JohnM

Krusty - I know that Iraq had WMD back in the 80's - provided from the US. Check it out for yourself. "The proof is in past threads that I have alrready linked" Yes your first link - Iraq and WMD - posted from RScott was a very enjoyable read. Fist line - CNN reports from CIA Weapons Inspector - right there I have to laugh. Not very impartial. Although I did enjoy reading the following article.... (provided in part to appease your URL fetish) http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/31/...arch/index.html The rest you provied simply isn't very thought provoking. "Now prove to me that scince only 10 of 130 weapons sites have been inspected in Iraq and less than half of the country has been gone over that Bush was wrong about WMD. Now you are going to tell me and prove to me that in a country the size of California that there is not a propane size cylinder with some type of deadly chemical anywhere that can be placed into the nose cone of a Scud missile?" As I am not an military expert I cannot say in either case, but I would certainly consider this report over anything you may have to offer on the subject http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/docume...es_05062003.pdf JM

KrustKidd - please by all means fell free to piss off - all you are doing is simply critisising and not offering anything vaild or worth reading for that matter. If I thought like you - this would be my contribution to ANY thread. "Ya see? All you right-wing military closet homos just sit there clutching their rifles in fear that the boggy man is just around the corner ready to take them out. Just another example of SMALL DICK and NO BALLS syndrom. Its folks like you that get suckered punched in bars - knocked down on their fat soft white asses and left wondering why." Ok - so that dosn't really get us anywhere does it Clint? Your a dying breed. Moving on....... Righturnonred - "You think the alerts are bullshit because [you think] the Bush administration is a complete farce and you use the Iraq invasion as an example. Well, you have every right to think that way even if you really have no logical jusification for it." Please enlighten me as to why I have no logical justification? Or let me guess - you are just going to be critical and not offer an arguement? If so please read my above reply to Krusty the Clown. JM

Krusty Kidd - overload and evade?? What the hell are you talking about??? How can you trust that the alerts are credible considering that almost every bloody thing that comes out if the Bush Admin is BS?? I mean have youbeen living in a spider hole over the past 12months? Sorry if I am not being clear enough on this. I think the alerts are bullshit because the Bush administration is a complete farce and I used the Iraq invasion as an example. Is that clear enough for you??

Righturn - Like I said we disagree on these points. Nice chattin' with ya.

Getting a good laugh out of this!! Righturn - so thats what terrorism means!! Thanks for the reference You have missed my point entirely but no worries would we disagree anyways - agreed? Re: remote drones. Sorry my mistake - they use hell fire missles and it says nothing about a farm or family. But I still stand by my point. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,1227...,834306,00.html

Thelonious, I guess the point I am trying to get across is that it there is much hypocrisy in the use of the word terrorist. When a female Palestianian lawyer desides to end her life along with the lives of innocent civilians it is an act of Terrorism. But when the US deploys a drone armed with Stinger missiles to the outskirts of Yemen taking out an entire family while leaving their farm in the morning, its colateral damage. I call it something else. Anyways - Thanks for all the feedback folks - this is a cool website! JM

Wow - I really need to respond faster - the whole thread is passing me by. Righturnonred - When an Iraqi family is desimated by a missile, extended relatives would most likely regard it as Terror. The end result is the same regardless of whatever medium is chosen. Weather its a sniper hiding in some trunk of a car, explosives strapped to some-ones chest or an Apache helicopter taking out a few civilian homes. JM

Cool this is what I wanted, a real debate - Well said righturnred. But why must the ENTIRE country must be on alert? I agree that maybe it should be a region where there may be a possible terrorist attack but not the whole nation....just seems excessive - reactionary(?) Although what it does socially may have a lasting impact on the visible minorites of the US. You yourself may be more objective in an alert situation, ie. a van parked infront of the White House, etc - but I fear that others may not be so objective. And from what I have observed Muslim Americans have already been placed at the short end of the stick since 9/11. Inside and ouside of the country. Do I have to pull a mountain of evidence to support this claim? Again you don't need an alert to have a hightened sense of awarness. You just have to have witnessed what happened in NYC. No the genisis wasn't from 9/11, obviously, but his actions have increased anti-american sentiment. Complacency - You must be kidding. The American gov complacent?? The US Gov has been asserting its supposed God given democratic right to ride the world of tyrany and replace it will democracy since WWII and continues to do so. Of course only in situations whereby improves their interests. Bush would never have invaded Iraq if they only exported potatoes! But back to my point - was the American gov being complacent when it colonized the Philipines? Installed proxy governments in soveriegn countries such as Cambodia, Zaire, Brazil, Iran, Chile, Indonesia - should I go on? More recently Afghanistan and you might as well soon add Iraq to the list. Then again Bush himself didn't really win the election - correct? Thank god for good 'ol Jeb eh? About your "final resolution" - the way I see it there has been enough terror in this Holy Crusade exacted by both sides. When two great forces appose each other, victory goes to the one who knows how to yield. JM

Righturnonred - no one mentioned that it caused wide spread anxiety and panic - not sure you read the thread? And I agree that people would more or less continue with day to day living but they do not have short term memory - that day I am sure is burned in their heads, as well for the rest of us. Certainly not but if something terrible does happen all the Bush Admin has achieved is misdirecting blame. "Hey America - I warned ya!". I don't buy it. And what type of "activities" are Americans supposed to watch for? Would like to see you define that one. They just can't win with you can they? They're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't, huh?

I agree on all points. I don't think some kind of alert gauge is required, the American citizens are unfortunatley already on high alert since 9/11. JM

Just wanted to know what members of the forum think about the Terror Alerts of the US. There was one released to an Orange level just before Christmas and then you heard nothing. At 1 billion per week(http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/12/23/threat.level/index.html) in elevated security spending I would hope the Bush Administration has credible evidence to justify raising the 'ol Boooo Meter, considering their inablilty to prove much of anything re: the Iraq invasion. JM