a plea to all americans

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:22:13 GMT, "Casey" wrote:

as did they back the taliban against russia
The USA did not support the Taliban.

He isn't very good with names (or grammar), but he's still right. The
USA backed the Mujahideen against the Soviets in their Afghanistan
war. The Mujahideen turned into the Taliban. Jimmy Carter took
the USA out of the Olympics because of that Soviet war.

the taliban were a faction of the mujahadeen. they were supported by
pakistan and saudi arabia. the US wasnt involved.

And you conveniently forgot his other point, that the USA backed
Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war.

irrelevant. 2 fanatical regimes. you play the hand you're dealt. and
we were right to oppose the islamist fanatics. look at their actions
over the last few years.

---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

check my blog at:
http://www.bobview.blogspot.com/

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:16:47 -0000, "Ken Catchpole"
wrote:


"Mitch Farmer" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:22:13 GMT, "Casey" wrote:

In Europe, we have a lot to be greatful for from the USA, not least for
helping us rebuild after WWII - a fact that is often forgotten. However,
there is a lot of ill-sentiment towards the US because American forgein
policy is very often extremely naive

so is that of france and germany. look at the view of the folks in the
ivory coast towards france today. thousands of ivorians stormed a
french military center last week screaming 'kill the french'.

it's become a cliche to say US foreign policy is 'naive'.

, and because the people are so
inward-looking. Good foreign policy doesn't win US voters. Take a look at a
US newspaper and you'll struggle to find the half of one page devoted to
world news.

the US invented this thing called the 'internet'. plenty of
international news there.

The fact that most Americans have never been outside their state
(why would they - America is a big place) also means that Americans (even if
they care) simply do not *realise* they are being overly naive.

sigh...most of these screeds eventually devolved into a patronizing
lecture on how SMART the poster is...



And Stalin as well when it was necessary. Go figure. Didn't stop us
from ending the Soviet Union's reign of terror, did it? Naturally you

IIRC the USSR disbanded itself, and was largely down to Gorbarchev's brave
"Perestroika"- and at the very least it was more complicated than "The
Americans Won". This is *exactly* the sort of naive and arrogant
banner-waving that ****es off the rest of us.



guess he doesnt read much. shortly after the time of the soviet
union's collapse, the former soviet foreign minister, alexander
kozyrev, wrote an article in 'foreign affairs quarterly'. he said it
was economic competition from the US that forced the collapse of the
USSR. the soviets realized they were falling further and further
behind and couldnt catch up.

but, we dont read, you see...
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

check my blog at:
http://www.bobview.blogspot.com/

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 03:19:18 -0500, nobody wrote:

Casey wrote:
And you conveniently forgot his other point, that the USA backed
Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. Go back and read newspapers
during the 1980s (search on the USS Stark) and you will see that
the media portrayed Iraq as the USA's friend.


Ossama had direct help from the CIA.

hhmmmm...really? proof? because in the november, 2001 issue of "GQ"
magazine, robert fisk published an interview with bin laden. there,
OBL said he never received funding or training from the CIA.

The problem started when Russia pulled
out of Afghanistan and the USA quietly widthdrew its suppor happy that the
enemy of communism had taken over and not thinking about the implications of
the taliban. On Sept 11 2001, the USA paid a high cost for this error

gee. imagine. helping to liberate a country, then expecting the people
who LIVE there would build a better country. go figure.


What I can't wait to see is Hussein picking up the video where Rumsfeld shakes
his hand to conclude the sale of biological arms and intelligence supply to
help Iraq combat Iran during the 1980s. With such a video in court, he could
then subpoena Rumsfeld and get the USA to publicly admit that it was the USA
who supplied WMD and WMD technologies to Iraq. If Franch television (france)
had a copy of that video, I would assume Hussein's lawyer could get such a copy.

the french will never show it since they were iraq's primary arms
supplier over the last decade.

(The USA never found the UN
inspectors to be useful because they went against the Bush regime's political
goals as per the newamericancentury.org plans.

then why did the french veto former arms inpector rolf ekeus to have
hans blix's position, which required them to take blix? answer: the
french thought blix was 'too aggressive'.

seems you know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field

check my blog at:
http://www.bobview.blogspot.com/

In alt.politics, you wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 03:19:18 -0500, nobody wrote:

What I can't wait to see is Hussein picking up the video where Rumsfeld
shakes his hand to conclude the sale of biological arms and intelligence
supply to help Iraq combat Iran during the 1980s. With such a video in
court, he could then subpoena Rumsfeld and get the USA to publicly admit
that it was the USA who supplied WMD and WMD technologies to Iraq.

Since there is no proof that the U.S. supplied WMD to Iraq in the 80's
or any other time, how would that be helpful to the mass-murderer
Sadam Hussein?

Of course, if you think there IS proof then show us, or be shown
to either be a liar or a pitiful propaganda dupe.

Where is your link to the 'truth'?

Go ahead, we'll wait..

You don't need to wait for long.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm:

Even before Iraq released its weapons-program dossier on 7 December 2002,
it was said that the report would name the corporations that supplied Iraq
with the equipment and other material it needed to develop biological,
chemical, and nuclear weapons. Soon after the report was released, those
suspicions were confirmed. Sources who had seen the report said that it
identified suppliers from the US, UK, Germany, France, China, and
elsewhere.

Now, that part of the report has been leaked. The leftist German daily
newspaper Die Tageszeitung received portions of the original, uncensored
12,000-page dossier. (The names of the corporations have been blacked out
of the version of the report given to the ten non-permanent members of the
Security Council.) The paper has printed the list, presented below.

Key

A = nuclear weapon program
B = biological weapon program
C = chemical weapon program
R = rocket program
K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi
Ministry of Defense, and building of military plants.

USA

1. Honeywell (R, K)

2. Spectra Physics (K)

3. Semetex (R)

4. TI Coating (A, K)

5. Unisys (A, K)

6. Sperry Corp. (R, K)

7. Tektronix (R, A)

8. Rockwell (K)

9. Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)

10. Finnigan-MAT-US (A)

11. Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K)

12. Dupont (A)

13. Eastman Kodak (R)

14. American Type Culture Collection (B)

15. Alcolac International (C)

16. Consarc (A)

17. Carl Zeiss - U.S (K)

18. Cerberus (LTD) (A)

19. Electronic Associates (R)

20. International Computer Systems (A, R, K)

21. Bechtel (K)

22. EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R)

23. Canberra Industries Inc. (A)

24. Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

"In addition to these 24 companies home-based in the USA were 50
subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business
with Iraq from within the US. Also designated as suppliers for Iraq's arms
programs (A, B, C & R) were the US Departments of Defense, Energy, Trade
and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia
National Laboratories."

Cheers, Jan

--
/"\ Jan Kalin (male, preferred languages: Slovene, English)
\ / http://charm.zag.si/eng/, email: "name dot surname AT zag dot si"
X ASCII ribbon campaign against HTML in mail and postings.
/ \ I'm a .signature virus. Copy me to help me spread.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:39:21 +0000 (UTC), in (Jan Kalin) wrote:

In alt.politics, you wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 03:19:18 -0500, nobody wrote:

What I can't wait to see is Hussein picking up the video where Rumsfeld
shakes his hand to conclude the sale of biological arms and intelligence
supply to help Iraq combat Iran during the 1980s. With such a video in
court, he could then subpoena Rumsfeld and get the USA to publicly admit
that it was the USA who supplied WMD and WMD technologies to Iraq.

Since there is no proof that the U.S. supplied WMD to Iraq in the 80's
or any other time, how would that be helpful to the mass-murderer
Sadam Hussein?

Of course, if you think there IS proof then show us, or be shown
to either be a liar or a pitiful propaganda dupe.

Where is your link to the 'truth'?

Go ahead, we'll wait..

You don't need to wait for long.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm:

ROFL!!!!

Surely you wouldn't call this site an objective repository of truth.
Man, that is pathetic.

Bush may have been tipped to 9/11 attacks

The US Terrorism Plot That the Media Ignores

Pentagon denying Purple Hearts to keep down casualty counts

Delivered Into Hell by US War on Terror" by Maher Arar

Bush Snr met with bin Laden's brother on 9/11

FBI scrutinizes antiwar rallies

Under US control, press freedom falls short in Iraq

Facility 1391: Israel's secret prison

Happy 75th birthday, Mickey the Racist!

CIA allowed to kill Americans

US troops more hostile with reporters

Bush and the hidden coffins

Senate wimps out with unrecorded, unaccountable voice vote for $87-billion Iraq appropriation

Guantanamo inmate sues US

PUH-LEEZ ..


--
* "We will direct every resource at our command - every means of
* diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law
* enforcement, every financial influence and every necessary weapon
* of war - to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror
* network. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against
* another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or
* no rest." - President George W. Bush - September, 2001

Casey wrote:
And you conveniently forgot his other point, that the USA backed
Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. Go back and read newspapers
during the 1980s (search on the USS Stark) and you will see that
the media portrayed Iraq as the USA's friend.

Back then Iraq was an economically weak country and not much of a
threat. Iran however was a threat to the region. The USA used Iraq to
stop Iran. The USA's mistake was not realizing what their own doing
would create. Bush just a couple months ago publicly stated it was a
bad mistake to use one thug to defeat another.


You don't know anything about history.

LOL...And most who spew the above crap seem to think the Iraq of the
1980's bears any resemblence to that of the 90's through now. Besides,
the mistakes made back then are just that. Mistakes. Some seem to
learn from them and correct them and move on. Others such as yourself
seem to use old mistakes in a weak attempt to support their views for
current day.

Ken Catchpole wrote:

As it was, IIRC Bill Clinton - despite his faults - was instrumental in
signing a series of global treaties.

Treaties or just simple pandering? Much of what Clinton gave away has
come back to haunt us today as a direct result of his pandering ways.

"ray" wrote in message
om...
when is someone going to get around to trying george bush

When are you going to wake up. George makes you feel
and your country "impotent". That's your problem.

In article , nobody wrote:
....
What I can't wait to see is Hussein picking up the video where
Rumsfeld shakes his hand to conclude the sale of biological arms and
intelligence supply to help Iraq combat Iran during the 1980s. With
such a video in court, he could then subpoena Rumsfeld and get the
USA to publicly admit that it was the USA who supplied WMD and WMD
technologies to Iraq. If Franch television (france) had a copy of that
video, I would assume Hussein's lawyer could get such a copy.

So, you admit that Iraq has WMD - and the means to hide them (because we
gave it to them).

Good. That will be all.

In article ,
Ken Catchpole wrote:
The fact (?) that most Americans have never been outside their state
(why would they - America is a big place) also means that Americans
(even if they care) simply do not *realise* they are being overly
naive.

Source?

Not that I am against the sentiment expressed (in fact, one of the truly
neat things about the US is the fact that you *don't* have to cross
international borders to see new and different areas - i.e., our "states"
are about equivalent to your "countries"), but the statistic looks fishy.

As they say, 63% of all statistics are made up.