nova_satori
-
Posts
353 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by nova_satori
-
-
bbc link that i forgot.
-
They are making Sea Raptors? That sounds rather funny. JSFs should be here within a few years.
In that case, you are replacing one super-carrier with four small carriers and four supply ships. That's far more expensive than building one super-carrier, especially if you want them all nuclear-powered!Not in manpower costs. And training. You don't need to build 4, two will suffice. And you could cut the number of escorts.
The SU-27 is a great plane from a WWII perspective, but compared to an F-15, F-16 or F-18 it's dead meat.hardly
Dead Meat? More like a challenge
It's inaccurate and has very high kickback due to the large 7.62mm round, which still doesn't do as much damage as the M16 does with a 5.56mm NATO round. Let's not even bother comparing it to the H&K G11, which is around 200% more accurate, carries almost 4 times the magazine capacity while weighing over a kilo less and has to be stripped and cleaned far less often.yes, but most guns are inaccurate on a long burst. However, it matters very little due to the extreme amount of lead you're throwing into a small area.
US troops in Iraq favor the AK-47 over their M-16s,
The AK is favored by many of the world's fighters, from child soldiers in Africa to rebel movements around the world, because it is light, durable and known to jam less frequently.Some complain that standard U.S. military M16 and M4 rifles jam too easily in Iraq's dusty environment. Many say the AK has better ''knockdown'' power and can kill with fewer shots.the H&K G11 is much more expensive then a standard AK-47s
The hind was never designed to fight other helios. It can kill infantry at faster rates then the Apache. However, incompetent Soviet pilots, hoving next to trees learned the lesson that the afgans gave. RPGs are perfectly capable of destroying helos. you can't expect a tank to do a plane's job. You can't expect a anti-ship missile to knock jets out of the air. Things were designed for a reason. usually a few.
Foxbat's speed is enough to warrant its use. Can you find a faster interceptor?
Not really. After all, many of those crew could be expected to survive a sinking (unless it was actually vaporised), and the Navy could put together another crew without too much trouble. Like I said, it would cost a few billion, but it could be taken out of the existing budget, even. Higher costs have been borne in war.How the heck are you suppose to survive a nuclear blast? if the blast doesn't kill you, the fallout will quickly kill you or render you non-combantant, and most likely attachted to a bed for live. Most of the crews will be killed in the inital blast. Not only will they die, but the military will be forced to pay the families of those crews. Double whammy. Not only did vast amounts of capital disappear, but the payouts of that many crews will be astronomical.
-
Don't mind Craig, if he belives something is wrong, no amount of counter evidence will change his mind. Should "god" come down and tell him he's wrong, he won't change his mind.
Clinton benefitted from the Reagan - Bush era of tax cuts and deregulation - which he ensured ended in a bubble.Yes and no. Yes he did benefit from Bush Sr program cuts, he did manage the economy well. 8 of the best years the American economy ever had.
Craig is like Ashcroft, one so caught up in this beliefs, that nothing else matters/
-
If you actually think the U.S. is interested in making better and cheaper weapons, you haven't been paying attention
Um, they are trying to make things better and overall cheaper. Striker Brigades are cheaper to run then the status quo.
Take the F-22/JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) business as a prime example.... In other words: they don't need it.The Brits have been pushing this as a replacement for their sea harriers. US amphibious assualt ships like the Iwo Jima want the JSF as a replacement for their sea harriers. Sea harriers just suck period. The F-14 tomcat is schedualed to be decommished within the next 5 years, they aren't going to fill the hole with just super hornets.
Add the fact that upgrades to existing designs (such as the F/A/-18 Super Hornet and new F-16 models) are on the way, ask yourself if the above muddling sounds like the work of an organization interested in getting the best bang for the taxpayer buckWhen they pay $120 for a hammer....one has to wonder.
So while your idea has a certain whimiscal appeal, I doubt the boys in DC whose pockets are lined with Lockheed lucre would ever see it your way.whimiscal? or logical? We've already given the Israelis and the Japanese enough of our tech, I see no reason to stop.
Once again, corporate greed wins over logic.
-
On the global scale, the USAmericans also do not want a rearmed Japan for similar historical reasons, so they'd be forced to respond to the PRC's invasion.
I disagree. The US has been quitely pushing the Japanese for them to take over defense of their country entirely. They are ready for it. Their defense force is on par with the US. Their airforce already strikes fear into China. Their navy is strong, and their ground is quite capable. The US has quitely been pushing for Japan to go nuclear.
PRC invasion of what? Japan? With the two amphibious ships?
The Chinese do not, repeat, do not want any condition to come to pass that sees Japan rearmA nuclear Japan is china's worst nightmare. It is also a extremely useful pawn to force China to crack down on North Korea.
In addition, a rearmed Japan would be a fear for the North Koreans. This would push the DPRK further towards developing nuclear delivery options.It's a bit late for that. They already can hit Japan.
Nuclear weapons are the most powerful tools of the apcolypse.
-
That is simply amazing. I didn't know that many people disliked bush. Perhaps there is hope for the American public after all.
-
Derek, you're sounding like a American Craig. One so beliving in utter hatred, they are blinded by the facts and cannot even think of alternatives.
-
The Iraqi conflict is going quite well we took out saddam. We Killed his sons, the ruling party is finished. This could be a lot worse you know! Remember a little conflict called Vietnam, do you? We failed there. We triumped here. What are you still complaining about, a mad man is out of power, all you Liberals are talking about money. Why don't you think about the people we saved instead of the money we use to support our troops. Yes I know money is a factor and we shouldn't just "throw it around," but the Iraqi people and our military need this money to set up a democracy. Thats what you should care about. Quit bitchin' Libs.
Quite well? Where quite well means horribly bad. Not only have we pissed off almost every moderate and Pro-US iraqi, we have incited them to ATTACK us. Anti-bathists, anti-al queada iraqis are ATTACKING US TROOPS. Not only are troops being killed on a daily basis, but Bus is asking for $87 BILLION to fix the mess he started. We've created the largest terrorist magnet on the face of the planet.
It could be alot better.
Bush is still in power...Saddam wasn't mad. He was a brutal, shrewed dictator, but hardly mad.
The Iranian people are far more deserving. They'ved lived with the fanatical mullahs since the overthrow of the Shah. Their current protests, peaceful ones at that, are met with burtal force by Iranian authorties. Their student leaders are dragged off and never seen again. The univeristy of tehran has seen mutliple police and militray incrusions, often leaving the dorms destroyed. They WANT the Us to come. They WANT a democracy. They are willing to risk their lives for it. We KNOW they have Uranium accumulating in their storage facilties, the Russians recently terminted a pact which stated that all used fuel returns to Russia. Iran exports terror and acknowledges it. However, they have less OIL.
*ponder*
Listen to the facts before you write anyone off.
-
lol. Imagine how bad they would have been spanked if they gave away the "anarchist's cookbook."
-
They are also the fastest ships in the Navy and some of the most advanced
Uh....right. Like attack boats, La, Virginia and Seawolf subs are Slower right? And Missile cruisers are slower too right? lol. The Aegis Guided Missile Cruiser is more advanced then a standard Nimitz. Seawolfs as well, the sea shadow too.
Yeah, they are big, but those sitting ducks and move quite fast.Carriers can't even top 40 knots. That is NOT going to out run a nuke ladden missile.
A ship doesn't just APPEAR in a dock does it? It must enter a canal. That canal leads to the ocean.....i'm sure you can figure out the rest.
es, there are threats to them...but nothing gets within 200 miles of them without them knowing it and sending a welcoming party of a few tomcats200 miles is a bit overexergated. And they might not be sending F-14s in the next 2-6 years. They'll be sending Superhornets. Tomcats are scheduled to be decommishened. The JSF should be entering production, if it already hasn't. Now if only the comanche would enter production, we can get rid of these Cobras.
-
The American wing mounted two short-lived invasions of Canada in 1866 and 1870 and the Irish Fenians launched a small rebellion in Ireland in 1867. The American Fenians faded out of prominence after the last unsuccessful assault on Canada.In Gallery III, Canadians are still fighting for survival. During the American Revolution and War of 1812, a single major defeat could have wiped Canada off the map forever, and reduced it to a northern extensionof the new American republic. In each case, a coalition of English and French-speaking militia, First Peoples, and British regulars, all supported by the Royal Navy, won the crucial engagements that preserved Canada as a distinct North American entity. Even after the War of 1812, the American threat persists and generations of Canadians live out their lives behind a shield of fortifications, naval bases, communications links, and garrisons provided by the British. Even when relations with the United States began to improve, that nation provided a haven for minor incursions into Canada by Canadian rebels in 1837-38 and Fenians in the 1860s and 1870s.
-
Let's get this straight first.
History as we know it is bogus. It is simply a mismatched puzzle made from pieces that "historians" use to make meaning from raw data. No history is entirely correct.
Good thing you're here because I apparently know nothing about historyNo one knows anything about history, we simply BELIEVE what we think is true about history. Your bias aganist everything I say is your belief that liberals (and often conservatives) are warping history to their advantage. Of course, EVERYONE does this. On a higher level, no one knows anything. We simply believe much. Truth exists independently of us.
Oh, and Nova, I didn't take AP courses in HS. I went to college to take those coursesAnd that college would be....
. I'm serious. You may not like my interpretation because it gives your party a bad name, but libs have been distorting history for over 70 years, so why should you stop.I don't like your interpretation because it leaves out critical parts most historians agree on.
Like I said before, it matters not what party you belong to, everyone distorts history. To say that conservatives don't distort history is ridiculous.
-
Programs only grow, taxes only rise, and spending only accumulates with each passing political regime.
So there's no problem with Bush's cut taxes then asking for $87 billion? Cut revenue at the same time as raking up a $400 billion debt is a good thing? This debt will be carried on the backs of our grandchildren. And their grandchildren. You do remember that Clinton had the largest surplus in US history. Bush may have the largest debt in history.
You disagree that all social programs should be expanded?
Politics 101:
Lesson 1: Don't spend more money then you have
Lesson 2: Save for inveitable disasters
The class every politian fails.
-
New York would be a nice target, LA as well. Boston perhaps.
In a military harbor, it would be difficult, but the ship has too moor doesn't it?
-
Honduras - In 1988, US troops entered Honduras to prevent Nicaraguan forces from making incursions into Honduras to combat US-supported Contra terrorists. This deployment successfully stopped Nicaraguan incursions into Honduras, thereby providing the Contra terrorists with a safe haven to launch their attacks into Nicaragua.
Although the Nicaraguan issue has been settled for years, US troops remain in Honduras to present. Today this consists of an infantry task force that works with the Honduran military.
This took place during the Contra War, which consisted primarily of a series of terrorist attacks against Nicaragua carried out by bands of US funded mercenaries, dubbed “freedom fighters,” by the Reagan administration. According to congressional investigations conducted at the time, Reich reported directly to the notorious Colonel Oliver North, later convicted in the Iran-Contra scandal, where weapons were covertly sold to Iran by US government operatives, with the proceeds used to fund the Contra terrorists in defiance of US law.It was particularly disheartening to hear National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice welcome the coup, for it was she who selected Abrams to advise her on democracy and human rights. There is no greater champion of democratic values than Abrams. True, he’s a convicted Iran-contra perjurer, and he led cheers for Salvadoran army mass murderers and contra cutthroats. But hey, everybody has their bad days. Negroponte, our ambassador to the U.N., apparently was out of the coup loop. Back in the day, however, as Ambassador to Honduras, he was a great fosterer of democracy -- or at least its illusion. (Hey, you got to start somewhere.) The Reagan Gang erected a democratic facade in Honduras so the true powers, Negroponte and the army, could run the show, crush dissent and harbor Nicaraguan terrorists. Yep, Reagan’s beloved contra “freedom fighters” -- “the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers” -- were terrorists: They routinely targeted civilians for rape, torture and murder -- and the “murder” portion was justified in a manual the CIA wrote for and distributed to the contra terrorists.Not good for Ray-Gun. lol.
-
Yeah, put a 50Kt warhead on it.
Dentonate a nuclear missile to take out 25+ multiple rentry vehicles? Huh?
Bigger ships have far longer range, since you can put nuclear powerplants in ships that size, not to mention increased stores, fuel for aircraft, etcIf they can hit a reactor on a LA class, they can fit in on a illustrious. Fuel and stores can be carried on supply vessels the Us already has.
I don't believe that for a second. The main asset of the Soviet military was fear of the unknown, since no layman really knew for sure what they were capable of. The truth is that most Soviet military hardware is complete crap, the balance being only mildly crap.Sukhoi-27/35, absoultely wonderful plane. If kept in good shape, and pilot decently trained, it can be a major threat to almost every fighter in today's world. It's not the Fulcrum's big brother, it's his child.
Ak-47. Wonderful. Cheap, doesn't jam like the M-16, mass produced, doesn't require any traing, medium kickback, accurate in bursts, fully auto. What else can you ask for?
Hind. Essentially a A-10, but a helicopter, without the depeleted uranium cannon. But lots of missiles!
Mig (?) Foxbat?. Fastest fighter, meant to shoot down US valkyrie bombers (that never materliazed). Sickingly fast.
BAD: Just about everything else.
Sounds like a poor man's nuclear missile submarine to me. Only far more easy to detect, not nearly as accurate, with a far smaller warhead yield, etc. ICBMs are effectively useless in this day and age anyway - American missile systems are so well drilled from the Cold War that no nuclear power could pull a pre-emptive attack, and the retaliation would annihilate them.The point is to remove the blame from anyone. You can trace where it came from, but can you trace who launched it? The plane is long gone. Smaller warhead? The capacity of many medium-large cargo planes can fit a good size ICBM. Granted, without a AN-124, you're not gonna fit the largest ICBM, but even still, it would work. Not nearly accurate? Depends who's missile it is. American missile shields are effectively weak. Patriot anti-air batteris were never designed to defend aganist that. The Israeli Arrow i believe incoprates better tracking, but i'm not sure. Starwars missile shield is a sham. Simply put, reagan couldn't do it, bush isn't going to. They haven't even hit a 80% success rate.
Not really. America lost four fleet-size carriers in WWII, plus one light carrier and six escort carriers. The cost to float a Nimitz-class carrier (biggest in the world) is around $4 billion, but the budget for the Navy in 2002 was around $99 billion. The budget for ship procurement is $9.3 billion, but if a carrier was lost I'm sure you could get Congress to grant the cost of replacement, even if you couldn't take it out of your yearly ship procurement budget.You're ignoring the human cost. A nimtiz carrier has over 5,000 crewmen. The number of escorts may bring that number to 6,000 crewman. The loss of that many well trained toops would be astronomical. The amount of money and time spent to train each person would easily cost another carrier alone. Losing 72-144 trained pilots would be a major blow. Pilots are the most expensive people to train. Losing that many, well qualified pilots, and their potentials to trains others would be horrendous. Also, a loss of a carrier group would strain the US carrier fleets. Also, it would make the brass afraid of sending them out.
They first fire rounds in front then if you are coming in at a Fast speed they blow you away. Seriously no joke.Highly unlikely that they would do this to a hundred protesting Japanese in Yokosuko. The bad PR would be more then the President could stomach.
The US intelligence had a major breakdown pre-Sept. 11 if you are getting stuff from the Major news networks saying our intelligence sucks. that is complete and total bullshit.It also have a huge breakdown after 9/11. Our intelligence does suck. The CIA and FBI got huge beatdowns by the government for their failures.
I don't know if you guys know this but a plan for a dirty-bomb (back-pack nuke) was concieved buy some terrorist and foiled by the FBI before they could aquire any of the stuff to do it with.The Washington Post has a article on US funding Russian military ops to retrieve WGU (weapons grade Uranium) from insecure former Soviet stockpiles. We're still working on it. $400,000. The dirty bomb concept is something we're going to live with (and possibly die from) for the rest of our lives.
The thing is our intelligence is USUALLY top-notch. Yes we have had mistakes, but all countries who rely on intelligence as much as we do make mistakes also.Nova Satori...are you Canadian?
Mossad is top notch. We have a LONG way before we get to their level. No, i'm an American.
-
Hugo: I am by no way saying this is the Jew's fault. If it's anyone's, it's the UK and the UN's fault for this whole mess.
I suppose that a state wouldn't really help alot, given the current situation. It's hard to fix things when the militants have a the ultimate goal of complete destruction of Isreal.
Israel is the only democratic, free and really prosperous state in the entire region.Prosperous in comparsion to its neighbors. However, one would wonder if a dictator ship was installed, things would be more fluid. The labor party seriously doesn't like Sharon, and there is much disunity within the Israeli government. However, i'm curious, since the rise of the Jihad, hasn't Israel gone into the red? I know Saudi Arabia just recently pulled its self back into the black, thanks to a few rational minded princes in the house of Saud.
The best solution I can see is for the Arab world to accept the existence of Israel and Israel's right to exist and for the Palestinians to be accepted back into Jordan, their motherland.I suppose, but I see a huge clash of religions standing in its way.
What I don't understand is how Israel is going to provide for the people. Their current water levels are already in trouble, and their desalination plants are overworked. However, this seems to be the problem all over the middle east. When war is on, things like that get pushed to the back, but should peace ever come...Israel has alot to work on.
Fat chance, of course. Like Hitler, the Arab leaders have found that "blame the Jews" conveniently answers all the questions their people raise and to give that up would create the possibility that the real answer might come to light i.e. "We are a bunch of despotic and corrupt powermongers."What bothers me, is if Hitler could have found another way to band his people together, and still used the Jews. Jews at the time were wealth, educated and skilled. Adding their industrial might and wealth, and brains to his empire would have undoubtly prolonged the war, if not ended it in the favor. Few people will say and think that Jews are worthless. I am not one of them.
They blow themselves up in civilian centers hoping to further their cause, this does nothing.In the minds of the international yes, but to many palestinians, Israel has done so much wrong to them, that suicide bombings are the only way to get back. Vicious cycle.
I simply stated they need to stop the terrorism and actually fight the "right" way. Terrorism is for pussies.Then the US is a pussy. Contra anyone? What is the right way? Argue with Sharon? LOL. that will do alot good
I would simply load up my 30-30, my .357 Magnum and take as many of those fuckers off the earth as possibleThere are plenty of gun battles in that area. The Isreal push into Jenin Time Article, was a large gun battle, as well as suicide and remote bombings. They are fighting the way you described. Please keep the swearing to a minium if you have to, and if you can, cease the usage.
Most experts that are not UNO paid apologists feel that Palestine needs the infrastructure of governance before they get the land.True. They also need functioning police and civil services. the IDF likes to blow those up.
I read somewhere [wish i remembered where] that Palestinian kids can recite the Koran but they are illiterate.I read somewhere [wish i remembered where] that American Adults can recite the Bible but they are illiterate.
Arafat has to go - better off dead than alive I say.Better alive and imprisoned than as a martyr for the disguntled of the Middle East to rally upon.
-
Possibly, but seeing how the US's fate is more or less tied to both of them, I don't really see a problem.
Japanese make things smaller and more efficent.
Isreali make stuff that kicks serious butt and has the a huge test range (the whole country anyone?).
US starts with the idea.
-
Japanese Make everything better!
The US should given the Japanese weapons to refine, then let the Isrealis test them, then send them back to Japan for further refinment!
-
Whistler: True, unless we go to war with the UK, we don't need anti-sub warfare. China is using old Akulus and Romeos. So scared. Even Taiwan isn't that advanced.
It is perfectly possible to shoot down a missile with another missile.Of course, but this is all hypothetical, it could happen. The defenses on a US ship is much greater then they were when the USS stark was nailed by a exocet, nevertheless, is it a large threat to US assets. I think the US should start building smaller Carriers, like the British Illustrious class or the Italian Garbaldi class. Should this happen, the overall loss of manpower and equipment would be less then a loss of a Nitmiz Supercarrier, and her escorts.
About HOE, did they ever manage a way to take out 25+ MRVs? I'm curious.
No, they don't. You can't skim mere inches above the surface in a 12-foot sea unless your missile can swim! They fly at around 30-50 feet altitude which makes them not undetectable but certainly more difficult to detect due to backscatterI'll go look for the supposed Russian missile that can fly a 10-20 feet above the ocean. I'll have to find the russian military guy on previous forum I posted a while ago.
Of course, this is assuming that the target is just sitting there like a dummy - Russian guidance systems are atrocious and would be easily spoofed or jammed by US systems. Visual/IR range is not that much at sea, so any missile has to home in by radar, and a target ship could spoof a decoy many miles away.For the most part. Russia has produced some of the greatest military pieces, and some of the worse. The guidance interference could be circumevented by programming a time explosion. Just get to the general area and blow...not much expertise needed for that. it's not like a carrier can move very quickly to get out of blast range.
Basically, the carrier group is really impervious to all but a highly co-ordinated and very determined missile attack from a large force of opposing ships and/or subs.That is probably why China isn't bothering to work on the Minsks. Good luck attacking Taiwan. You're gonna need the largest taskforce ever.
I'm sure you can come up with some remote scenario in which a carrier group is vulnerable - sabotage, or nuking the city it's berthed in, but regardless, the reason they are built is that the extremely slim risk of their loss is well worth their utility. They are not floating dead cans at all, but extremely potent warships with massive firepower, great flexibility and very long range. Does that answer your original question?Well there is another method that already in the works. A medium sized cargo plane, like a Greyhound, could be outfitted with nuclear launch capiablity. In theory, the plane opens the cargo door, slides the nuke out, the nuke opens its paracutes and floats warhead up down to a certain attitude, where it detaches its chuts, and exgnites. Essentially you can launch a small ICBM from the middle of the ocean. If you know the coordiantes, 6-10 MRVs, from above, is signifitely different to defend then missiles from a boat or a plane.
I still believe that they are "putting all your eggs in one basket." should one ever be lost, the magnitude of the loss would be astronomical.
-
But just because he does it doesn't mean we have to do it as well. The pursuit of wealth without responsibility will ultamitely see us all dead.
-
No they don't have any right, at all, the land wasn't theirs, It was Israel's,
Neither was it Israel's, if we wanted to get down to legal rights, it was Britain's. The palestinians were living there before the creation of the isreal state. They "owned" the land (if you can really own land in the grand scheme of things). However, the land was used and lived on by the Palestinans. Many of them lost their property.
The Jews have obtained that land through many wars with Arab nations thinking they shouldn't be there, they fought for it and should get to keep it.No they didn't. The original land, much of which was occuptied by Palestinans, was given to Israel via the UN and Britain, after WWII. The Israelis gained land through wars with arabs, but that is irrevelent to the topic at hand. Much of the land that Isreali live on was once owned by Palestinians.
The Palestinians should stop their acts of terrorism. Plain and Simple.They should give up their chance to regain their property and former lives? Would YOU give up your land and freedom simply because some idiot said so?
It's VERY clear you have never spoken with any Middle Easterner. The vast majority of them agree when a Arab or a Muslim fights for their freedom, they are considered terrorists. When a westerner does it, the rest of the world considers him/her a freedom fighter.
If Israel was under Arab rule right now the people would be oppressedAnd you would want them to fight for their freedom, but when a muslim or arab does it, you condemn them.
Don't try to tell me i don't know anything about history.I don't need to. You should look at your own post and be able to tell you know nothing.
Hugo: Do you think that a creation of a Palestinian state, with aid from America would be the best idea in the long run?
Obviously, you can't have that contrast between people, but the Palestianes lost much land and wealth, it seems only fair to at least try to make it up.
-
Luigi, what are you trying to do, confuse some people?
Post verifiable facts?
Pry open closed minds?
Bravo!
WHAT? What do you think we are here to do? LEARN SOMETHING PERHAPS? Expand our minds? What are you crazy people talking about! We don't need evidence (there's a funny comic about this one, iit's by tom tomorrow), evidence is for sissies!
lol.
-
I think they fear nuclear weapons. I wouldn't declare independence if I knew they might use nukes on me. I suppose they would lose a war of attrition, PLA has the edge in numbers, and Taiwan lacks strike capability.
The US can't afford to lose either of them as trading partners, China is the slavery capital of the world. Are the Kuomintang Nationalists a threat to US control? Would they do something so vile as to threaten to keep the profits from the Taiwanese factories for the Taiwanese? That would surely put the brakes on as far as the US is concerned.I think the US would sac Taiwan for China. Bottom line wins the war with ethnics and morality. I think the Taiwanese are far more likely to adopt a internaional trade scheme then the mainland. It took a few months for piracy to be squashed in Taiwan, it's gonna take 50 YEARS for that to happen in mainland China.
Clark, Can He Win?
in Federal Politics in the United States
Posted
We already get a huge amount of our oil from them anyway. Why delay your oil via a war? The US recieved very little of its oil from Iraq. Thus, to gain more resources without putting obstacles in front of ones you have, you attack someone who has what you want and that you aren't getting from them.
This is a oil war. The ministry of oil was one of the few buildings that the US forces didn't let burn. While the ministry of health, military, etc all went up in flames, US marines were vigiliantly guarding the Ministry of Oil. What does that tell you?
Lies eh?
Hmmm..artifacts or oil?
So going to war with false evidence, lies, disgruntled allies, all for resouces is good and ethical?
Lies and propaganda is that we liberated iraq's people because they lived under a mad leader. Look at Iran, they have it far worse. And we have better evidence of their cladestine nuke programs. Guess who has more oil? iran or Iraq?
Anyone who completely ignores the events of the US invasion is an idiot.
Bush is going to win because no one else has the amount of money he has. But he'll pay through the nose for this election.
Clinton waited for evidence and resonable belief before he went around the UN. He also didn't alienate the entire world by doing so. He did not freak out the world by flaunting US military might. He made coaltions without threats or bribes. He did not see a need to waste precious resources on lies. Clinton was a liar, about Monica
. Bush screwed up badly. Time for change.
Now let's see you refute that Derek, my ignorant American friend.