• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 2/8/18)
See more
See less

President Bush Issues 48 Hr. Ultimatum....Please Pray For Our Soldiers

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dcm:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Calico:
    And, libraries are not foistering porn off on your son; they are providing free access to information, whatever information is out there. Internet filters suck, really bad, can't access sites like the Dykes Library at the University of Kansas Medical Center.

    If you think your son is going to the library to look at porn, maybe you, as his mother, can talk with him about it?
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    "...Whatever information is out there." You mean including pornography? Sadly, we do not go to the public libraries often. Plus I would never allow my kids to use public computers to access the internet. They can do that right here under my watchful eyes.


    ********
    I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

    I'm just the mom.

    Proud to be an American! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well, I wish some of the others complaining about unrestricted internet access had your perspective about supervising their own kids on the internet. But, is this the reason you do not go to the library? you actually blame the library for internet content? wow.

    Libraries can not block just porn, because other sites with blocked words, or parts of them, can not be accessed. If they could, they would. It would be impossible to archive and block all the individual porn sites, hundreds are added each day. If you have the answer, then please let us know so this issue can be resolved once and for all for all time.

    Internet II will help, but I'm not sure libraries can afford subscriptions, if there is one.

    Comment


    • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Calico:

      But, is this the reason you do not go to the library? you actually blame the library for internet content? wow.
      <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

      Get real. I am not a complete moron.

      ********
      I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

      I'm just the mom.

      Proud to be an American!

      Comment


      • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dcm:
        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Calico:

        But, is this the reason you do not go to the library? you actually blame the library for internet content? wow.
        <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

        Get real. I am not a complete moron.

        ********
        I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

        I'm just the mom.

        Proud to be an American! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

        then why do you not use the public library sadly?

        I interpreted your statement that you sadly do not use the library because of internet access. If i am wrong, I am sorry, but that is the context of the discussion. I will never and have never called you (or anyone) a moron. have a good day, I can see you're off to a good start!

        Comment


        • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dcm:


          Sometimes I am shamed of those who call themselves Americans.

          <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


          Just which ones are you ashamed of? Why? Because they don't agree with what you do? Personally I think that's pretty hypocritical.

          Secondly, your other comment "They are just an independant country, andif any of their citizens could survive being a dissident, they would just remove Saddam from power if they did not like him." made me think. From what I am hearing on the news, the coalition forces were expecting far more "welcoming" arms from the Iraqis, especially in the southern regions, known to be anti Saddam. I think this is one of the main reasons the war has sortof stalled at the moment, because they weren't expecting such troops to be putting up such resistance. If this is the fight the anti-Saddam people are waging,they are concerned (and rightly so) about how much "fight" the Pro Saddam Republican Guards are going to put up in the areas closer to Baghdad.

          Perhaps these folks are not so happy that the coalition forces (ie the US and English) just stormed into their country to ostensibly "free" them.....to me it begs the question "why are they all fighting so hard against us if they really want to be liberated.?" Maybe that's just what the media has portrayed to make is boiled down to a soundbite which the american people can swallow.

          Elippses Users Clique........
          Co-Founder Occularly Challenged Equine Support Group
          Ellipses users clique ...
          TGFPT,HYOOTGP

          Comment


          • lilblack, I see what you're saying, these folks are 'brainwashed' into dependency on Saddam. THey honestly think they are doing the right thing, and in no small part because we let them down last time after Desert Storm. We promised to free Kuwait and liberate Iraq, but we stopped after freeing Kuwait. (i'm sure that this has been said before, I apologize, haven't read all 50 some pages). So why should they believe it this time? The US expects Iraqi citizens to rebel with its provocation; but with such a half-assed history, why should they trust us?

            Comment


            • Calico,

              See my post a couple pages back. I listed several times over the last 1000 years the "west" invaded the middle east under the belief we would "liberate" them, combined with your example of the latest shrift, of course they don't believe us. These people have a society and history over 8,000 years old. Every other time they have been "liberated" the conquering army became an occupier.

              As for Internet II, it is primarily for universities, government and industry. Membership for access is $200K. We use it to access the Space Station in real time and control our experiments.

              dcm,

              The reason the missiles fell in Baghdad, is that surface to air missiles are short range with little to no guidance systems (heat seekers, radar). If no target is presented then they become falling bombs when their fuel runs out. Their range is very limited (around only a few miles) so they can easily fall within the city where they are launched. The laws of physics can not be violated (unless we are looking a Bose-Einstein Condensates). The same goes for the anti-aircraft projectiles.

              Sorry, but your sarcasm is lost because yes, these occurances are directly the result of our presence there. However, I agree with you about sometimes I too am ashamed of those that call themselves Americans.

              In other news, Halliburton has been taken out of the running for the overall contract to rebuild Iraq? It seems the many of the folks in the administration and in other places began to realize the rank smell of Dick Cheny's "nepotism."

              Reed

              Comment


              • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Calico:
                We promised to free Kuwait and liberate Iraq, but we stopped after freeing Kuwait. (i'm sure that this has been said before, I apologize, haven't read all 50 some pages). So why should they believe it this time? The US expects Iraqi citizens to rebel with its provocation; but with such a half-assed history, why should they trust us?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                Exactly, Calico. Many in the southern parts of Iraq did, with the encouragement of the U.S., take up arms against the Iraqi army in 1993. They were soon thereafter abandoned by the U.S., to bear the repercussions alone.

                The British military spokesman was on CNN late last week and deemed the war a 'battle for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people' - which makes the challenges there even greater. The U.S., specifically, is confronted not just by the daily battle; they're also combating a very troubled history - and long memories.

                Comment


                • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> We promised to free Kuwait and liberate Iraq, but we stopped after freeing Kuwait. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                  Not so, Calico, unless you ave a very narrow definition of 'free'.

                  Kuwait is NOT a democratic state. Women have barely any rights; only a small percentage of men (i.e., privileged) can vote. And the UN acknowledges the SLAVERY is still a problem in Kuwait.

                  Comment


                  • [quote]"Exactly, Calico. Many in the southern parts of Iraq did, with the encouragement of the U.S., take up arms against the Iraqi army in 1993. They were soon thereafter abandoned by the U.S., to bear the repercussions alone."
                    ------------------------------------------------
                    The above statement begs the following questions:

                    Why did the U.S. not follow through at that time?

                    Was it because President Bush, Sr. was coerced into accepting that there was no "mandate" to move forward?

                    Isn't that exactly what the dissenters are now claiming again--by way of the anti-war proponents?

                    Why do some so contemptuously accuse President Bush of "just wanting to finish his Daddy's War"..?

                    Were this (arguably) the case, would it then be so wrong?

                    Which is it?

                    Wrong or right to have pulled out and abandoned the brutally oppressed to the dire repercussions?

                    Wrong or right to finally deliver the people of Iraq from this despotic madman?

                    Is this talking out of both sides of the one head?

                    Is this *schizophrenic--or am I?

                    It's getting hard to (specifically) discern what the "this is wrong" voices are trying to put forth. Amid the worldwide cacophony of righteous indignation, muddled accusations and scornful rhetoric, I find much is being lost to definitive interpretation.

                    During one of the anti-war demonstrations, a protestor was queried by a television reporter as to why she was there. Her answer?

                    "I'm against the war on Iraq."

                    She was then asked if Saddam Hussein should be removed from power. Her unhesitating answer?

                    "Yes! Absolutely!"

                    She was then asked how that might be accomplished. Her answer?

                    A bufuddled silence.

                    My question, to all those so vehemently in opposition, is the same.

                    Anyone?


                    *Schizophrenia/also dementia praecox: contradictory or antagonistic qualities or attitudes &lt;both parties… have exhibited schizophrenia over the desired outcome —

                    Comment


                    • The only schizophrenia to be attributed is to the various administrations - republican and democratic alike. It's not unlike the childhood game of 'he loves me, he loves me not'...

                      Had Bush Sr. 'finished the job', so to speak, in '93, few would have had any issues with the elimination of a despot who'd, at that point, a decade-long history of dessimating his own countrymen. They didn't because they'd decided that after the deposition of Khadaffi, they'd 'won the battle'...

                      Is it alrightyo for the son to finish what his father didn't, couldn't...no, not if it endangers the U.S. military (whose median salary is pitiful) under the pretense of 'spreading democracy' and pre-emptively striking against a nation that's yet to be proven to house weapons of mass destruction. And damned no if it's done under the arrogant assumption that the faith of the beleagured Iraqi masses will somehow erase history and transcend the memory of American abandonment, not to mention American arming of Hussein's army.

                      To try on a whole new perspective for fit: if you were an Iraqi parent in '93 (and given that half of the Iraqi population is under the age of 18, it's safe to assume that most Iraqis are parents) and finally summoned the nerve and faith to battle Hussein's military so that your own children wouldn't have to suffer through such a damned brutal regime, under the reasurrance of support from the greatest nation on earth, only to be abandoned, your family members executed, your children starving...what would be your reaction to the current American invasion?

                      Comment


                      • RAyers...if you look to Hitler Germany before the actual occupation of Poland, you would see similarities, for instance, Hitler militarizing demilitarized zones, and the League of Nations doing nothing about it. (read: Saddam and the UN)

                        Even if Saddam isn't planning on occupying foreign countries any time soon, what's wrong with taking pre-emptive action against a maniacal dictator? If only that had been done in Nazi Germany in the 40s, or more recently in Civil Wars in Rwanda, where 500,000 men, women, and children were SLAUGHTERED with tools such as axes, etc. or in the Balkans where snipers specifically targeted children.

                        The way I see it, no matter what Bush does he's screwed. If he takes action early, he's an oil-hungry war mongerer. If he waits and the Iraq situation escalates into genocide, we're heartless and self centered.

                        As I said before, I never repeat myself.
                        My Web Site

                        Comment


                        • I will apologize to all in advance, I'm really tired we are in the midst of our 3 day show. But, when I read this I just had to share:

                          &gt; Subject: The Unbiased Press
                          &gt;
                          &gt;
                          &gt; &gt; The Pope is visiting DC and President Bush takes him out for
                          &gt; &gt; an afternoon on the Potomac...sailing on the pres. yacht, the Sequoia.
                          &gt; &gt; They're admiring the sights when, all of a sudden, the Pope's hat
                          &gt; &gt; (zucchetto)
                          &gt; &gt; blows off his head and out into the water. Secret service guys start to
                          &gt; &gt; launch a
                          &gt; &gt; boat, but Bush waves them off, saying "Wait, wait. I'll take care of
                          &gt; &gt; this.
                          &gt; &gt;
                          &gt; &gt; : Don't worry." Bush then steps off the yacht onto the surface of the
                          &gt; &gt; water
                          &gt; &gt; and walks out to the Holy Father's little hat, bends over and picks it
                          &gt; &gt; up,
                          &gt; &gt; then walks back to the yacht and climbs aboard. He hands the hat to
                          the
                          &gt; &gt; Pope
                          &gt; &gt; amid stunned silence.
                          &gt; &gt;
                          &gt; &gt; The next morning, the Washington Post carries a story, with
                          &gt; &gt; front page photos, of the event. The banner headline is:
                          &gt; &gt; : &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
                          &gt; &gt; : &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; "Bush Can't Swim."

                          Battle Scarred Veteran
                          http://www.usAHSA.org and http://www.noreinstatement.org

                          Comment


                          • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PonyJumperGRL:
                            RAyers...if you look to Hitler Germany before the actual occupation of Poland, you would see similarities, for instance, Hitler militarizing demilitarized zones, and the League of Nations doing nothing about it. (read: Saddam and the UN)

                            Even if Saddam isn't planning on occupying foreign countries any time soon, what's wrong with taking pre-emptive action against a maniacal dictator? If only that had been done in Nazi Germany in the 40s, or more recently in Civil Wars in Rwanda, where 500,000 men, women, and children were SLAUGHTERED with tools such as axes, etc. or in the Balkans where snipers specifically targeted children.

                            The way I see it, no matter what Bush does he's screwed. If he takes action early, he's an oil-hungry war mongerer. If he waits and the Iraq situation escalates into genocide, we're heartless and self centered.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Pony Jumper Girl, I admire your beliefs that we have a responsibility to help those in need (and share them) but what you are talking about is a global police force of sorts. Many people have a problem with one country taking on that role, particularly the US right now, with the situation in Afghanistan not really resolved. (not that any country in the world wouldn't be viewed with suspicion under the same circumstances )

                            I agree that it is to our great shame that the genocide in Rwanda and in the Balkans happened but consider that the way those kinds of ethnic hatreds have been controlled historically was by an occupying imperialist force (European nations and the USSR for the above regions) and then ask yourself do you want the US to do that? That is why so many people supported a UN mandate for action.

                            Hussein will be no loss to the world though- you're right on that.

                            ~edited for rambly sentence structure ~

                            [This message was edited by maggymay on Mar. 29, 2003 at 11:46 PM.]

                            Comment


                            • As a student in politcal science, your comments interest me greatly. Currently, I am beginning a research paper on the United States involvement in various coups and federal takeovers in the past 100 years. You would be surprised ( or maybe not) at the amount of coups the CIA has assisted in,causing numerous deaths, (and everything else I'm sure you are aware of what happens with coups) Of course, I am also sure that you know of the reason behind these take overs, 'communsism' or, a socialist party gaining control, taking assests owned by the united states, and giving them back to the citizens of the country.

                              Not that I don't agree with this war, or don't feel proud of Canadian citizens in it. It is just making me think a great deal more about what the media, and the government, put forth to be believed by us in the west. They don't call it propagrenda wars for nothing.

                              But hey, really though, I'm just a kid spouting off about something I could not understand about right? But atleast I'm doing my research in other outlets besides Western Media.

                              Just food for thought.

                              Comment


                              • I'm sorry but I missed the last 20 pages because we're busy with the show. I cannot believe what I've been reading because of the selectivity of the interpretations.

                                I have been watching BBC since that's what I can get in the bedroom. Having lived through World War II I can certify there is no resemblance between GWB and Adolph in speach or philosophy.

                                Adolph was a charasmatic speaker as was Bill Clinton he could messmerize the crowds with promises of a great future, and did not explain his own weaknesses. He offered a scape goat for all of Germany's problems. It was quite simple if you had a mortgage and you knock off the guy who holds the mortgage, then under the Hitler formula you no longer had a mortgage. The banks (owned in some part by Jews) were the cuplrits so if you got rid of the jews you would have no debts.

                                GWB is hardly a great stage personna who can move crowds into instant conviction that he is the only one that is great and winderful. However, we have to choose if George Bush the original made a mistake listening to the pacifists and the isolationists after we chased Saddam Hussen out of Kuwait, whoever was President might feel obligated to make up for it by now trying to finish the job. We owe those people who revolted against Saddem then the opportunity to prove we know we made a mistake and this time we'll fix it.

                                As to the fact that these other countries did not accept out political model, that speaks well for the fact that we did not impose our personal opinions on the local society after we freed them.

                                People are free to belive what they wish even if it is not what we believe, but no one should be terrorized into to believing in a despot. Surely, after watching the news we can all agree that it was wrong to have abandoned Iraq in 1991. So, whoever our President is we should be grateful now to correct that error.

                                <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Of course, I am also sure that you know of the reason behind these take overs, 'communsism' or, a socialist party gaining control, taking assests owned by the united states, and giving them back to the citizens of the country.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                My goodness if that's what your research has told you! You better do it over because that hypothesis is a guaranteed FAIL.

                                Battle Scarred Veteran
                                http://www.usAHSA.org and http://www.noreinstatement.org

                                Comment


                                • My goodness if that's what your research has told you! You better do it over because that hypothesis is a guaranteed FAIL.

                                  I've said I've just started right? And I have already gone through thoughts with my teacher who has been studying it all his life, he was the one to point these facts out to me.

                                  Comment


                                  • Yesterday was pretty exciting around my house. We were supposed to go to a horse show, but the weather didn't cooperate (can you say ice and snow). So instead, I spent the majority of the day on my hands and knees stripping and rewaxing my kitchen floor. Woohoo! It was a happenin' good time.

                                    While slogging away, I had the TV on and tuned to the war coverage. There were a wide variety of stories presented which provoked much thought and many questions on my part (or maybe it was the fumes from the wax). Here, in no apparent order, are some of those musings. Sorry it is so extensive. It took me a long time to get that floor rewaxed.

                                    Protesters: I fully support their right to express themselves and I think it is an important part of our democratic society. But, I don't understand why they are protesting now instead of before the war started. Do they really want us to quit at this point? If so, do they realize what would happen if the US forces turned around right now and came home? Not only would the Iraqi people bear the brunt of such an act, but the US would be in the toilet in terms of global politics. It would be hard to convince any foreign country that we would or could keep our word. World power!?! We wouldn't even be a blip on the screen.

                                    Do the protesters fully understand the message they are sending to our troops? Yes, they constantly say that they are protesting the war, but support our troops. Unfortunately, this is not the message that is getting to our service personnel. Our soldiers aren't sitting in front of a TV, reading newspapers, or even getting mail at this point. All they hear are snippets of what is going on here in the US. Interviews with several servicemen show that they think our country does not support their efforts. That has got to be a major slap in the face.

                                    Do the protesters fully understand the message they are sending to our adversaries? Throughout the world we are seeing protesters in other countries speaking out against the US. This is sending a pretty powerful message of support to the Iraqi regime. Do the protesters in our country realize or even care that they are sending the same message? Like it or not, by protesting our government, they are telling the Iraqis that they support Saddam Hussein. So, instead of shortening the war, they are actually doing more to extend it. They are adding fuel to Saddam Hussein's regime. Is this what they really want?

                                    If the protesters feel that they have to speak out against war, why are they not out there protesting all wars? Where were they when Russia invaded Afghanastan? Where were they when Saddam Hussein basically declared war on his own people, invaded Kuwait, or went to war with Iran? Or does it only matter when it is in their own backyard. They are great at protesting the actions of our own government, but turn a blind eye or can't be bothered when they perceive that it is someone else's problem. Hypocrisy in action.

                                    In search of the UN: Iraqi soldiers are using women and children as shields. They are forcing men to fight and threatening their families with death if they don't take up arms. They are pretenting to surrender and then opening fire on our soldiers. They are using hospitals as military headquarters. They are torturing and executing POWs. Yesterday they hung an Iraqi woman because she waved at US soldiers.

                                    Where is the UN during all of this? Isn't it one of the duties of the UN to enforce the rules and regulations that all of the member countries are supposed to follow? As far as I know, Iraq is a member of the UN. Where is the public outcry from the UN for these atrocious acts of inhumanity? The UN is allowing the Iraqi Regime to get away with murder, but condemns the US for enforcing the resolutions that the UN itself enacted, then didn't have the backbone to put into action. The double standard just boggles the mind.

                                    Humanitarian Aid: Am I the only person who finds it maddening that the US is one of the only countries expected to take care of the civilians of our adversaries while still on the battle field and does so at the risk and peril of its own troops? When Hitler's armies invaded, well, everyone and God, who expected them to bring along water and food for the children of Poland and Russia? When North Vietnam swept into South Vietnam, where were their cargo ships laden with wheat and rice? When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, did they also drop relief packages?

                                    Now, I'm not saying that providing humanitarian aid is a bad thing. My heart goes out to the Iraqi people who are bereft of the things that most Americans take for granted every day. They desperately need all the help they can get right now. But, the current plight of the Iraqi people was not created by the US. It is a situation that has been developing for a quarter of a century under the leadership of Saddam Hussein himself.

                                    It is not fair or just that the US is expected to divide its focus between the war at hand and the humanitarian efforts that everyone, even the UN, has deemed necessary when historically this has not been required of other countries in the same situation nor is it a result of actions by the US. But, the US strives to do what is right and we are sensitive to the opinions of other who I doubt would be able to fulfill these expectations if they were in the same position. Sometimes it sucks to be the good guy.

                                    The Enemy: As I listen to the news, I'm having a hard time figuring out who the real enemy is. Right now I would have to put my money on the US media. I just can't figure out why they are taking such an adversarial position against their own country. I don't blame Tommy Franks for avoiding the Centcom briefings. I wouldn't want to deal with the second guessing, the accusations, and the utter lack of respect for the leaders of our military who have dedicated their lives to the defense of our country.

                                    Some people say that President Bush bought his way into the Presidency and isn't fit for the job. Maybe so, maybe not. I don't really know. But one thing I do know is that our military leaders didn't buy their stars and bars. They are fit for the job and are the product of one of the mightiest, most successful military powers this world has ever seen. I find it highly insulting that the media thinks they know more than Tommy Franks and Company.

                                    Would it really be that hard for the media to just give us the news and leave the planning and analysis to those who have been trained and have earned the right to lead our military? Or better yet, wouldn't it be great to hear the media ask, "What can we do to help in this effort?". Not only is the US fighting a war on the battle field, but it is also fighting a war of public opinion. The media could do much to help our leaders win this "war of words". Unfortunately, they haven't yet stepped up to the plate and have chosen instead to serve their own self interests. What a shame.

                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    A dog has one master, a cat has an entire staff.
                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    If the Number 2 pencil is so popular, why is it still number 2?

                                    Comment


                                    • good lord, have a dictionary?

                                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JER:
                                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> We promised to free Kuwait and liberate Iraq, but we stopped after freeing Kuwait. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                      Not so, Calico, unless you ave a very narrow definition of 'free'.

                                      Kuwait is NOT a democratic state. Women have barely any rights; only a small percentage of men (i.e., privileged) can vote. And the UN acknowledges the SLAVERY is still a problem in Kuwait.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                      Free = Democratic? better look up "free", 16 main entries, one of which is 'to rid of', and in this case, yes, kuwait was rid of hussein.

                                      Equimom, you're not Schizo, unless I am as well. I wrestle with your questions, too. This is a strange and uneasy situation, full of contradictions and blame. I wish protesters had a solution to proffer, and I wish supporters could see beyond the scope of this singular military action i.e., what will we do when all of our forces are concentrated in and around Iraq, and china and North Korea get into it?

                                      Comment


                                      • Canterlope - this may very well be the 'end' of the UN, it's suddenly apparent the world over how ineffective it is

                                        did I read Libya is ELECTED to head the top UN human rights panel?? hahahaha!

                                        Comment


                                        • like it or not, our country profile from BBC, from the outside. it's interesting to see first hand how we're perceived by the world.

                                          http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/...es/1217752.stm

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X