newbie

So good that he bluffed Dear Leader into signing the Iraqi Liberation Act in 1998, declaring that Saddam was a threat to the free world and was hiding his weapons programs? Edited: Don't forget he kicked the UN inspectors out in '98 and could easily (and did) fool the U.S. given their pitiful intelligence and Saddam's bragging. Clinton's Act simply ties into the United Nations: My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. It says nothing about any imminent threat or barging into Baghdad though, but rather letting the UN keep Saddam in check. And he was kept in check through sanctions.

Great post as always BD. These guys are so bloody desperate. Of course it coincides with Bush's ever dipping approval rating. Hey, maybe Rove has been leaking again.

Found this in my email. Thought it was appropriate given the recent cartoon issue. Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage. * Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage. * A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage. * Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage. * Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage * Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage. * Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage *Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.

[quote name='kimmy' date='Feb 16 2006, 02:14 PM' post='98396 As for the Americans mishandling Afghanistan, recall that the US did in fact secure UN authorization and a long list of allies before going to Afghanistan. At that time they literally did have the whole world on their side, and they did not lose that goodwill for over a year. -k I have no argument with the UN authorization and allies. But the assualt was led by the US and they did blow it. They had Bin Laden cornered in Tora Bora and they power shared with Afghan warlords to get him. Bad mistake.

The cartoons in question. http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/698

We would not have attacked Iraq as it was irrelevant to even the least obvious of observers. We would have gone to the UN and secured the proper authority and allies to conduct an assault into Afghanistan where the enemy was. And since we undoubedtly would have had more allies than the US, we just might have been able to capture Osama and undermine his movement. So if you've been sure all along that the enemy was confined only in Afghaniztan, why didn't you volunteer that valuable information to intelligence? It would have saved Saddam a lot of grief...not to mention the courtroom spectators, of having him show protest in his dirty underwear. It is easy for us to criticize because it was not us who was directly hit by those planes. We were not the ones who were directly challenged right on our shores. You asked the question, I answered it. I wasn't the only one who thought the "enemy" (not Saddam by the way) was in Afghanistan. Read the 911 commission report.

Not sure what your point is August. I read the article and disagreed with his opinion.

Move to Alberta Monty.

London Free PressTrite and shallow? Anti-Americanism? Huh? One man's opinion.

Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses 10. "Heart palpitation caused trigger finger to spasm" 9. "Wanted to get the Iraq mess off the front page" 8. "Not enough Jim Beam" 7. "Trying to stop the spread of bird flu" 6. "I love to shoot people" 5. "Guy was making cracks about my lesbian daughter" 4. "I thought the guy was trying to go 'gay cowboy' on me" 3. "Excuse? I hit him, didn't I?" 2. "Until Democrats approve medicare reform, we have to make some tough choices for the elderly" 1. "Made a bet with Gretzky's wife" David Letterman, 13-Feb-2006

Compare Clinton's terrorism program to Dubya's pre-911. You might be surprised. Also, Clinton had the Orrin Hatch's of the world and a republican congress telling him that it was a waste of money to fund for terrorism.

Dear Monty. You still haven't learned that Saddam was BLUFFING. He was good at it too. My edit: Hell, I could have predicted terrorism was coming as well due to the Amercian foreign policy alone.

CTV, the so-called "right wing media" is saying the same thing. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories It's news. Get over it.

I quoted from the same site as Kiraly. And that poll doesn't say anything specific about the % of people who disagreed with Harper re his appointments.

When the Liberals do it is criminal don't you know.

That chart you linked to was actual not proportional. And if you look at the U.S., they contribute the same as we do at 10 times the population. Same goes for Australia and England.

And the sad thing is that there are a number of Canadians who feel the same.

I don't think so. This quote, Canada is a member of more international organizations than any other country in the world leads me to believe we are very well accepted in the rest of the world. Check out this link. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/govrev/04/cp-rc2_e.asp

We would not have attacked Iraq as it was irrelevant to even the least obvious of observers. We would have gone to the UN and secured the proper authority and allies to conduct an assault into Afghanistan where the enemy was. And since we undoubedtly would have had more allies than the US, we just might have been able to capture Osama and undermine his movement.

I think you are quite confused about Liberals and Conservatives. Let's take control. Whose "conservative" government is in the White House and wants to "control" the rest of the world (interfere with the cultures and laws of foreign countries ring a bell?) The "conservative" right in the States started the Iraq war/invasion, never mind the interference into how many countries? Please do some research on this. Seems to me it boils down to this: conservative = narrow/close-minded; liberal = open/fair minded. How's that for generalization. And oh, us modern Libs don't tend to start too many wars.

Don't get too excited. A good percentage of B.C.er's are still pissed about Emerson, and the poll doesn't seem to say anything about what the rest of Canada thinks about Harper's appointments. http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=2973

No he isn't, which is exactly why I stated "the prospect of someone dying". Read before you post. Ok. I'd like to take this opportunity to educate some of you. Here's a newsflash. Dick Cheney isn't in the mountains of Afghanistan searching for Osama Bin Laden. President Bush isn't in the mountains of Afghanistan searching for Osama Bin Laden. Who is you may ask yourself? Brave men and women of the American military, and Special Ops. So when you refer to "they" haven't been able to catch Bin Laden but "they" can hunt down a 78 year old man, it makes absolutely no sense. If you can't believe that the Special Operations soldiers in Afghanistan haven't been able to capture of kill Osama Bin Laden yet, and that it's an easy enough job that should have been completed by now, maybe you should pick up a gun and try it yourself. If not, shut the fuck up, and stop disparaging the brave people (who don't include policitians) that are trying to accomplish that goal. Hey, aren't you among the bunch in here that promotes free speech?

No to beat this to death, but EVERYONE has a friend with the net, and most if not all libraries have the net. If you want to see them bad enough, it ain't hard.

I don't know. There is something about a 180 pound man hitting/spanking a 40 pound child. My dad hit me with a small plastic pipe and I hated him for years because of it, and feared him as well. It's just too slippery a slope for me. I've used time out with all my kids and other forms of discipline.

They're all over the net. Hardly limited.