Nice Current Quotes...

Paul Watson

JoeSox wrote: Inspections are the only way to keep him from becoming more of a global threat than he already is Isn't that the thing though? After Gulf War v1.0 inspections were supposed to keep him in check. They didn't, he flaunted the rules and the inspections dwindled and became useless. That dwindling led to him now being this threat (or is claimed to be this threat.) What has changed on the inspections front? Nothing. He is still resisting them and dragging the issue on and on and on and on. Also inspections are not even meant to be the solution. They are meant to report back on the situation. Once the situation is known fully and agreed on then a solution can be drawn up. What could, apart from war which is not a solution, that solution be? I have no idea if the technology or organisations we have today would have helped stop Hitler.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

JoeSox

Paul Watson wrote: After Gulf War v1.0 inspections were supposed to keep him in check. They didn't, he flaunted the rules and the inspections dwindled and became useless. Well, we have learned that we can not let the inspections dwindle and now the rest of the UN knows. Look at it as a chessmatch being played, if we want to win but not kill the king, we play for the draw or resignation. Later,
JoeSox
www.joeswammi.com
A Season in Hell[^]

Lost User

Paul Watson wrote: How else can Saddam be removed from power and the global threat removed? What global threat? How is Saddam a global threat when his longest range missile is from memory 180 miles? Christ, I think dinky old backward Australia has more potent weapons than that. Michael Martin Australia mjm68@tpg.com.au "I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end." - Chris Maunder 15/07/2002

Paul Watson

Michael Martin wrote: How is Saddam a global threat when his longest range missile is from memory 180 miles? *sigh* I was trying to stay on topic. This is not the discussion. But if you must know: Forget conventional threats Michael. As you said his missiles go a piddly 180ks. But as 911 showed you don't need missiles or bombs to do damage. Now imagine 911 where instead of just planes with passengers the planes have chemical payloads or a dirty bomb? Lot more dead NYers. Also it is global because the terrorists are hitting US targets in other countries. And don't give me crap about Saddam not provenly linked to terrorism. Nothing more that guy would like than to help terrorists beat Bush. Michael Martin wrote: Christ, I think dinky old backward Australia has more potent weapons than that. Yeah, Bret Lee could teach those yankee commandos a thing or two about hurled missiles!

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

Lost User

Paul Watson wrote: *sigh* I was trying to stay on topic. This is not the discussion. How so? The discussion is about American politicians who don't want to go to war as Saddam is not the target they should be going after. Missile is about his only form of offence as his planes wouldn't get out of their own airspace. Paul Watson wrote: But as 911 showed you don't need missiles or bombs to do damage. Now imagine 911 where instead of just planes with passengers the planes have chemical payloads or a dirty bomb? Lot more dead NYers. Yes, though the one off surprise of using passenger planes is now gone. They have no chance of getting their own planes in to US airspace. They won't be able to get the bombs of any sort on board. Paul Watson wrote: Also it is global because the terrorists are hitting US targets in other countries. Good point, never thought of it. Paul Watson wrote: And don't give me crap about Saddam not provenly linked to terrorism. Nothing more that guy would like than to help terrorists beat Bush. He hasn't been. So what if he hates Dubbya, Castro does too, is he a terrorist? Michael Martin Australia mjm68@tpg.com.au "I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end." - Chris Maunder 15/07/2002

David Wulff

You know you are living in 2003 when... Paul Watson wrote: After Gulf War v1.0 :-D

David Wulff

http://www.davidwulff.co.uk

Jorgen Sigvardsson

Paul Watson wrote: Also it is global because the terrorists are hitting US targets in other countries. And don't give me crap about Saddam not provenly linked to terrorism. Nothing more that guy would like than to help terrorists beat Bush. Ok, then let's carpet bomb all of the middle east and parts of both africa, asia and america. Using your logic, there won't be not many countries left... -- we dance to the sound of sirens and we watch genocide to relax we dance to the sound of sirens we are the heroes of self-deception

Michael A Barnhart

Paul Watson wrote: I am not 100% convinced Saddam needs to go. But the US is. So lets find a way that does not involve war. I do not have time for a full reply here but I totally agree with Paul on this. I am in the middle of reading "Bush at War - ISBN: 0743204735" and if the book is accurate Rumsfeld and Cheney are the two principle people who are convinced that Saddam is a threat. Now I tend to not appreciate either of these two, so I find this easy to believe. I personally am in a conflict here. I totally agree that evidence linking Saddam to 9/11 has not been shown so why go down this route. I also feel that Saddam is a threat in general and has defied the UN for years so when is enough enough. I also realize that these are two separate issues so let’s be honest and do not try to mix them. But how do we proceeded with out WAR? "I will find a new sig someday."

Paul Watson

Michael Martin wrote: How so? The discussion is about American politicians who don't want to go to war as Saddam is not the target they should be going after. Missile is about his only form of offence as his planes wouldn't get out of their own airspace Listen Reindeer Boy. My original post had nothing to do with this. All I asked JoeSox was what alternatives do we have to war? That is all I wanted to talk about. But you dragged me kicking and screaming into regurgetating all this crap. Ugh, you know how much I hate arguing and talking about shit I have no clue about. Damned Aussies. ;) Michael Martin wrote: Castro does too, is he a terrorist? Castro does not have WMDs. Castro is just a tad closer to America and feels the need to be vewwy, vewwy quite. Castro has not tried to invade near-by countries. Saddam has, the guy is a danger to all those around him and through terrorist organisations the rest of the world. Michael Martin wrote: Yes, though the one off surprise of using passenger planes is now gone. They have no chance of getting their own planes in to US airspace. They won't be able to get the bombs of any sort on board. *Paul sighs deeply* Aeroplanes were at hand then. Now they will swap tactics to things like a panel van, a fishing vessel, an 18 wheeler etc. There is already lots of talk about installing nuclear detectors around every single major city in the US plus all ports. It is much harder to track a fishing vessel and a fishing vessel can carry a much bigger payload. Plus as you pointed out a plane is hard to smuggle things onto. Pretty easy getting the entire Iraqi cricket team onto a fishing vessel and sailing into NY harbour. Now, what altervatives to war do you have?

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

Paul Watson

Michael A. Barnhart wrote: But how do we proceeded with out WAR? Thanks Michael, appreciate it, thought I was going to be yelling "not talking about that!" all day :-D

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

Kant

"In two short years, George W. Bush has taught us what the 'W' stands for -- wrong" - Sen. John Edwards Follow live World Cup Cricket scores here[^]

Jason Henderson

JoeSox wrote: Inspections are the only way to keep him from becoming more of a global threat than he already is, if he is at all, without the use of force. You are living in a dream world my friend. Inspections have not worked and are not working now. Hans Blix even admits that Saddam is playing games.

Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

articles profile

Jason Henderson

I was just looking at your website. Those pictures are quite good. You're a very talented photographer. Would you mind if I downloaded some of them for wallpaper?

Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

articles profile

Jason Henderson

This coming from a man who has a vested interest in a bad economy and a war that goes badly for Bush. Sorry, but I just can't trust any democratic candidate at this point. They have offered no alternatives and no solutions.

Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

articles profile

Paul Watson

Jason Henderson wrote: Would you mind if I downloaded some of them for wallpaper? Please go ahead, I would be honoured :-D If any of the images you get off the site are not big enough for your monitor then just email me and I can send you the original (not compressed for the web) which is much better quality. Jason Henderson wrote: Those pictures are quite good. You're a very talented photographer. :-O thanks. So my photographs are better than my war talk huh? ;)

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

Michael P Butler

Paul Watson wrote: I am not 100% convinced Saddam needs to go. You surprise me Paul. The guy is responsible for one of the worst regimes in the world at the moment. Peope live in fear under him, they have no freedom to express their own views. People just disappear, are tortured and murdered. His not the only one in the world, but he is one of the easiest to go after. We have to show that this kind of treatment of people cannot be tolerated anymore. Be it, Iraq, Korea, Zimbawae, or anywhere else the ruling powers oppress their people. Michael Wonder Woman, Wonder Woman. All the world's waiting for you, and the power you possess. In your satin tights, Fighting for your rights And the old Red, White and Blue.

Paul Watson

Michael P Butler wrote: You surprise me Paul. The guy is responsible for one of the worst regimes in the world at the moment. Peope live in fear under him, they have no freedom to express their own views. People just disappear, are tortured and murdered. His not the only one in the world, but he is one of the easiest to go after. We have to show that this kind of treatment of people cannot be tolerated anymore. Be it, Iraq, Korea, Zimbawae, or anywhere else the ruling powers oppress their people. Ideally I agree with you. But now we are getting back to the whole "Who should be the police then? We don't want the US." issue. Also once Saddam goes, who is going to take his place? Will they be any better? And war is going to harm the country, and it's people, even more. So is there a better way of getting rid of Saddam? Also the "I am not 100% convinced Saddam needs to go" statement is more based on the reasons the US are giving. On that playing field there is not much proof and to me it looks more like Bush just being a bully with a personal vendetta and the world does not need that. It is not based on Saddams human rights abuse record or anything like that. This is why so many people are against Bush. They see Evil Saddam and they see Raging Bush. Letting Raging Bush have free reign is quite a scary thought. If we all just give in and say "US knows best, go ahead start liberating the world please" then... well I don't know how good that will be. We are sick of the US throwing it's weight around. So you are scared, sorry terrible thing that happened to you, but give us some hope that you actually care about the rest of us. Everyone knows the US can do what it wants, but we are hoping you don't because then you become no better than Saddam and the others. If human rights is the reason why the US is liberating Iraq then why aren't they regime-changing Zimbabwe too? Plenty of other countries as well.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er Want a job?

JoeSox

Jason Henderson wrote: You are living in a dream world my friend. Inspections have not worked and are not working now. Why are they not working? I don't think starting a war is a solution. Later,
JoeSox
www.joeswammi.com
A Season in Hell[^]

Ray Cassick

JoeSox wrote: Why are they not working? Tell me how you think they ARE working. Are the inspections holding off war. YES, but only as long has Sadam chooses to keep going along witht hem. Are the inspections FIXING the reason why we are here in the first place? NO. Even if he does disarm, one the inspectors are gone he will start all over again. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."

Chris Losinger

Jason Henderson wrote: Sorry, but I just can't trust any democratic candidate at this point. and partisan politics rears its ugly head. what color is that dragon? -c

When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.

Bobber!