News:
The U.S. military has not properly tracked hundreds of thousands of weapons supplied to Iraqi security forces since 2003, according to the Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, leaving over 14,000 assault rifles, machine guns, and RPGs unaccounted for. Another report found the U.S. unable to say how many Iraqi logistics personnel it has trained, even though the program has cost over $650 million.
The new slogan of the G0P
"Accountability? We don't need no stinkin' accountability!"
I see them! I see the fnords!
- Email this page
By nonexistent manOctober 30, 2006 - 9:28amIt should be clear to anyone....
with half a brain.....
THAT THIS IS ALL CLINTON'S FAULT!!!!
- Email this page
By clausen1October 31, 2006 - 7:17pmWhat the F%^&
Could anything be more negligent mr. Rumsfeld?
Mr. Rumsfeld has been losing our equipment at our expense for the future killing of our sons and daughters. FOR WHAT???
EVERYTHING has gone criminal under this administration EVERYTHING. This SHOULD piss off everyone right and left. This is our money, our security and our future all stolen, lost, or simply given away for what ever reasons in the same way they did it during Iran-Contra.
WHAT THE FUCK
- Email this page
By BastiatOctober 30, 2006 - 9:49amWe armed the terrorists...can't have a war without it.
One more for the road..Boz Scaggs
- Email this page
By madBuckeyeOctober 30, 2006 - 9:54amLet's see now....what is the common thread here?
Beginning of occupation a failure to secure munitions dump = 300 tons of high explosives unaccounted for = a shitload of IED's = more dead soldiers and civilians.
Now thousands of unaccounted for military weapons = weapons in hands of ???? = more dead soldiers and civilians.
At what point would the concepts of accountablility, and responsiblity in this countries handling of the war come into play here?
Just 8 more days to go.....
- Email this page
By frisbee7October 30, 2006 - 10:34amIs this where "STAY THE COURSE" has gotten us?????
jdevould
- Email this page
By jdevould1October 30, 2006 - 10:40amaaaarrgh!
yet another indication that stabilizing iraq really isn't on their list of objectives. oops! more like, arming the hell outta the region in order to assure a little more chaos. more record profits for the big oil boys.
Worst President Ever!
- Email this page
By faade00October 30, 2006 - 11:08ammaintaining public order
H.R. 5122: John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
Section 1076 [about two-thirds down the page] of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled,
"Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."
- Email this page
By madBuckeyeOctober 30, 2006 - 11:17amI KNOW WHERE THE WEAPONS ARE!!
With the $9 billion that's been missing since Bremer's reign. Oh, and with the weapons stash that went missing in 2003 that are now being used against us.
Doin' a heckuvajob Rummy!
- Email this page
By Pookie2112October 30, 2006 - 12:06pmAhh
They just want a fair fight. That is all.
- Email this page
By AntillectualOctober 30, 2006 - 1:07pmSo what else is new and Ho Hum
The guberheaded gubberment is still wondering where the hell all the weapons and gas canisters aka WMD's reagan an the U S furnished Hussain and the Iraqi's during their war with Iran.
- Email this page
By tomp46October 30, 2006 - 1:25pmNot really......
.....actually germany was the number 1 supplier.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,716376,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/17/iraq.chemical.suit/index.html
This is based off Iraqs own disclosure in 98. Pretty big controversy here in europe at the time cuz the majority of countries are european.
On another note...if ya do some research on Iraqs order of battle (ie weapons systems) before Gulf war 1 you won't find any major U:S weaposns systems....just a fact. Russian and Franch aircraft. Russian and chinese tanks. Russian and south african artillery.
The U:S definately supported Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war but so did all of the gulf states and most of europe. Lesser of 2 evils....
- Email this page
By SgtDOctober 30, 2006 - 2:31pmSgtD
Germany number one supplier...who really cares who number one was or even who came in second.
Germany, the U S A, France, Russia (sold arms to both sides) Spain, China, blah blah blah...Hussain was buying arms on the world market from anybody and his dog that would sell the damned stuff to him...and Iran was doing the same damned thing.
And it was pretty damned obvious that just about everybody AND their dogs were willing to sell weapons.....picking out one nation over the other is just more pot calling the kettle black crapola....no offense intended either just stating the facts.
- Email this page
By tomp46October 30, 2006 - 3:07pmMy poli-sci prof in
college said that it was in everyone's best interests for Iran and Iraq to be at war forever. Thus, every time one side seemed to be winning, we (not just US) would begin supporting the other side.
- Email this page
By GMFordOctober 30, 2006 - 3:10pmGMFord
Tell ya what bud your poli sci professor was full of shit as a christmas turkey.
The only thing idiotic war dictates of that sort produces is more wider spread war.
Instead of local war, due to extraneous influence as you stated doing. it becomes regional war, and if that is not resolved in as timely manner as possible it becomes WORLD WAR.
Do the names Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Isreal being actively at war with the names Syria, and Iran rattling their war sabers, was not our own nation sucked into war because of just two men, bin Laden, and Hussain.
You my friend should have gone to another school..or better yet join the military and get a taste of the world over seas and a double helping of reality.
- Email this page
By tomp46October 30, 2006 - 3:25pmHold your horses
tomp46. I think what he was saying was that it would be bad if Iran took over Iraq or vice versa. He wasn't giving his opinion but was just saying that US foreign policy was to keep it a draw, not let either get too powerful.
Re: joining the military - by the time I was old enough I was already pregnant so not an option.
- Email this page
By GMFordOctober 30, 2006 - 3:36pmYou made the statement...Reagan/U.S armed.....
.....Iraq. I know thats pretty much gospel nowadays but if anybody looks into it....it's highly exagerated.
We backed the lesser of 2 evils and that support didn't really start till it looked like Iraq might lose.
If Carter had been pres I guarantee you he wouldn't have let Iran win that war.....can't prove it but it's my opinion.
We got what we wanted....a draw. Either country winning that war would have been bad news.
If we'd actually wanted Iraq to win they'd have had F-16's and M-1 tanks....but we wouldn't sell them.
- Email this page
By SgtDOctober 30, 2006 - 3:22pmperhaps backing one of two evils
was not a good policy. perhaps it would have been best to stay out of it completely.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:03pmperhaps it's not a good idea to sell wmd
to one of two evils.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:03pmreagan's help not exaggerated
In an October 1, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Got Germs for Weapons Program from U.S. in ’80s,
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:07pmreagan's help not exaggerated
n an October 1, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Got Germs for Weapons Program from U.S. in ’80s,
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:14pmreagan's help not exaggerated
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp
i think reagan gave our allies the go ahead to supply saddam.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:16pmreagan also sold weapons
to iran, but i don't know if he sold them wmd. don't know about that.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:18pmreagan defended saddam's
use of chemical terrorism.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:18pmsgtD
is making excuses for reagan.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:19pmSgtD
YES I DID SAY rEAGAN ARMED HUSSAIN...but read where I said about the U S and reagan being number one, two or 2000 on the arming Hussain list.
Please produce data as to how its HIGHLY EXAGERATED. It doesn't change the facts that the U S did spitefully furnished weapons of all types, including nerve gas agent canisters aka WMD's, to the Iraqi's that were used against the Iranians.
And if you want my opinion on it, I think Carter would have accepted the losses of the attempted rescue and backed off to renegotiate...not my perferred method in that instance...had it been me, I would have bombed, (but never gas) Iran or any other nation that went against international diplomatic embassy policy, attacking the embassy, taking diplomats, their staff, and military guards hostage, back into the stone age until the hostages were released.
I'm not knocking reagan for arming Hussain against Iran at the time for there was just cause. However I do knock some of the weapons that were furnished Hussain's military, including white phosphorus, and gross overkill Daisycutter meat shredder type bombs and nerve gas that reagan signed off on.
My military record confirms that I personally killed 62 souls in Southeast Asia and I never tried to make a slow kill ormutilate a one of them
- Email this page
By tomp46October 31, 2006 - 11:32amreagan gave the world the ok to supply saddam, i think
Germany is home to the most major suppliers listed in Iraq's 1998 U.N. declaration. The Netherlands and Switzerland each are home to three companies on the list. France, Austria and the United States each are home to two.
TWO US COMPANIES HELPED SADDAM GET HIS WMD ALSO.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:02pmiraq's wmd programs were stopped in 1991 says
sgtd's article.
The list in Iraq's 1998/current chemical weapons declaration contains 31 "major suppliers", 14 from Germany. The 1996/current nuclear suppliers list has 62 company names on it, 33 from Germany. As Iraq claims that since 1991 it has not engaged in WMD production, the lists name no post-Gulf War suppliers. Call it old news. So much the sillier that the UN refuses to make them public. But since the BND claims that deliveries did not stop at the end of the Gulf War as well as simply as a matter of record of German complicity in arming Iraq, the issue remains an urgent current concern.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:25pmnot THIS german govt, says german official
The spokesman however said that the German government of the time in 1990 had informed the parliament about such German supplies to Iraq.
Ever since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, there has been a strict embargo against the country. The spokesman said that there have been a few cases of violation of the embargo and the government has initiated investigations.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:31pmis this info put out
by OUR iraqi puppet govt?
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:32pmreagan's role not exaggerated
The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items that had both military and civilian applications, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:39pmreagan's role not exaggerated
"It was a horrible mistake then, but we have got it right now," says Kenneth M. Pollack, a former CIA military analyst and author of "The Threatening Storm," which makes the case for war with Iraq. "My fellow [CIA] analysts and I were warning at the time that Hussein was a very nasty character. We were constantly fighting the State Department."
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:41pmreagan's role not exaggerated
Although U.S. arms manufacturers were not as deeply involved as German or British companies in selling weaponry to Iraq, the Reagan administration effectively turned a blind eye to the export of "dual use" items such as chemical precursors and steel tubes that can have military and civilian applications. According to several former officials, the State and Commerce departments promoted trade in such items as a way to boost U.S. exports and acquire political leverage over Hussein.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:50pmreagan's role not exaggerated
When United Nations weapons inspectors were allowed into Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, they compiled long lists of chemicals, missile components, and computers from American suppliers, including such household names as Union Carbide and Honeywell, which were being used for military purposes.
A 1994 investigation by the Senate Banking Committee turned up dozens of biological agents shipped to Iraq during the mid-'80s under license from the Commerce Department, including various strains of anthrax, subsequently identified by the Pentagon as a key component of the Iraqi biological warfare program. The Commerce Department also approved the export of insecticides to Iraq, despite widespread suspicions that they were being used for chemical warfare.
The fact that Iraq was using chemical weapons was hardly a secret. In February 1984, an Iraqi military spokesman effectively acknowledged their use by issuing a chilling warning to Iran. "The invaders should know that for every harmful insect, there is an insecticide capable of annihilating it . . . and Iraq possesses this annihilation insecticide."
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:53pmreagan's role not exaggerated
Although U.S. export controls to Iraq were tightened up in the late 1980s, there were still many loopholes. In December 1988, Dow Chemical sold $1.5 million of pesticides to Iraq, despite U.S. government concerns that they could be used as chemical warfare agents. An Export-Import Bank official reported in a memorandum that he could find "no reason" to stop the sale, despite evidence that the pesticides were "highly toxic" to humans and would cause death "from asphyxiation."
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:57pmreagan's role not exaggerated
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52241-2002Dec29?language=print...
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:58pmBad enough...
... to sell weapons to all sides, but these folk are giving them away????does it count as supporting out troops, if we are giving away all the weapons the enemy needs as well.
That to say nothing of arming all sides in a civil war, where hating Americans is about all they can agree on.
- Email this page
By freedemOctober 30, 2006 - 3:09pmJust part of the
whole general f*up.
- Email this page
By GMFordOctober 30, 2006 - 3:11pm...psst!... c'mere... I gotta secret for ya.
..don't tell anybody... it's a secret!...
hey, ever wonder why the so-called Iraqi Security Forces are NEVER properly armed with heavy weapons or properly armored personnel transport vehicles by Rumsfeld??
DUH!!
NOW YOU KNOW!
The situation in Iraq has been SO unstable that they haven't dared to properly arm THE SO-CALLED GOVERNMENT... BECAUSE THOSE ARMS WOULD QUICKLY BE USED TO KILL AMERICAN TROOPS.
IT'S CHAOS.
Heckuva job, Bushie...
... GLAD YOU IGNORED ALL THAT SOUND ADVICE FROM COMPETENT ,EXPERIENCED MILITARY OFFICERS.
.
- Email this page
By A GOctober 30, 2006 - 4:14pmi guess our iraqi puppet troops
stole the weapons and gave them to the militias and the insurgents. bush says we are making progress.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:59pmRepulsive Disgusting Democrats
Bad enough that NJ Democrats install
judges who are in favor of gay "marriage".
Now it turns out that their new shining star
- Jim Webb, who's running in Virginia against
the next US President George Allen (that will
be the 4th President named George!) - is a
super sick pornographer, who fantasizes not
only about pedophilia, but INCESTUOUS
pedophilia. His writings are too explicit for
the airways.
IS there any choice in November? Methinks not.
- Email this page
By weaslerOctober 30, 2006 - 4:56pmIt's no worse than
what Lynn Cheney or Bill O'Lielly have written.
- Email this page
By Pookie2112October 30, 2006 - 5:10pmAnd there it is folks!
Todays' off-topic and so-last-week whine by the cast of Desperate BushWives...
I don't care WHAT Webb writes about...they're not making it a kindergarten textbook are they? Then what's your fucking problem, Nazi? Got something against Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press? Hmm?
- Email this page
By heavily armed l...October 30, 2006 - 5:20pmWheezy 's just spewing today's talking points...
Like a good little ass kissing yes man. And then he'll tell you in the same breath how MANLY and MACHO he is. Pitiful.
- Email this page
By LiberalIconoclastOctober 30, 2006 - 5:28pmGentlemen, gangrene has officially set in to our thread.
That's the best you can do weasle-dick?
Check out "Johnny Reb Allen's Swift Boating of Jim Webb":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
Then come back with a better reason to vote for the Gay Old Pedophile's party.
- Email this page
By enemyofthestateOctober 30, 2006 - 5:28pmHave you no shame?
Have you no conscience??
WOW!
You just don't care, do you.
You know full well that the N.J. Judges were REPUBLICAN appointees. I've told you time and time again.
You also know full well that the "Drudge Report" story on Webb's novels WAS A LIE... You know that full well.
Well, welcome to Karl Rove's America folks.
...And these fascists wonder why people rise up and slit their fucking throats in their sleep.
.
- Email this page
By A GOctober 30, 2006 - 7:37pmrepub rep. tom reynolds
told hastert about the over friendly email last spring. hastert has still not resigned.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:00pmbill o'reilly is a pervert
repubs still love him.
we expect dems to be sinful. we expect more from the holier than thou repub party.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:01pmwebb was just writing what veterans had seen?
Bear with me as I try to figure out this Jim Webb situation. Senator Allen and the mighty GOP cabal is making a big deal about several historical novels written by Jim Webb and endorsed by Senator McCain which depict the horrors of the Vietnam War. The horrors include sexual references and acts which many veterans observed in the war. This somehow proves Jim Webb's lack of character.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:04pmsenator allen is a racist
Senator Allen, meanwhile, made a cameo appearance in the awful movie Gods and Generals (in the interest of fairness, Stephen Lang, who played Stonewall Jackson, was brilliant). Gods and Generals, apart from being a preachy love letter to the Confederacy with an editorial pace making it seem only about two minutes shorter than the actual war, contained repeated instances of the word "darkies" to describe African-Americans while glorifying the generals who engaged in what technically amounted to an organized military and political insurrection against the United States. Senator Allen is seen in the movie singing the Bonnie Blue Flag lyric, "Hurrah! Hurrah! For Southern rights, hurrah!" implying, in part, the right to own slaves. Senator Allen, when you boil it right down, portrayed a traitor against the United States. An insurgent, if you will.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:06pmwebb was just writing what he saw in nam
t the end of the day, the Rove Republicans have once again highlighted how shameless they can truly be. Not only have they brazenly and without remorse attacked the patriotism of decorated veterans like Max Cleland and Senator McCain, but now they're attacking a decorated veteran who wrote about the war. They've ripped these passages out of context for the easily led masses and posted them on Drudge. Then, in the most ridiculous strategic move in this outrageous stratagem, they pooped out Lynne Cheney and dumped her in CNN's lap to perpetuate this trumped up outrage against a Vietnam War veteran.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:10pmwebb was just writing what he saw in nam
he end of the day, the Rove Republicans have once again highlighted how shameless they can truly be. Not only have they brazenly and without remorse attacked the patriotism of decorated veterans like Max Cleland and Senator McCain, but now they're attacking a decorated veteran who wrote about the war. They've ripped these passages out of context for the easily led masses and posted them on Drudge.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:11pmwebb was not writing fiction. he was writing what
he witnessed in nam.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:13pmwebb was not writing fiction. he was writing what he saw in nam
Now Jim Webb, a well-vetted Reagan appointee, has been forced to defend his stories of the war. Likewise, Michael J. Fox has been forced to defend his Parkinson's symptoms. What kind of party is this which controls our entire government and most of our media right now? It's surely a party which hasn't deserved a single second of that kind of success. And the only reason why they've managed to attain this power is very simply because they're good at "one thing," as Karl Rove quoted from City Slickers this week. That one thing is manipulation. They manipulate you and everyone they encounter through fear, deception and ignorance of the truth. They manipulate good people into defending themselves when no defense would otherwise have been required.
I think I've grasped this now. Thanks for your patience.
A final note to anyone who's written about the atrocities of the Iraq War and who plans to one day serve in politics. Delete now -- especially if there's a chapter about Abu Ghraib containing the phrase "naked men smeared with feces forming a human pyramid." Who knows what brand of futuristic cyberwingnut will try to nail you on it.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:13pmjpn said webb was writing fiction
that would be a lie. he was writing what he witnessed in nam. i guess drudge lied again.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:14pmwebb was not writing fiction. he was writing what he saw in nam
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:16pmrepubs can afford the best liars/slimers
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:16pmrepubs will do anything to win. they have no morals
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:18pmthis is why i say
winning and losing is not important. what's important is not selling out your morals in order to win, like repubs do. in fact, repubs have turned suck selling out into an art form.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:20pmwinning and losing
winning and losing is not important. what's important is not selling out your morals in order to win, like repubs do. in fact, repubs have turned suck selling out into an art form.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ huffpost/20061028/ cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:21pmwinning and losing
winning and losing is not important. what's important is not selling out your morals in order to win, like repubs do. in fact, repubs have turned such selling out into an art form.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ huffpost/20061028/ cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:22pmeach election
repubs get lower and lower. then i think they can't go even lower and they manage to do just that. lol.
winning and losing is not important. what's important is not selling out your morals in order to win, like repubs do. in fact, repubs have turned suck selling out into an art form.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ huffpost/20061028/ cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:22pmrepubs giving a bj to satan
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20061028/cm_huffpost/032694
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 8:24pmFuck this regime!
Again...just how are we winning hearts and minds for Jesus? How is life better in America than it was ten years ago?
A hundred years from now (if we survive as a nation), history will look honestly back on George Walker Bush Junior as a dimwitted, egotistical despot who led our republic into war, chaos and cruelty.
- Email this page
By LiberalIconoclastOctober 30, 2006 - 5:11pmOh thats just great.
So we're arming the waring factions through a proxy now. We give weapons to the Iraqi military and police and they give them to the waring factions.
The incompetance of the Bush administration is astounding.
"It was believed afterwards that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said." "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain
- Email this page
By QuantaOctober 30, 2006 - 5:35pmPray, contards!
Maybe your Jesus will work a miracle and Rapture you all before the election! Iraq is the lead weight on your President's feet with a noose on the other end.
- Email this page
By LiberalIconoclastOctober 30, 2006 - 5:52pmJesus Seen Riding an Elephant!!!!
I must admit that the limits of my Christian worship is praying to the invisible white man with blue eyes and hair like Lynyrd Skynrd is to just take all these pathetic, war-mongering anti-Christian Christians off to La-La-Land where they'll praise the great white man, hovering on clouds, eating grapes, playing harps and singing eternally about the earth they destroyed. Ah...just get the hell off my planet so we can finally live in peace...
Then, I guess that leaves us all the other wacko religous nut-jobs around the world. Damn - don't they have any rapture-like thing we can pray they go home to as well? Anyone?
- Email this page
By Redneck LeftistOctober 30, 2006 - 6:07pmrise up and resist corporate radio
Freeform radio takes to the airwaves on www.homegrownradionj.com
Where have alll the protest music gone?
Seasonal tid-bits and good natured Bush Bashing from 9:30 till midnight and beyond!
Join The Rough Draft Freeform radio Program!
Let Freeform Ring!!
- Email this page
By Rough Draft Fre...October 30, 2006 - 6:47pmreagan's help not exaggerated
In an October 1, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Got Germs for Weapons Program from U.S. in ’80s,
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:06pmtactical nukes
Over 300 troops were killed when this Post and ammo dump were attacked. Watch as tactical nukes blow, and you will here the men being ordered to seek cover in bunkers.
http://justanotherblowback.blogspot.com/2006/10/us-marines-vid-of-ammo-d...
One more for the road..Boz Scaggs
- Email this page
By madBuckeyeOctober 30, 2006 - 7:06pmreagan's help not exaggerated
Iraq Used Many Suppliers for Nuke Program
Tuesday, December 17, 2002
E-MAIL STORY
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
UNITED NATIONS — Dozens of suppliers, most in Europe, the United States and Japan, provided the components and know-how Saddam Hussein needed to build an atomic bomb, according to Iraq's 1996 accounting of its nuclear program.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:09pmreagan's help not exaggerated
n an October 1, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Got Germs for Weapons Program from U.S. in ’80s,
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 7:14pmIran
I just saw a very intersting documentary about Iran on France 2. It seems that Iran's nuclear desires go back to the time of the Shah, when the US was actually helping them. Iran signed onto an agreement that if they got peaceful nuclear power, they would not develop any weapons. That is what they claim to be doing now. However, the man who was in charge of the nuclear bomb project in Pakistan is now working in Iran. Iran also allowed Pakistan to test its nuclear bomb right on the Irani-Pakistani border. Other than the US, France provided nuclear materials to Iran for a time, and now Russia is. What a tangled web! It seems that this mess was caused by the nuclear powers in the first place.
"Blind faith in bad leaders is not patriotism." SLC mayor Rocky Anderson, 8/30/06
- Email this page
By MichtouOctober 30, 2006 - 8:41pmyes, we helped the brutal
shah of iran to build nuclear power plants.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 9:20pmRummy ! and co.
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html http://www.airamerica.com/springer/node/8391 http://www.airamerica.com/springer/node/7526 http://tinyurl.com/dw846
http://www.geocities.com/tthor.geo/debasedmoney.html
- Email this page
By google mrsickofitmanOctober 31, 2006 - 8:24amwebb was writing about things he saw in the nam war and
southeast asia, including an apparent act of pedophelia.
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 9:20pmwhy didnt the rupugs attact ? They like lil boys !
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html http://www.airamerica.com/springer/node/8391 http://www.airamerica.com/springer/node/7526 http://tinyurl.com/dw846
http://www.geocities.com/tthor.geo/debasedmoney.html
- Email this page
By google mrsickofitmanOctober 31, 2006 - 8:24amwebb was writing about things he saw in the nam war and
southeast asia, including an apparent act of pedophelia.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200610/PO...
- Email this page
By mtmeggidoOctober 30, 2006 - 9:23pmIraqi war .lies .bush.9-11.Debt slaves.collapse of nation.
Why We Fight
www.amazon.com Buy the documentary film on DVD Now at 32% off. $16.99 on DVD
Why We Fight
Moviefone.com In Theaters Now - Get Showtimes, Read Reviews, Watch Clips & More!
Why We Fight - A Film By Eugene Jarecki
Eugene Jarecki's film about the anatomy of the American war machine, combining personal stories with commentary by military and political insiders.
www.sonyclassics.com/whywefight/ - 4k - Cached - Similar pages
Why We Fight (2005)
Why We Fight - Cast, Crew, Reviews, Plot Summary, Comments, Discussion, Taglines, Trailers, Posters, Photos, Showtimes, Link to Official Site, Fan Sites.
www.imdb.com/title/tt0436971/ - 58k - Cached - Similar pages
BBC - Storyville - Why We Fight
Info and links on the documentary about America's military might.
www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/storyville/why-we-fight.shtml - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
Why We Fight
Why We Fight. What are the forces that shape and propel American militarism? This award-winning film provides an inside look at the anatomy of the American ...
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8494.htm - 11k - Cached - Similar pages
whywefight
Why We Fight. by George Marshall's War Department; Frank Capra - producer; at Fox & Disney studios; Alfred Newman - music ...
history.sandiego.edu/gen/filmnotes/whywefight.html - 5k - Cached - Similar pages
A S W E F I G H T | M I D N I G H T T O R N A D O
We’re really happy to announce that Niller is the new drummer in As We Fight! Niller was already a good friend of ours, and both Jason and GUN play with him ...
www.aswefight.com/ - 7k - Cached - Similar pages
Apple - Trailers - Why We Fight
An unflinching look at the anatomy of the American war machine, weaving unforgettable personal stories with commentary by a “who’s who
- Email this page
By google mrsickofitmanOctober 30, 2006 - 9:33pmHaunting words of hallowween! BOO!
Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
* and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming t