KrustyKidd

Talk about a lady that can inspire! She tells the troop's that they are doing a great job but the American people are wondering why they are doing it. Man! That would inspire me to wonder if she gets it. LOL. She spends more time bashing Bush than anything else. And you say Bush had a questionable motive? I would've loved to have been a fly on the wall when she found out Bush beat her to the draw! Probably took away one of her big digs - "The President should be here" LOL. She used this as an opportunity (you heard this from KK first, remember. only a theory mind you) to drop a trial balloon She talks about how there is not enough troops to support two missions such as these. Watch the news in the next few weeks. You will probably hear stuff from 'annonomous sources' saying conscription is needed. Somebody errently posted that here as well. Anyhow, that's what that comment was designed to do. Pave the way for another anti Bush rumor. CLINTON'S 'RALLY THE TROOPS' VISIT Danial, Can't believe you don't understand. It's actually pretty simple. I will use a traditional military example of strictly infantry formation, tactics and mnpower. Ok so far. We could say that in an invasion of Iraq we know the Iraqi Military's overall troop strength as well as it's general deployment formations, locations and designations. We may not know the deployment of all of these troops and their missions. Better believe that we are working on finding out. There may be troops engaged in activities that we are not aware of, locations we are not aware of and in amounts of manpower that we are not aware of. The last is is very troublesome but one has to try to cover all bases and remain aware of the possibilities versus the realities. This is where resoning, logic, discounting bad int from good int and constant villigence of enemy actions are necessary. You cannot be allowed to be bogged down on the possibility that the Iraqi Air Force will drop elephants onto our troops, therefore we can discount that one and pay attention to others. Remember though, that it is possibile to do that (however unlikely) and not to be so focused on the possibilities that we pay no attention to things that are improbable. Danial. you need a translation book for that? It's simple english that anybody with any ability at all can understand. It sounds strange but if you think, yes think man! You see it for the logical statement that it is. The only thing that I question is that given the basic logic that it expouses why didn't the idiots listening to this know this already?

You would have to ask those who think the fetus is not a child. The whole point of what I was telling you. The answer of course is in their belief. Your answer and disbelief that anybody can do this is in your belief that it is a child. Both are unwinnable arguments against the other.

No, the $50 fee covers a $25 OPP criminal search and filing charges. nothing more. Like myself and any other small business contractor, the girls should have their own coverage. If I owned a bar I would certainly want to see some sort of disability insurance before I allowed them to slip and slide, leaving me open.

Sorry, I forgot about all the guys that were around in the first millenium. Like you remember when you were gathering pine cones in northern Germany when you were only a couple centuries old. Bring back the good old days of wenching and pillaging! Get real. Zealots are organised but are by no means the majority. Hence the reluctance by the US to turn Iraq over to Iraqis. it is, if you will observe, the religious men who want this, call for it, aid in the resistance by semi or non cooperation with the US. The people want to live, to prosper, to be free, free from all, US included.

My town recently sent a business owner into backruptcy by charging all peelers $150 a year for a license. Normally in most Ontario places this is $50. Scince the girls make $700 for the week they are here and pay food, gas, agent's fees, union and hotels this takes quite the chunk out of the income. Hence they just avoid Pembroke and the guy closed. The newspaper had an editorial about it and called it for what it was, a morality decision by a council set up and fully qualified to make zoneing laws not function as a Ruling Taliban Committee. A gentleman, who was most likely very active in petitioning the city for this decision wrote back and chatitised the paper for their stand and then went on to tell us all about the evils of pornography and all. I wrote a letter to the newspaper expressing my concerns and submitted it. Views?

How do you know that it cannot be "foisted" on the people of Iraq? Even they are strangers to any notion except that as subjects of a tyannical dictator. The Idea of an Islamic Society, Communism, Aristocracy is all foreign to them. They just got out of prison for crying out loud!

No Riff, that would have been called the duties of an NCO. A lower level leader. Hate to be the bearer of bad news to you Riff, Bush is the President of the United States. His duty is to show leadership to all of America, not dodge bullets and dig latrines. He showed leadership in ways well above the Senior Officer and General level by showing up there, even if only for a couple of hours. It was a tremendous boost for the troops morale. Like you would expect PM Cretien to wash pots if he showed up in Afganistan? Difuse mines and interrogate POWs? As for the unwarrented sidetracking rant about WMD and all, it's a rant, period. I have responded to it in the other thread where at least it is in a more applicable catagory.

Lonius, in order to say for sure that there is no WMD in Iraq one has to cover the entire country. That has not been done yet by over half. For legalities, enough material has been uncovered to warrent the continuation of hostilities from the 91 Gulf War. Hence, the only outstanding issue here is WMD themselves. If you read back over the past few months I have said many times that the reason for the war was never, ever, about WMD. This was one of the reasons Bush gave to the American people and Blair to the British. Given the flagrent uncoperative behavior of Saddam towards the UN inspections and the fact that every day inspectors were tripping over undisclosed WMD equipment and material it is not much of a stretch to say that in all probability he had WMD themselves. Every indication was there that he did and he never fully disclosed his inventories to a real inspection after ten years of oportunity. I have and will again tell you that in all probability WMD themselves will not be found in Iraq. Also as before I will tell you that nobody could say for certain that there was not, hence Bush was for every intent, telling the truth to the best of his knowledge. Yes, he probably amplified the threat but for what reason? The seeding of democracy in order to provide an Arab anchor in the Middle East that provided an example for all. Democracy, freedom and prosperity are the worst things that can happen to a terrorist. That is the reason for the invasion of Iraq, not some stupid Scud with some ten year old mustard agent it. Why the emphasis on WMD rather than rebuilding a country into democratic form from a tyrannical dictatorship? Look no further than yourself, you were against this from the start for any reason. Even when indications were that he did have all sorts of nasty stuff poised to strike the Western World. Would you have bought it simply to seedc Democracy? Doubt it. It's not to fight for our ideals but to give an opportunity for a life to people who otherwise are going to turn into suicide bombers that is what is happening. I am surprised that you don't get it.

You're absolutely right Morgan. The nature of government in this day and age is pure self propagation, not what is right and wrong. Hence we have all these screwed up alliances happening with gays, dope smokers and such. Witness Cretien not allowing his ministers to vote what their constituents will, that is not democracy and power to the fitest but rather fear of reality. The reality that the Liberals and all those seeking simple votes are pure crap that on an open market would sell in a dollar store at half price. This also includes the Republican party in the US who just slamed that drub bill through against all common sense.

What do you think about the radical turnaroud in philosophy when dealing with others that is propagated in the NT Bible? It isn't written by eqauals of the Romans but victims who had every right to preach violence and continue with the OT. Jesus, fact or fiction, changed a way of life that was violent. That to me says something was up, something much more than a bunch of smart people runnng around spouting off foolishness. Picture today, a Leftie turning our minds around without facts or reason (like they have any LOL) and then believing in something that is completely foreign. Something did that.

The problem with Boot Camps is that they do not do any follow up. After completion, the inmates are either released into the common prison system or released into society. On their own, with no disipline they go back to what they were before. That is the failure, pure and simple. In some Boot Camps, they don't recieve Drug and Alcohol rehabilitation that normal inmates get and thereby set them at a serious disadvantage for long term rehabilitation. To society, it looked pretty good. However, dollars and cents command. With the drop out rate it leaves open beds, and that is money that could be spend elsewhere. Much as we all like to see 'cons getting screamed at' as one article quoted, if it isn't doing any good in present form then get rid of it or change it. I suggest that it be kept as a bonus for good behaviour. Upon completion at the end of a good service record, a con can go on this course and then be given a discharge with a bit of time shaved off under the condition that he serve Military time. If he leaves the Forces then he serves the remainder back in 'The Big House.' Of course I'm not talking about serial killers here, just the normal nickle and dime two to five year people.

Wow, you sure read a lot into a fact Riff. I took the article to mean that some of the translaters and staff have been reassigned temporarily in order to aid in the fight agaist the accelerated attacks by foreign infiltrators and former Regieme Members. And from that fact you get a confirmation that there is no WMD in Iraq at all? When over 90 percent of it's weapons stocks have yet to be inspected, when over half the country has not been looked at? RIFF'S PROOF THAT THERE IS NO WMD IN IRAQ Let's set this straight so that some idiot Leftie does not come here and take what you posted for fact. There is not a "more and more" reassignment. It is a "temporary reassignment" because it is kind of hard to inspect while you are getting shot at. Like I said before, scince you know there is no WMD in Iraq, help. Give the US all your data that shows how all the material vanished, where it was destroyed and when. Also, how did you get this info? Or are you just riffing without a clue Rant?

Read the articles Riff. They are not talking about two Muslims having a fender bender and this replacing the exchange of insurance numbers, it's replacing their law for ours. As an example, a husband decides to divorce his Muslim wife. He says "I divorce you" three times and that is it. Gives her two chickens and a goat and she goes on welfare while he lifts veils in singles clubs. You think this is good?

So Riff, if you were the main man, you would televise your holiday greeting from a 'Bed In' from some hotel in NYC with Yoko Ono or what? When you have troops and they do a job you go to them. That's leadership. An aircraft carrier and a victory tour of a country you have freed is a photo op, and a dam good one! The president visits with the troops that did the job, and in the back drop is the presence of America's military might. That is classic, a photo for a century book. Truely, America is great. And if he sent a taped message, you would say he was too scared to show up but in lieu, it is a flagrent photo op. I I know it shoves a thorn up your behind but the troops loved it. It boosted moral and sent a message to Iraq that their cause is worthy and going well enough for the President to show up. It also sends a message to the foreign and ex Regieme fighters that America is not going anywhere. You guys keep on trivialising yourselves through BS points. Should pick your battles more carefully..

You seem to be missing about 754 resolutions that the US did not think important enough to declare war over. Is it because most of these 700+ were against them or their allies? Against dictatorships they were currently supporting? Of course, not all of them. My point was that the US, although illegally in Iraq, could have avoided a great deal of ambiguity, and international strife, if they had declared war. Further, they could have ended resistance in Iraq with a far stronger hand than they have now if official war was declared. They could have said, "If reistance continues, so will carpet bombing". They threw away that card before they even started. Foolishness. As much as I deplore violence, I can't believe the US(who adore violence) would toss away their trump card. I suppose I can believe it, though, since they have been military idiots since the Civil War. You have no point, the US is legaly in Iraq. 687 is the mandate for them. Show me hard evidence that Iraq has complied. Show me where there has not been WMD evidence turned up in Iraq. Show me conclusive proof that Saddam has TOTALLY COMPLIED with all resolutions. It chose to enforce this one, the rest, well, I suppose you can see if maybe the rest of the UN wil take care of those as the US is busy right now. As for military geniuses and trump cards, you seem to be missing a war here. It was not designed to destroy Iraq but rather exticate the ruling Regieme and leave as much of the country intact. All with minimal damage to civiliians. A totally different objective than what you seem to think it is. Had you been in charge of the military campaign we would not even have one Iraqi left to free therefore you are unqualified to judge good or inept military/political strategy.

The largest known and confirmed reserves are there. Utter nonsense. The ultimate aim is more power and profit for the US, hence the support of dictatorships where US economic interests are dependent on squashing democracy. I did not miss Morgan's post, I laughed at it. Yes, there was a big difference. The US and coalition did not enter Iraq. They did not act solely on the issuance of a resolution penned by the US/UK only, either. 2nd largest actually. Five hundred billion dollars worth of oil to repay what the US spent? Hmm, lets see .... Oil reserves of 100 billion barrels. 3 million a day pumped at full steam is 33 thousand days or a hundred years. Oil price: $30 a barrel Pumping, refining, transport and infastructure costs; $20 a barrel Leaves profit of $10 a barrel. Most has to go to the Iraqis themselves so give a figure of $7 for Iraq and $3 for the US in payback. This leaves a repayment of $9 million a day on an investment of five hundred billion dollars. Fifty thousand days to make back the investment. Hey! Your great, great, grandchildren will get the final payment around the year 2150! Now that is economics at work! Now, let's put a little interest on this amount. What rate shall we use? LOL Forget it, it's an unatainable amount anyways Lonius. The argument is crap. It just goes to show that the reason for the action in Iraq was not for oil unless of course the US administrationis using your economic strategy. And if not for democracy then what? The rest of your post was a unsubstanciated one liner and something about a resolution. Was it refering to the ceasefire agreement that was set in place in '91 saying that it was conditional on Iraq's adherence to UN res 687 or was there something else

UH OH. Leftie logic at work here. If Canada tommorow is attacked by hordes of terrorists we will not be able to defend ourselves as Cretien is not even a Boy Scout much less an ex military leader. And yet he is able to send our troops to Afganistan and Bosnia? He is not a pole smoker yet he can influence homo laws? He is not an imigrant yet can influence immigration policy? He is not a dope smoker yet ..... hang on, strike that one, he must be. Wow, you would be happier to have a military man in charge of America? Tell us, when is the next terrorist atack going to come so that America can strike all non ex military people off the leadership race card. What an idiot you people are. Any tripe argument will do.

What's your primary goal Riff? I havn't gotten too many cheques from you lately so can only figure you are looking after your own as a primary load station as are all governments. I would imagine even the most ardent Leftie would oust the Liberals pretty quick if they started catering to any other country rather than our own. You must be estatic and a huge Bush supporter now that he has combined the goals of the US with the freedom of the people of Iraq? And sharing? Well, five hundred Billion Dollars going down range with no chance of getting it back. That's right Riff, not a hope in hell of getting that money back. There isn't that much oil there for starters and even if there was, by the time it was pumped, refined, sold, transported and needed to be used (as you can't use it all at once) we'll be flying electric cars.. So, I would say that along with a SERIOUS redirection of foreign policy by the US government they are also riding on a high of actually helping somebody as well. Are you not happy about it? We all win! You get a people freed, a change of foreign policy, the world gets one less outhouse where terroists can breed and a twenty five million person market open for business. Anyhow, guess you missed Morgan's post. It's only a couple up, I'll quote it here for you. He also said somthing about how helping Saddam and other dictators defeat their enemies (who at the time happened to be our enemies) did not mean automatically that they have the right to attack us. I know that is leftist logic but is not based on any loose sense of reality. Speaking of reality, if you have noticed, there has been, scince Bush has taken office a distinct difference in foreign policy. Afganistan was bombed with food, money and aid more than explosives. The 'Shock and Awe' in Iraq was a mind game designed to destabilise Iraqi leadership and it worked. Instead they got kid gloves in order to leave the country intact in order to rebuild in a democratic form. This is a distinct difference from the first part of the war in '91.

CRAIG Why do people not rape, rob and take their anger out on each other when presented with an opportunity? Because of God or simply consience? Why, when explorers found primitive societies around the globe did they all expouse the same type of laws, that being "The Golden Rule?" Why is there such a thing as "Honor among theives?" Why will the worst of society pass the salt and butter when asked at a prison cafeteria? It's human nature, an instinctive action to be good and help even when it goes against the sense of self. Was it instilled by a higher being? Is the bible simply a manual or warning to those who don't get it that the man is gonna get you if you're bad? WIDOW So true. If given proof that God exists as does heaven and hell and that He decides who will go then, I would imagine all sorts of terrible people like Stalin would convert (on the surface) to get free admission. I do not think the New Testament is the word of God but rather the historical record of what had happened during an extraordinary period. I think that many events have been distorted and embellished to suit the agenda of the writers. However I would like to add something; I went to Saladeen's Fortress once with my Syrian driver. We were lost in the hills and didn't have a shmick of where to go. Stopping in front of a small cottage where an old guy was jerking around with some sheep in front behind a small stone wall. We stopped the pickup and got out and walked over to him. They did all sorts of shaking hands and putting hands to head and chest and five minutes later we leave and I ask "So, did you find out where it is?" "He doesn't know." Astonished that this old guy didn't know as Iit would be like asking a person from Naples where Mt Vesuvius was I asked him why. "He has never been out of the village in his life, but he thinks it is this way." and on we went. It was totally wrong direction giving but we stumbled on the dam place an hour later. Point being is that people in Jesus' time did not travel. They, like the old Syrian guy did not want to know of the world beyond the rugged hills they lived in. They did not talk to strangers. They didn't run away with strangers, particularly poor strangers. People were openly hostile to strangers an more than likely stoned strangers. What power did this Jesus have that he could travel in safety and could make employed people leave with him? The other thing about the Bible is that it is so different from other stories. Most are fire and brimstone, thunderbolts, vengeance, God's interferring, beating, instructing and more or less being oppressive. The Bible is so calm and peaceful that on first look it is unfathomable that anybody could be drawn to it. Hardly a premise for an ancient best seller like the Illiad or Oddesy yet it was and is. If fiction, it was a heck of a lot of work put into something that was so experimental and would likely not be well recieved. That is as reason why I think that it has much in historical fact.

What if the world were under any one system? What if everybody did what they were supposed to do under this one system? Why would there be any hunger then? There wouldn't be. Therefore your comment is only geared to promote communism for communism's sake, and does not prove that it is superior to any one system.

Is there a line you would draw anywhere? I mean can us white people set up our own sytem of law within Canadian Society as well? Why can't we? There are Tribal Council sessions on Reserves now to met out punishment like temporary banishment for kids caught commiting crimes. Can I convert tommorow and put a few uppity bitches under a drop cloth if I don't happen to like the bikini they have on? Ten years from now, what happens if I catch my wife messing around with my homo husband? Can I have them both put in front of an Islamic Council? Not liking the outcome can I then go to a Canadian court? Not happy with that can I go to the White/RedNeck court system? And not happy with that can I just get a couple of Aborigionals to banish them to a remote island on Lake Superior? Can we also make it so that there is a second ruling party permanently in place in Parliament? An Islamic one? There should be as this is only fair too. hey, can I be on that council or part of the Islamic process? Not being Islamic it might raise a few eyebrows but hey! This is Canada and if they discriminate against me I'll haul their ass into Red Neck Court and have them dragged behind a pick up. Can I get to make real intelligent decisions like picking my daughter's husband LIKE THESE IDIOTS FIGURE Or should we just draw a line now?

Hugo, this is an extremely valid point. However, only if one considers the fetus a human being. If one does not, for whatever reson or justification then it is nothing. I am no legal expert however would imagine that for each of those to occur it would be based on the presumption that the woman was pregnant and that she fully intended to carry the baby to full term. If the woman carried out her legal right to terminate the fetus then of course the property would not be inherited. As for the second, hmmm, that is a good question. Essentially though, the legal rights of the fetus are based on the assumption that the woman will not exercise her right to have an abortion and the fetus be carried to full term. Hence, becoming a validated human capable of being a plaintiff and inheriting estate. As a thought provoking exercise for a counter point; scince we are in a court and allowed to assume things, why can we not asume that the fetus chooses not to prosecute or inherit the property? Where are it's rights in this case?

Didn't know where to put this one, figured here was as good as any as it didn't deserve it's own thread. TALK ABOUT SENSITIVE Oh well, I suppose all former slaves are happy and in great anticipation to the new name they are going to recieve in the history books. As for Doms and Subs, a whole new sexual dictionary is going to have to be written. Truely we live in exciting times! Brave new world.

Looks like they will be vetting history to the Iraqis pretty soon. JAPAN TO GO TO IRAQ Didn't say how many or when they were thinking of it.

Well, if the US would stop selling arms overseas, maybe the NGOs would have safe access to help the helpless. But nooooo. That would be bad for the US economy wouldn't it? Arms are not the problem Daniel, existing forms of government are. There is not much difference between a person dead of tribal violence at the end of a machette than a bullet. Also, let's try and keep this in the 20th century, the guns are already there. Sure they got there via Eastern or Western production but they are there at this moment. Want to know why a lot of them are there? To stop people from killing each other. If one side has an advantage then the deaths of millions is a forgone conclusion. Hard to fathom isn't it? A self perpetuating cycle of armament. Until the political process changes in those places nothing will work. Tribal, Medival, Facist ways are the only thing understood. It's all the same with or without modern weapons; oppression. Now, back to getting the food aid, you need a military to do it. Witness the dead UN workers in Somalia. Hijacked food shipments, food and starvation used as weapons to gain concesions from the West.