Okay, I lied

[vraiblonde]

I said I couldn't talk about war anymore because the idea of a naked Robert Reich sent me into a catatonic state.

Then I read this (<---you can click that):

Land-war commanders have been devising procedures to make it possible for entire Iraqi units to signal the allies that they prefer to stay out of the fight. Units that indicate they intend to stay on the sidelines will be exempt from air and land attack and may not even be taken prisoner, allied officers say.

Air-war commanders are planning to limit their attacks on Iraq's infrastructure to reduce the hardship for the Iraqi people. In the 1991 Gulf War, the United States attacked Iraq's power plants and electrical grid to try to deprive of power air defense units and other Iraqi forces. This time they intend to conduct more focused attacks, seeking seek to avoid interrupting the civilian electrical system.

Yeah, Maynard, ST and JLab - these are some real bloodthirsty SOBs, let me tell you. And their compassion for the Iraqis just makes you all look that much smaller.

 

[SmallTown]

Great, trying to take extra credit for things they are SUPPOSED to do in the first place. UFB.

I can't speak for the others, but i'm not spouting things such as being blood thirsty. I am saying it would be very nice for the county (and the careers of Bush and Blair) if we UN approval. I also question the motives that Iraq is the main focus when we have a couple of other countries posing a much greater threat (Did I mention the State Department says that Iran is the greatest state sponsor of terrorism?) And, afterall, this IS the war against terrorism, right??

 

[Kyle]

Can we get off the U.N. approval crap?

It will never happen. Read each word.... The Frogs, Ruskies, Krauts and other Clucks will ... ( NEVER ) ... ( EVER ) ... sanction action against So Damn Insane as long as they have a vested interest in his regime.

U.N. Approval WON'T happen. We have to do it alone and say the hell with the Euro-trash.

 

[Kyle]

Ok! Maybe not "ALL" of 'em.

 

[justhangn]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Land-war commanders have been devising procedures to make it possible for entire Iraqi units to signal the allies that they prefer to stay out of the fight. Units that indicate they intend to stay on the sidelines will be exempt from air and land attack and may not even be taken prisoner, allied officers say.

"If they show the right signals and do not want to be part of a defense of Saddam's regime and weapons of mass destruction, we will do everything in our power to not target those either with air or ground formations," Lieutenant General David McKiernan, commander of allied land forces, said in an interview.

I think this is a mistake. I know taking care of the POW's was a huge PITA, but just letting the enemy walk around is another.

 

[jlabsher]

Originally posted by Kyle
Can we get off the U.N. approval crap?

U.N. Approval WON'T happen. We have to do it alone and say the hell with the Euro-trash.

But of course, you seem to have forgotton that King George's SOLE publicly stated reason for going to Iraq is that they are disobeying a UN resolution. Why are we so worried about enforcing a UN resolution one way but don't care about UN approval the other? Could you please explain this with logic? War= UN OK, no war=UN bad.

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by jlabsher
But of course, you seem to have forgotton that King George's SOLE publicly stated reason for going to Iraq is that they are disobeying a UN resolution. Why are we so worried about enforcing a UN resolution one way but don't care about UN approval the other? Could you please explain this with logic? War= UN OK, no war=UN bad.

Personally I couldn't care less whether he wants to get U.N. approval or not anymore.

The sleezeball in Irag has the material, means and motivation to do harm to others, including us ( U.S. for those of you without a country ), and anything that exterminates this roach is just fine with me.

If that includes the Brits, Portugal or anyone else. Cool. If not... FM.

... One further point... The U.N. has recently, with the addition of terrorist states on the Security council, rendered "ITSELF" irrelevant. The U.N. makeup of the time, circa 1990, was at least reasonable enough to understand the nature of the beast.

For now, under the Flags of its creditors, Iraq has some protection from a U.N. action.

And you know... It IS all about OIL... To the French!

 

[jlabsher]

And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill, KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me, sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."

oops, forgot the credits: Arlo Guthrie - Alice's Restaurant


Your mama would be proud!

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by jlabsher
And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill, KILL, KILL." ...

You really need help!

A dose of reality too... But first, really serious psychiatric help.

 

[jlabsher]

Originally posted by Kyle
You really need help!

A dose of reality too... But first, really serious psychiatric help.

Reality is relative, it does not exist solely on Fox News Channel or Rush Limpba&&s show.

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by jlabsher
Reality is relative, it does not exist solely on Fox News Channel or Rush Limpba&&s show.

Nor does it exist where you're looking... With your head up your ###!

 

[Bruzilla]

You make a good point jlabsher. This all makes no sense because the UN makes no sense. They pass sanctions and resolutions then make no effort to back them up. That's because at it's core the UN is not united. It's a group of seperate nations, all looking out for their own best national interests. The US sees Iraq's government as a threat and wants to take them out. France and Russia sees them as a business partner and wants them to stay. Everyone says that they are corrupt despots and murderers, but when you're talking 50 billion dollars in oil contracts, that buys a lot of forgiveness from the French and Russia. Talk about the real "Blood for Oil" mentality.

When I first read about the new Spare the Iraqis mentality I had mixed emotions. What if a bypassed unit changes it's mind and decides to attack? What impacts will there be on our troops if we have to slow down critical manuevering units because we're trying to bypass Iraqi units? On the plus side, the Iraqis will need a decent military if they are going to keep Turkey and Iran from invading immediately after this war. I guess this is not such a bad approach given the downsides of trying to rebuild a military from the ruins.

 

[jlabsher]

Anyway, just trying to make the case against a quasi-totalitarian regime waging the first unprovoked war in its 225 year history for no valid stated purpose on a nation that poses no direct threat to its borders and will only serve to alienate it in the eyes of its allies and the rest of the world.

Its populace which has the most advanced technology, greatest freedoms, and highest standard of living in the history of civilization shows nothing but apathy and chooses not to debate the facts or call its government to task.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by jlabsher
Anyway, just trying to make the case against a quasi-totalitarian regime waging the first unprovoked war in its 225 year history for no valid stated purpose on a nation that poses no direct threat to its borders and will only serve to alienate it in the eyes of its allies and the rest of the world.

Its populace which has the most advanced technology, greatest freedoms, and highest standard of living in the history of civilization shows nothing but apathy and chooses not to debate the facts or call its government to task.

Didn't the predecessor to the UN, The League of Nations, run into a similar situation about 70 years ago when dealing with Germany and their continued claims of being in compliance with the Treaty of Versailles? No one would agree that Germany was a threat or was not in compliance, but we know how that one ended now don’t we. It is time to be unlike the French and remember what has happened in the past.

By your use of the term "quasi-totalitarian" are you implying that the Legislative branch has not authorized the Executive branch to take action and that the Executive is doing this on it's own?

The reason many of us aren't challenging the government is because, and this might just shock you, we have full faith that our government is right.