why should Congress have taken it seriousy if they weren't happening?

The result of the inspections don't corellate with your opinion.

Quote:

Yes, we and the UN are at fault for putting up with this bullshit for this long.

Again, fact is, we gave up on inspections, partly because President Clinton needed to appear assertive about something in order to make up for troubling times.

We pulled them out, and likewise, when it was agreed that Iraq had not come into 100% compliance (NOTE: Not meaning they had nukes stock piled, simply meaning they hadn't met the standard set).

The UN and the U.S. Government failed then, and now they are complaining. Too little, too late.

Another question is why should Saddamhave obeyed? It was policy all throughout the 90s, both public and private, that nothing would improve inj Iraq unless Saddam was out. It IS not, and never HAS been about all of these mythical weapons that Saddam will hit America with.

Quote:

You mean, when they happen unobstructed?

Like now?

Quote:

You mean the ones they said they didn't have?

Again, why should someone commit suicide? The U.S. and the UN have never REALLY cared about inspections, so why be concerned now? Bush will invade whether they give up those missiles or not, which also proves that this is NOT about WMD. It's like holding a gun to someone with a gun, and saying "give me the gun, and I'll think about not shooting you."

Quote:

So, I can have an outlook, but sharing it makes me a warmonger?

No, I think you ARE a war monger. That isn't what I'm criticizing, what I'm criticizing is the need by most on the pro-war side to pretend to be peaceful puritans, and that their support for war is out of necessity, not desire. I don't buy it.

El Blanco · #20

So, if I support prostate exams, that means I enjoy them? Or maybe its something I think is awful, but needs to be done for the long term good.

Why should Saddam comply? He doesn't have to. He can happily pull Iraq out of the UN. You want to be in the club, you play by the rules.

AChimp · #21

Why did these people think human shields in Iraq when he already has millions?

KevinTheOmnivore · #22

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Blanco

So, if I support prostate exams, that means I enjoy them? Or maybe its something I think is awful, but needs to be done for the long term good.

Uhhh, sure.

Quote:

Why should Saddam comply? He doesn't have to. He can happily pull Iraq out of the UN. You want to be in the club, you play by the rules.

If it meant no more sanctions and no-fly zones, I'm sure he would.

FS · #23

I agree that this news story makes the human shields look mighty stupid, but quoting the article:

Quote:

Nine of the original 11 activists decided to pull out after being given an ultimatum by Iraqi officials to station themselves at targets likely to be bombed in a war or leave the country.

There's a big difference between acting as a human shields to protest the war, protect civilians or at least call attention to their unnecessary deaths, and being recruited by the Iraqi army.