a message to cindy sheehan

[Jenks]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

I don't listen to anyone named "Tucker."

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

oh i wasnt talking to the jenks man..

you seem to share my cynacism and broad contempt for anyone in office.

[eye-p]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

your complete inability to look things up that you dont like is apparent.

the US military's 4 main branches, under the constitution of the US are not allowed to operate on domestic soil in any capacity outside of training. the army, navy, marines and airforce only operate outside of the US. we have the national guard to operate on this soil. the onlytime you will ever see the ARMY or marines operate here is under one of two circumstances.
1. martial law, which hasnt existed since the 1800's.
2. for things like the RNC and DNC where it isnt feasible to have the NG troops travel and setup across the country when there is a division of another branch based closer. (its a logistics thing that they try to make easier.) the folks you see in Penn Station and in DC, are, for the most part NG units unless there is a need for a specific force, like hazmat or intel.

you join the military to fight abraod.

you know your shit when it comes to your own opinion, and you sure know how to google search stats, but you need to do more research on the shit you disagree with. and im on your side more often than not. anyone can take mike moore or tucker carlson or bill oreilly or anne coultier for the truth, but it doesnt mean they are right.

Not exactly.

1. I was not suggesting that the military protects us by fighting on US soil. My post didnt suggest that either. The military protects this country BY fighting abroad. Got it? The military should not be a subsidiary of big oil.

2. In your misreading my post, I assume you are referring to The Posse Comitatus act of 1878, which you should know has been suspended by The Patriot Act. The US military has no legal barrier to acting within US borders. In fact, I regularly see military guarding the Coronado bridge in San Diego.

3. Since you mentioned the NG, have you not noticed that the NG is more than 50% of the US force in Iraq? Who is then supposed to protect the US mainland?

Nice try.

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

Nice try.

fuck you.

im glad you looked up a law. way to go. however, you still seem to apply only ideas that make your point rather than looking bigger.

the national guard is in Iraq for the reason we are in the midst of an invasion which is stretching our groups thin.(because ppl like you dont have any balls to do something beyond your own personal gain and motivation). the main 4 branches still wont operate here. i know this because right now my brother James is in fort bragg getting ready to go there, my cousin keiran is a US ARMY attorney operating in the pentagon, and i am former 525th (forensic accounting/fort bragg/99-01/mos#2002ACC). the Military you see at coronado bridge is most likely the NG or a division of the marines that is on shore duty. the P.C. Act was put on hold in order allow 4 divisions of the ARMY to operate in DC and NYC. they arent acting on an offensive, they are here and in DC to back up the NG units that are stretched too thin.

you also seem to be forgetting that the Baath party killed over 300k people in under 25 years. continued to create purified unranium cake while blix and crew were sent on wild goose chases. we have indeed found bacteria, there still seems to be a stockpile of missles, explosives and other choice weapons.

you keep crying about big oil companies. i understand you belive that the oil is the single and only reason any conflict occurs in the middle east. i cant change the fact that you are narrow minded.

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

and another thing.

oil=open market.
most US companies were booted from the area in the 80's
Europe pays higher prices on oil per person than the US does.

maybe there are OTHER FACTORS OUTSIDE OF OIL COMPANIES.

im still saying its wrong, but christ you are closed minded and oblivious to things.

like trying to boost the european markets which are getting killed by the high cost of operating thier industrial centres.
this might help thier currency valutaion in comparison to the north american and asain markets.

stabilizing the region for the gigantic mistakes we all made with isreal. dont think for a minute that if the ""muslim"" nations seemed to unite, they wouldnt head right in and take back the land.

i could go into these, but i got shit to do.

none of them are good enough for me, but nonetheless they are indeed factors that in one way or another were eventually going to peek their heads up. what was going to happen when the N. american companies began dirlling in northern canada and developed a trade structure with the south american producers and the euro markets fell behind? they would jump right in there.

[eye-p]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

Nice try.

fuck you.

im glad you looked up a law. way to go. however, you still seem to apply only ideas that make your point rather than looking bigger.

the national guard is in Iraq for the reason we are in the midst of an invasion which is stretching our groups thin.(because ppl like you dont have any balls to do something beyond your own personal gain and motivation). the main 4 branches still wont operate here. i know this because right now my brother James is in fort bragg getting ready to go there, my cousin keiran is a US ARMY attorney operating in the pentagon, and i am former 525th (forensic accounting/fort bragg/99-01/mos#2002ACC). the Military you see at coronado bridge is most likely the NG or a division of the marines that is on shore duty. the P.C. Act was put on hold in order allow 4 divisions of the ARMY to operate in DC and NYC. they arent acting on an offensive, they are here and in DC to back up the NG units that are stretched too thin.

you also seem to be forgetting that the Baath party killed over 300k people in under 25 years. continued to create purified unranium cake while blix and crew were sent on wild goose chases. we have indeed found bacteria, there still seems to be a stockpile of missles, explosives and other choice weapons.

you keep crying about big oil companies. i understand you belive that the oil is the single and only reason any conflict occurs in the middle east. i cant change the fact that you are narrow minded.

So you are wrong, and I call you on it= Fuck You? Good job sparky.

1. The Coronado bridge is protected by Marines on loan to DHS. I know this because I live here. Oh, and my next door neighbor is attached to that unit. They are active duty. This is a clear violation of P. C..

2. The Baath party did not kill 300,000 people in 25 years. While they did kill over 10,000 with chemical weapons that WE sold them, and a whole bunch more in the Iran/Iraq war, they did not wholesale slaughter 300,000.

3. Uranium cake? Are you totally stupid? NO WMD. Period. The yellow cake episode has been debunked. In fact, the Bush administration apologized for including this in the 2003 SOTU speech. Did you miss this important point? If you did, you can look at the Rovegate scandal that is happening right now. Joe Wilson calling bullshit on this is the reason they outed his wife.

4. We found bacteria? Are you kidding? Bacteria? Bullshit. Bush said nukes. Condi said nukes. Cheney said nukes.

5. Other weapons? Stockpiles of weapons? Of course he had weapons! Should the Iraqi army have shot spitballs at their enemies? I cant believe that you honestly believe this.

For the record, UN and US inspectors have found exactly 16 banned Al-Saamud missles. They were not operable, but they were still banned under UN sanctions.

Checkmate.

[eye-p]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

and another thing.

oil=open market.
most US companies were booted from the area in the 80's
Europe pays higher prices on oil per person than the US does.

maybe there are OTHER FACTORS OUTSIDE OF OIL COMPANIES.

im still saying its wrong, but christ you are closed minded and oblivious to things.

like trying to boost the european markets which are getting killed by the high cost of operating thier industrial centres.
this might help thier currency valutaion in comparison to the north american and asain markets.

stabilizing the region for the gigantic mistakes we all made with isreal. dont think for a minute that if the ""muslim"" nations seemed to unite, they wouldnt head right in and take back the land.

i could go into these, but i got shit to do.

none of them are good enough for me, but nonetheless they are indeed factors that in one way or another were eventually going to peek their heads up. what was going to happen when the N. american companies began dirlling in northern canada and developed a trade structure with the south american producers and the euro markets fell behind? they would jump right in there.

1. European's pay more for oil due to their govt's taxing structure.

2. US companies were not booted from the area in the 80's. This is a fabrication on your part.

3. So you rationalize attacking Iraq to stabilize the Euro and Asian markets? I dont. I dont think the US wanting to help their currency valuation had anything to do with it, an I suspect you dont either. This is a war for resources and you know it.

4. Stabilizing the region to help Israel played a big part in this.


You can keep making excuses for your "team" as long as you want. History will prove me right, not you.

The sooner you figure out that the people you keep defending are looting the country and killing for oil, the sooner our country will be able to fix what ails it.

Hows that fork feel?

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

1. i understand that. but taxes arent flat fees, they are rates imposed on a base price, which is still high.

2. actaully, they were. US and Euro drilling companies were replaced by local, gov't run run drilling companies. ex. BP still owns the equipment, but they dont get the oil.

3. your putting words in my mouth, i was saying that there are other factors.

4. i dont know what you mean here.

and fuck off yet again, im done arguning with you, you say the same shit over and over. send me our address so i can send some kleenex soaked in oil.

history, has and still is proving you wrong. you are arguing against facts that exist and are not changing. we want them to change, but they arent, you seem to be denying this.

i still dont know why you think im on a team. i hate all govt in the last 2 decades. its all corrupt.

now go live in your fantasy world where everyone gets along. either that or move to a different country as you seem to hate how half of this retarded nation of ours has voted him again.

you bring nothing here. you just say ""war about oil"" every time someon has a thought about the war not related to oil.

i can see you now, your prbably 19, a philosophy major, sitting in your dorm planning your next protest at the local Mobil station.

[Yao]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

Chill out you two...no need to get personal. You can simply agree to disagree ;-)

A few points:

1. believe it or not, but in my country in the price of ?1.35 a litre ?0.90 or more is taxes. It's all about the taxes here mates...liberal socialist politics they call it. Should keep health services affordable, but our country manages to even fuck that up. (I'm almost ready to actually kill the goddamn son of a bitch that invented our soon-to-be-implemented new system.)

2. Despite the fact that I've learnt enough on the Iraqi case to advocate a regime change right now, the WMD's and Nukes we were told about were never found: what was found were small remainders and stocks that under no circumstance would justify the war solely.

Neither do I believe the war is on resources alone: they may be part of the agenda, but there's more to it. What that is, is yet to be found out by the common man.

3. History is still taking place: neither of you two have been proven right or wrong right now. Sit back, relax and enjoy the play that is called 'The history of planet Earth unfolding, or: how we humans managed to ravage this perfectly nice little planet we had'.

[eye-p]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan



Now go get your shinebox!

[eye-p]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

Chill out you two...no need to get personal. You can simply agree to disagree ;-)

A few points:

1. believe it or not, but in my country in the price of ?1.35 a litre ?0.90 or more is taxes. It's all about the taxes here mates...liberal socialist politics they call it. Should keep health services affordable, but our country manages to even fuck that up. (I'm almost ready to actually kill the goddamn son of a bitch that invented our soon-to-be-implemented new system.)

2. Despite the fact that I've learnt enough on the Iraqi case to advocate a regime change right now, the WMD's and Nukes we were told about were never found: what was found were small remainders and stocks that under no circumstance would justify the war solely.

Neither do I believe the war is on resources alone: they may be part of the agenda, but there's more to it. What that is, is yet to be found out by the common man.

3. History is still taking place: neither of you two have been proven right or wrong right now. Sit back, relax and enjoy the play that is called 'The history of planet Earth unfolding, or: how we humans managed to ravage this perfectly nice little planet we had'.

Point taken Yao.

I wasnt the one getting personal. I was just being honest.

He started it! :P

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

fuck you eye-p, you really are an ashhole. still in the end, you think that the oil companies are the sole reason?

i give it to you though, you actually got me to argue against myself...... touche.

[Yao]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan




Anyway..Sightless, do you remember me saying once that I would never ever be in favour of this war? I still am not entirely, but I'm not entirely against it anymore either....for me that is quite a swing. But it took those UN Security Council classes form last year to make that happen...fuck you should read what I've read about it man, there's so much more to it.

Finished all the chapters on Iraq yesterday, and at this moment I would probably have favoured the regime change, simply because whatever the UNSC did, it it wasn't an attack on himself, Saddam would always find a way to use it to further repress his people. Even the sanctions (heaviest weapon without violence) were a tool for him to keep more control of his people than ever.

Right now I think it's really unbelieveable that most European countries were against the war, but then again: with better argumentation they might have been in favour. Maybe the emphasis should've been on Saddam's non-co?perative behaviour in the first place, and his gaining of the sanctions. Europeans hate to be made to look like a fool, and that's exactly what he did.

[thesightless]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

im not in favor either, actually i want out and i say give em back hussein if the world hates the US that much. but im saying that there are other reasons other than the oil companies subliminally cont5rolling us.

[Yao]

Re: a message to cindy sheehan

Tho there is IMO no denying their influence: it is, to say the least, pretty suspicious that an administration has already occupied itself with handing out jobs and lucrative contracts even before the war has started. Not to mention that the contracts benefited the companies in which those administration members had an interest the most.

Then again, there is also just a group inside your govt that is simply very assertive in dealing with (future) problems. I've always advocated a little less war mongering from the US neo-con side, and a little more balls from the side of Europe.

What I'm beginning to think is that the NATO and the UN have too many different opinions inside them: I mean, fucking Russia and China are in them! To me, that means that a real consensus on any problem is going to be really hard to concieve. The thought behind it might have been to lessen the tensions from that side by taking them aboard, but that has IMO rendered the UNSC virtually useless: too many economical and political interests involved in one organisation. I think Veto right should be abolished, and a 2/3 majority should do. That is democratic. Veto's are used as weapons, and they slow the process down too much. Archa?c bullshit to secure the interets of the P-5, nothing else.