bluelight

Well i actually did not think this was so.......but this image of Mr Don is taken....after the attack where 5000 kurds were killed by nervegas.After the use of nervegas against Iran..

Anyone doubting this image or more right .....video that it comes from..well check the links...read the interwiew with Mr Don himself and...the origin is...Cnn...





Mr Don



Mr Don...a true christian with a mission


This is why i feel so much condifence about the true reasons for the current war.

The notion of having "real men" with totally corrupt minds..handling the issues...makes you feel safe doesnt it.



Bluelight

Dom

Truly hypocritical.

JavaFox

So the war is wrong because the US has supported bad guys in the past? Would you prefer the US just stay consistent, and continue to support Hussein?

raid517

Well consitancy is good... Its good if you can stay on the good side of things. People will see inconsistancy as hypocracy, indeed I believe that is part of the very definition of hypocracy...

Mainly though I just think people mistrust the Don and his motives. He strikes most people as a manevolant SOB at the best of times. So I guess his biggest problem is lack of trust. Shaking the hand of someone when you later set out to put a bullet in their heads isn't a great way to inspire trust.

Q

Falstaff

and he destroyed entire cultures, or tried real hard, not to mention Jews....War is hell,

__________________

Dom

The US supported Saddam even when he was commiting atrocities, because he was halping us with Iran. But once he does the same thing to someone the US isn't against, now it's worng. Now he's a bad guy. Now he's a brutal dictator. Right.

JavaFox

No, the US supported Saddam because he was anti-Iran, which made him anti-Fundementalist Islam. Sometimes you have ally yourselves with bad guys to right a bigger threat. Europeans should understand this better than anyone else.

Dom

Please, a total load of crap.

raid517

What, do you mean allying ourselves with the USA? Lol Well maybe we could see eye to eye on that one. As for supporting bad guys well I don't think there's ever really an excuse for it. You can try to justify it, but it still means that you are helping to kill torture and suppress potentially millions of people. I don't think any 'cause' is worth that.

Q

JavaFox

Exactly how would have WWII ended without Stalin's help? (each Nazi flag symbolizes 100,000 dead Germans)

raid517

Just to clarify that last point... I'm not saying I'm against the USA (this is for JF's benefit BTW) only that I think this country should look more towards Erope than it currently does. That means spending much more money on defense and helping build up a strong European defense force. But neither the tories here nor labour will allow that. This is simply because America has made it clear that a strong European defense force is against their interests and the UK has blocked any moves in this direction on America's behalf. Why? Who the hell knows? Its certainly not something I support.

Q

raid517

Well on that degree I think I'm probably even more right wing than you on what we should have done with Stalin JF. Lets just say we had about a 3 year advantage over them.

Given the amount of suffering and the countless trillions of dollars that were subsquently spent in putting that particular little mistake right, I don't think 'dong business with him' was all that smart an idea. If It were down to me, he would have been left to rot in the East while the allies went on with their invasion plans. By the time the Germans had finished there, they would have pretty much been a spent and overstretched force anyway. Also, knowing several Russians as i do and what tough SOB's they are, they would probably have won their side of the war without any allied help.

Q

ByteMe

Could it be that Europe could NOT afford a decent defense and feed it's people?

JavaFox

Well, that is certainly a unique perspective, Raid. I don't know that many people would agree with it. Nevertheless, it is interesting. That said, I still think that supporting Stalinist Russia was for the better of the world, particularly Europe.

Zardon

When Stalin gained total control of the Soviet Union, he immediately began to change agriculture and industry. He believed that the Soviet Union was one hundred years behind the West and had to catch up as quickly as possible. This could only be achieved, he believed, by creating a "command economy" and forcing farmers and industry to modernise. So, in 1928 Stalin ended Lenin's New Economic Policy and began to force all peasants to join Collective Farms:
Peasants had to pool their machinery and livestock on large farms, which were controlled by the State. 5,000,000 richer peasants, Kulaks, were murdered or starved to death.
On the Collective farms, peasants were forced to hand over their produce to the government and were either paid wages or had to feed themselves on what was left over. the ensuing result was a devastating famine. Kulaks burnt their crops and killed their animals, rather than hand them over. 5,000,000 people starved to death in the Soviet Union between 1932 to 1934 . Agricultural production fell by 15%.

Stalin made sure that everyone knew about his successes. He used many forms of propaganda to pass on the news, but his favourite form was paintings and sculptures. these appeared all over Russia. they showed Stalin meeting smiling people, opening factories and dams, and he always looked rather taller and fitter than he actually was.

Of all the dictators who came to power between the two World Wars, Stalin was the most successful. Not only did he murder more people than any of the others, but lived to be seventy-three, dying in 1953.

raid517

Well I sure eat ok Byte - there's no one starving in this country, or in the rest of Europe for that matter. Also the combined GDP of Europe is at least on a par with, if not significantly greater than that of the US (or at least it definately will be when most of the former soviet Eastern block countries join too). So I see no reason why more money shouldn't be spent on defense, providing everyone was willing to do an equal share. But if you had read any of the literature supplied from the Project for a New American century, you would know that a militarily strong Europe is expressly against American interests. If there was a political party in this country that saw it some other way, they would have my vote in seconds.

Q

raid517

Well al I'm saying is I don't think we gained anything from that particular little relationship, apart from 50 years of terror, global repression of millions of people and economies that were stifled from genuine growth due spending so much money on defense.

Considering the millions that died, and the trillions it cost us (and being one who lived through the terror of total nuclear destruction in the 70's and 80's; although I was just a kid in the 70's) I don't think the trade-off was all that worthwhile. Did Stalin save our assess during the war? No I don't think so. I think the only thing he did do (which was typical for Stalin) was save his own.

Q

Falstaff

the cold war? and it was a big relationship, really really big..There was a time when the communist threat was so huge that democratic countries all over world were willing to support the prescence of the U.S. military. I haven't forgotten my history lessons...If there was no allied prescence to thwart the efforts of the pro communists regimes, including the old CSSR, we would be fighting a different foe now...or we would all be speaking russian

__________________

raid517

Well really what I was saying is maybe all that could have been avoided. But as there is no way to replay history, we will simply never know..

Q

Falstaff

I know this is morbid, but when I was a lad, I visited some missle silo's with my father, and became familiar with the spector of nuclear war, just on the horizen..and to hear my father tell me that DEFCON has achieved it's highest level many times, and somehow we managed to overcome the desire to push the button first, or they did, and the world existed another day., so many years ago..I didn't understand why people had bomb shelters in their yards, why groups of people were waiting for the end of the world in massive underground networks like the Maginot line, in the middle of Montana..It wasn't till my first years of service and a visit to Cheyenne mountian, that it all came together, it seemed like anyday if the circumstance were completely out of control, that the world would again feel the power of a nuclear arsenal...and the world would end....I even listened to the rantings of Rush Limbaugh, and ultra conservative if there ever was one, wanna good laugh, read the book "I told you so", full of little pundits and political gems..ha ha..Now we all face the spector of another war, driven not by political idealogy, but the strength of conviction in a faith that preaches tolerance, but has become a dymanic behind fundametalists all over the world....A world wide Jihad (in terrorist terms) could become a reality....soon....

__________________

raid517

Well Bush it looks like Bush is engaged in a little 'Jehad' of his own. At least that is certainly how a lot of muslims see it. I'm still not sure about all this, it still feels wrong. It still seems like an invasion rather than a liberation a lot of ordinary Iraqis seem to be thinking this way too. There hasn't been much dancing in the street welcoming the Americas and British as liberators. My prediction is even when Bagdad falls there isn't likely to be either. I mean I hated Maggie Thatcher when she was in power, but if anybody had invaded my country I would have been the first to take up arms. I expect that this is how many Iraqis feel about this invasion too.

Q

Falstaff

are loyal to the Bathist party, and to Saddam Hussien, many of the security personal assigned to the republican guard have no future after the liberation of IRAQ...they might just fight to the death..and take civilians with them. also the terrible possibility that if they people flee, they will be shot by their own military....choices are terribly limited...

__________________

Smoothdrive

About the Tatcher example..how would you have felt if anyone against Tatcher would have "disapeared" and if women would have been beheaded in trafalger square on a saturday afternoon as common practise to set an example ..still take up arms to defend any liberating force ?

__________________
GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Falstaff

I know it sounds like the old "apples and oranges" comparison. but Saddam has hisotrically forced his reluctant tribesman to fight for him or remain loyal through intimidation, murder, and kidnapping...He was absolutely ruthless in his campaign to reduce oppostion. He is a murderer and a thug.....something Margeret never was or never could be...I always admired iron Maggie, even if I didn't agree with her methods

__________________

bluelight

And nobody finds it appalling that the same Mr Don that is shaking hands with Mr Nervegas himself and who was partly responsable for delivering arms to Mr Nervegas........Is today Defense minister in a government that accuses Saddam for something he encouraged Saddam to do 20 year ago??

To me that is schizofrenia (not you that are reading) ...Rumsfeld...


How can anyone think that the world should happily leave it to such a man to "Fix things up" i stead of leaving it to the UN??


Many of you do not see the turmoil your government is currently creating in internatinal politics and its balance.

You deciding to stert "acting" as the "superpower" you are instead of approaching this fact a little more humbly...will create large problems.

Bush Rumsfeld Cheney Wolfwitz......are wrong...they have an analysis that fails.....they dont get it...

Usa can not impose anything on the world and the world will not listen as long as Usa does not act internationally.


Bluelight

raid517

Oh give it up blue... Even I'm beginning to feel its old now. Rumsfeld is a malevolent SOB, well fair enough. Its not really news anymore though... Yawn... I'm really starting to get bored with all this talk of war and terrorism and national security etc... I mean, we really are living in a totally paranoid world...

Q

Falstaff

and hawks are predators....pure and simple...He even scares me....

__________________

Falstaff

had anyone noticed how much McNamara and Rumsfield look alike? I man the fellow from the Vietnam war and Rumsfield

__________________

bluelight

Give it up on MR DON?....Ther man with no moral at all??


Never!!


IN fact i got a mail from a musician in Texas who runs a fairley good and successful band.

The mail was dsort of a publicity for a concert they were to do....


The graphics background for the publicity....was.......


Mr Don.....saying hello to the Green guy.....


And i havent spoken to this dude for more than a year....he does not know my political wiews either.....



So Mr Don.....will eventually be a legend....


Drop him...no no no.....

And.....no it is not irrelevant what happened 1988 because it explains why we are where we are today.


Ignorance and denial of history..is not a good way..and cureently i figure 80 percent of Amnerica has not got one single clue about what was going on then.



Bluelight

Falstaff

It isn't that we don't learn from history, we do, we just ignore the facts.....and 80 percent of americans aren't ignorant of the facts, our news agencies only publish the truth........."not"

__________________