Off_White

My apologies Cavemen, I don't mean to put words in your mouth. [ 10-02-2002, 12:08 PM: Message edited by: Off White ]

sometimes words just fail. I think I'm gonna write my grandma a letter tomorrow.

quote: Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman: quote:For the Bush administration to suggest that we should attack Iraq because they "gassed their own people" is totally bogus. You are an idiot for taking my statements out of context like that. It's merely an example of his will and desperation.[/QB] Work on your reading comprehension Cpt. Flamethrower: unless you are a member of the Bush administration I in no way stated that it was your suggestion. All I did was use a snippet of one of your brief posts as a springboard for my own spray. I know it always pisses you off, but I just can't help myself. No harm intended though.

Thats a little steep for an old used bosch buddy. And you being an italian and all, it must have a 220 volt charger, eh? cheaper bosch ad

Matt & Caveman: Which both are you talking about? Tikka and Princeton?

Necro, thats a very offensive avatar you have

quote: Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman: He used them on his own people that were living near the border. Check your facts Belive what they tell you I have seen films. Oh, I believe it, its just the phrase "his own people" that strikes me as odd. I'm just playing semantic games, I agree he gassed people who were living within Iraqi borders. Here's some facts: quote: It is suddenly de rigueur for US officials to say, "Saddam Hussein gassed his own people." They are evidently referring to the Iraqi military's use of chemical weapons in the Iraqi Kurdistan town of Halabja in March 1988 during the Iran-Iraq War, and then in the area controlled by the Teheran-backed Kurdish insurgents after the cease-fire in August. Since Baghdad's deployment of chemical arms in war as well as peace was known at the time, the question is: What did the US government do about it then? Nothing. Worse, so strong was the hold of the pro-Iraq lobby on the Republican administration of President Ronald Reagan, it succeeded in getting the White House to frustrate the Senate's attempt to penalize Baghdad for violating the Geneva Protocol on Chemical Weapons, which it had signed. This led Saddam to believe that Washington was firmly on his side--a conclusion that paved the way for his invasion of Kuwait and the 1991 Gulf War, the full consequences of which have yet to play themselves out. full article: Iraq and Poison Gas Note that Iraq has not used poison gas since the Gulf War, so it does not function as proof of current capabilities. You're right that it is pretty despicable, like using Sarin on the WTO protesters instead of tear gas. Lots of other regimes do it with conventional weapons too, like the Indonesians, our oil rich anti-communist allies, who killed off about 600,000 East Timorese in an action that was green-lighted by Ford and Kissinger, our old freedom fighters the Contras, Pol Pot (never a friend of ours) in Cambodia, and our former friend Pinochet in Chile. My point is not that its okay, but that lots of places do it by various means (gas, bullet, machete, or burning: dead is dead) and we don't usually do anything about it. The Yugoslav situation, Bosnia, Kosovo, and such are the only occasion I know of the US getting militarily involved specifically over ethnic/ideological murder. For the Bush administration to suggest that we should attack Iraq because they "gassed their own people" is totally bogus.

quote: Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman: Either that's no cover for saddam who has used chem weapons on his own people in the past. Saddam used chem weapons on Iran, which we approved of since they were our enemies (we were supporting Saddam at that time, Carter administration) and on the Kurds, who would beg to differ with the definition "his own people." We don't do a hell of a lot for the Kurds because our very necessary allies, the Turks, have a little Kurd problem of their own, and really don't want an independent Kurdish state springing up on their border and gobbling up some of their own territory. And the fact is, the Kurds may not really be our friends, just because Saddam is their enemy. I could be wrong, but seems like I've heard of their goal to be a reasonably fundamentalist Muslim religious state, who would most defintely not be buddy-buddy with a secular capitalist democracy like the US. And don't get me wrong, I agree that Saddam's use of chem weapons makes him completely despicable, but he's really only used them in situations where there are no repercussions for him. Saddam is secular, not a religious fanatic, and his goal is to stay alive on top of his hill as long as he can. Yes, he's a liar, as are most governments in matters of self-interest, but he is somewhat predictable, and I think he's very susceptible to containment. He knows that outright attack on the US, or supplying weapons to Al-Quaida is a total death sentence for his regime, and he's not looking for eternal pleasure in heaven, he wants a big slice of pie here and now. He's a black hat for sure, but I don't think he's the kind of wild card threat to the free world that he's made out to be.

quote: Originally posted by sk: the middle is a good place to be Like Jim Hightower (a Texan I might add) says, "Ain't nothing in the middle of the road 'cept yellow lines and dead armadillos."

Tyrone, you may be new, but you seem to know the game... [ 10-01-2002, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: Off White ]

Oh yeah, and I'm aware the foreign policy bit is a thread drift. On the original topic, I'm with Erik. Die die die is dull dull dull.

I was stunned to see that yesterday's column, Georgie Ann Geyer, whos usually a gung-ho right wing type, has joined the "what's the big hurry?" camp. Frankly, I think McDermott's comments are pretty responsible, and he's not saying that Saddam is a good guy. He's just advocating for inspections. The Bush administration is in too damn much of a rush to radically change American foreign policy with no debate or discussion about it. I haven't heard anyone in the government, and very few in the mainstream media, discussing the question of whether its really a good idea to try establishing an international precedent that premptive war on perceived threats is acceptable. Whos next? India should lob a few nukes at Pakistan? China should go ahead an invade Taiwan? I think regardless of your position on the question, the vigorous in-depth discussion has to happen if you want to instigate a change of this magnitude. And I don't mean discussion by us folk twittering away online, I want Congress to debate it with lots of coverage, not just line up in some ill-considered cockamamie "support the president" bullshit.

quote: rack of antique rigid Friends with home made tied off webbing slings (from the bivouac.com report) Hey! My rack resembles that remark! Tyrone, its a link (click on it) to a trip report on a different website. You have to register with that site to access everything, but it does not cost.

Dru, is that shot from last weekend? Looks like a lot of snow for September (not that I'm familiar with that range in particular...)

quote: Originally posted by Fence Sitter: i'm out... See, just like e-rock was saying about the link between latency and homophobia! I'm so glad you've come to terms with yourself. If you could just get over that self-hating queer thing life will seem much brighter. You should have come down here to Olympia this weekend: Homo-A-Go-Go

Are you really a drummer Fern? Hey, I'm not gonna post all those drummer jokes, I'm a bass player and we're next in line... Vague rumour makes it sound like you've got a fun weekend ahead.

quote: Originally posted by Dru: And hence I dunno where to find the secret Enhancements Careful! Next thing you know trask will start posting jpegs of penile implants and we're right back to "what kind of trip is this?"

Yo, wake up girl. You gotta help keep your driver awake, no carloads of regulars crashed in the bottom of some creekbed please.

Silly rabbit, Pub Club, not Devils Club. I've been in that club though, its a much better handhold than ferns (No slight to "the" Fern)

I dunno, sounds like a reasonable enough social climbing outing. I was contemplating the trip, but I can't head out until Saturday morning, and I can just imagine showing up alone at an empty campsite, hang out all day, hang out all night, then drive home in the rain the next day. Hmmm, perhaps I'll work on another friend, see if I can't make Saturday a Darrington day rather than a Der day. Of course, I could get a couple truckloads of manure delivered and push that around, or wire up lights in the barn, or make a couple railings for the stairs, or make some kitchen countertops, the shop needs cleaning, I need to wash my hair...

quote: Originally posted by Dru: I got that CD I will let you burn it for $22.99. You save 1 dollar plus shipping costs!! Even better if he can pay for that CD in CDN.

just to make it complete, I'll answer "maybe"

check out the rack on this one! (from the Salt Spring website)

quote: Originally posted by trask: quote:Originally posted by Mr. Natural: quote: bet I climb harder than Mr. natral I bet I spell better than SK I'll bet SK has bigger tits than you.I HOPE she does, cuz otherwise that would be a touch grotesque.

DFA, that was some righteous parody. I think Trask is just trying to flex a little cuz someone accused this board of losing it's spray compass. Yeah yeah, I know Trask, fuck me and all that... You are showing pretty good form today.