American Pacifists Descend on Baghdad - Meanwhile, US Airstrike Hits Civilian Airport

Now that is courage! My prayers are with them.

It is not pacifism to protect a despot who tortures and murders his own people, who invades his neighbors and loots their countries and commits acts of environmental terrorism (remember the oil wells he set on fire? Remember who put them out?). It is collusion.

Oh, and even if I would believe the Iraqi news (let me guess, we blew up another baby milk factory.), the fact is that Iraq has consistently located military hardware and installations in close proximity to civilian activity and structures. They do this in hopes of deterring our striking at them for fear of collateral damage. They are using their own people as human shields without importing a confused bunch of tie-dye and earth shoe wearing Jerry Garcia disciples. Of course the Iraqis don’t worry too much about collateral damage when they fire SCUD missiles at city centers in Saudi Arabia and Israel, but I guess that doesn’t matter.

for the loons on here . . . I don't like the word myself, but that's how they're described in this article.

I just have to think that even after Hitler had come and gone, there were still people that supported him . . . that's the level of insantiy, like these war mongers in the US.

You want to hum ‘give peace a chance’ to yourself and think that if we all just loved each other just a little bit more the world would be a far out and groovy place. The problem is that Mr. Hussein doesn’t give a fiddler’s fart for you or your latte-drinking ass. He wants to exercise his power unfettered by international sanction or interference. And you facilitate his atrocities by your collusion. You are an appeaser.

I want to air out his brainpan and string his carcass up Mussolini-style to free a wonderful and educated people and to serve as a warning to other primitives.

Appeasement leads to endless wars. Opposing tyranny ends them.

Who’s the war monger?

Can't make an argument, so just call your opponent names. Pitiful.

"Mussolini-style to free a wonderful and educated people "

Sure, free them by killing them. Great idea. Glad to know you support Mussolini - that tells me all I need to know about you and your real wishes to 'free' people.

Attention Ignoramus:

Mussolini-Style refers to the fact that Mussolini was strung up at the end of the second world war by anti-fascists. The fact that you don’t know shit about history brings into question why anyone would respect your opinion on foreign affairs. And another thing, Mr. Oh-so-smart: Saddam Hussein and his people are not the same thing. To want to kill Saddam and his hardcore supporters is not the same as killing Iraqi civilians. And yes, I realize that some innocent Iraqis will die. That is the unfortunate cost of stomping out despots. Using your logic we shouldn’t have opposed Hitler and fascism because some Germans might get hurt.

In summation:

Read a book once in a while. May I suggest history?

Saddam Hussein is horrible. That is undeniable.
But most of his worst crimes were against his own people. The invasion of Kuwait was benign when compared to Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and the death toll there (18,000 civilians). But there are no serious calls by our government to bomb Israel for this or even to stop aid (which is around 5-12 billion dollars a year).

If we are to take anyone seriously who calls for war, then the person calling for war must:
1. Put his ASS where his mouth is and enlist and go fight.
2. When claiming crimes as a reason to go to war, that person similarly brings up the MUCH WORSE crimes of neighboring countries (like Israel) and clamors for war against those countries as well (or at least stop aiding them).
3. Calls for war against countries with weapons of mass destruction no matter who has them. Israel has nuclear weapons as well as stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. And they also have no hesitation to use them except for the worldwide condemnation that might come. But this doesn't bother us since the weapons are pointed at Arabs.

Basically, if you want war against a country, then you have to demonstrate that you understand the recent history of the area you want war in and are not so biased that you think it's ok for Arabs to die, but not Israelis.

If the US were serious about creating a democracy in Iraq, then the government would have backed the rebellions that occurred there due to our leaders calls for the people to rise up against Saddam.

This happened twice: Once in 1991, and another time around 1994. Both times, the US refused to help and even let Saddam suppress those uprisings with helicopter gunships etc.

The reason is pretty simple, the US does NOT want a real democracy in any Arab country but dictatorships that will do what we want (like sending us the oil profits through wealth transfers like buying weapons for exorbitant prices and foreign investment.)

The fact is, a democracy would be more interested in using the profits generated from oil sales for their own benefit and this is something that cannot be tolerated.

In addition, the US government does not care squat about the fate of the Iraqi people. Since 1991, at least 1.5 million Iraqis died from the sanctions (500,000 of which were children under the age of six). The first to die were children and adults with chronic illnesses like diabetes.

To this Madeleine Albright said "the price is worth it." This is a person who said that three out four of her grandparents died in Auschwitz. Yet she cannot understand the implications of her own statement. Iraq (like Palestinian occupied territories) has been turned into one huge concentration camp.

All the civilian infrastructure was destroyed: Pharmaceuticals, 18 of 21 power plants totally destroyed (with the remaing 3 damaged severely), dams, bridges, roads, airports, livestock (including the shepherds and their dogs), agriculture, everything wiped out.

There used to be a thriving middle class in that country with night clubs etc. Now all that has been destroyed. As the first George Bush put it "we bombed them back to the stone age." It is unbecoming for us as Americans to gloat in this destruction. It really makes us look pretty bad in the eyes of the rest of the world.

I do understand the history of the region; recent, not so recent, medieval and ancient. The State of Israel has been under constant attack from it’s Arab neighbors since it’s founding in 1948.

As far as your prerequisites for advocating war with Iraq, they are preposterous.

1. If only soldiers are to be allowed to advocate positions on conflict, then do only women get to advocate positions on childbirth? Do only gun owners get to decide gun laws? In the United States, the people are free to express their views regardless of whether they are members of the power structure or not. This is called Democracy. If only the military gets to say, it’s called a Police State or a Junta. How’s this: You can only advocate peace with Iraq if you have lived your life under the rule of Saddam Hussein and think that it’s swell.
2. There is nothing inconsistent in the position of supporting the only Democracy in the region against a despot. To criticize Israel alone and paint the Arabs as innocent suffering lambs is dishonest.
3. We will go to war with Iraq not just because he is in possession of weapons of mass destruction, but rather because we believe he will not be deterred from using them. If, as you claim Israel has had these weapons for some time, why haven’t they used them on their tender neighbors? Why didn’t they respond with them against Iraq when Iraq launched SCUDs at Israel? I’ll tell you why. Israel is a civilized democracy of the first world and Iraq is a brutal despotism of the third. Weapons of such power need to be kept from animals like Saddam.

Oh, and who said I'm not a soldier?

If you really understood the recent history of that region, you would not have made this statement which pretty much parrots the mainstream media:
--"The State of Israel has been under constant attack from it’s Arab neighbors since it’s founding in 1948."
bullshit, bullshit...

--"Israel is a civilized democracy of the first world"
Israel bombed Iraq in 1981 and Iraq didn't respond then. Iraq fired rockets at Israel during the Gulf War only after being attacked by the US. How many Israelis were killed -- two, three? Those missiles were just symbolic and not laced with any toxic agents. Our missiles and shells were laced with depleted uranium and the radiation poisoning is still making Iraqi civilians sick and killing them to this day.

Also, the Gulf War was completely unnecessary. There was a diplomatic solution that the US had carefully avoided.

This is a war that left somewhere in the vicinity of 1.5 to 2 million dead and a country in ruins, yet you want another war and more dead. Are you a racist who hates Arabs? Because this is genocide.

Logic, what logic?
As far we know Israel invaded other countries, and the despot in power in Israel is a terrorist. USA is a very good friend with this guy (Sharon). If you think that Israel is democratic country just because people have the right to vote is ridiculous. In the western world people have the right to vote, the problem is that when the majority of the people do not vote because they are fed up with Washington crap, it seem that some kind of demented party decide to put their own president even if he is unelected with the excuse that people was given the choise (of what?). Women cannot become president at the moment. I have difficulty in here to see anything called democracy, but dementiacracy a lot.
Criminals are in power, people are hurdled. Sharon is not better than Saddam as they are not better than Bush or Blair, these bunch are criminals.

First of all, Israel attacked a nuclear reactor which Saddam Hussein was using to make a nuclear weapon. Iraq didn’t counterattack because even with the help of the rest of the Arab world, the Israelis would still kick their butts.

Second, symbolic or not, Saddam Hussein launched missiles at a country that wasn’t involved in the Gulf War. His reasons for doing so? Because he believed that the rest of the Arab allies of the United States would desert the Coalition if Israel counterattacked. We never found out if he was right because the Israelis showed restraint.

Third, no missiles or shells are ‘laced’ with DU. DU is utilized in APFSDS-T tank rounds as a hardening agent which makes the tungsten steel penetrators more dense. These rounds are only good at killing tanks, they don’t explode or spread fragments. If the Iraqi people are sick or dying from radiation poisoning ten years after these rounds were fired, they are either the luckiest tankers in the world (they should be dead if their tank got hit), or people who liked to crawl around on all the hundreds of burned out Iraqi tanks right after they got hit. Somehow I doubt there is any epidemic going on.

I agree the Gulf War was unnecessary. But then Saddam Hussein decided to attack Kuwait.

And stop saying people are racist because they disagree with you. Would you like it if I called you a racist because you want the Iraqi people to live under the heel of a Despot while you enjoy the fruits of Democracy?

I don't want the Iraqi people living under a dictator.

But I don't believe it is up to us to go there and free them which would result in the deaths of probably thousands if not tens of thousands of civilians. The way to free them is by supporting their rebellion with weapons and maybe providing air cover so that Saddam cannot once again suppress them from the air.

Democracy is possible but it's up to them to take it.

Anyway, I think this is all disengenuous since going to war against Iraq will result in more civilian deaths than Saddam himself would cause...

I don't believe you care a whit about Iraqi civilians but use them to try to justify war that would benefit no one in the world except for maybe Israel and the US (if we successfully place a puppet there).

So you support supplying arms to rebels who will get slaughtered by Saddam's army but you don't support an American-led invasion which will defeat Saddam. And you're the guy who's concerned about the Iraqi people? You've got a broken ethics ticker there pal.

If Israel is justified in bombing a nuclear power plant because they believed Iraq was going to construct a nuclear weapon, then anyone is justified in bombing the Damona nuclear power plant in Israel because it is hardly a secret that Israel uses it to make nuclear weapons.

If supporting literal genocide is not racist than I guess we need to redefine what racism is. Or maybe you just don't accept that we've been supporting genocidal policies (like the bombing of Iraq's civilian infrastructure combined with sanctions that are in place solely due to US pressure), which have resulted in literally millions of civilian deaths.

Gulf war veterans were screwed by the government when they were not informed of the dangers of Depleted Uranium in the ordinances they had to work with.

An International Appeal to Ban the Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons

Drafted by Ramsey Clark

Depleted-uranium weapons are an unacceptable threat to life, a violation of international law and an assault on human dignity. To safeguard the future of humanity, we call for an unconditional international ban forbidding research, manufacture, testing, transportation, possession and use of DU for military purposes. In addition, we call for the immediate isolation and containment of all DU weapons and waste, the reclassification of DU as a radioactive and hazardous substance, the cleanup of existing DU-contaminated areas, comprehensive efforts to prevent human exposure and medical care for those who have been exposed.

During the Gulf War, munitions and armor made with depleted uranium were used for the first time in a military action. Iraq and northern Kuwait were a virtual testing range for depleted-uranium weapons. Over 940,000 30-millimeter uranium tipped bullets and "more than 14,000 large caliber DU rounds were consumed during Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield." (U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute)

These weapons were used throughout Iraq with no concern for the health and environmental consequences of their use. Between 300 and 800 tons of DU particles and dust have been scattered over the ground and the water in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. As a result, hundreds of thousands of people, both civilians and soldiers, have suffered the effects of exposure to these radioactive weapons.

Of the 697,000 U.S. troops who served in the Gulf, over 90,000 have reported medical problems. Symptoms include respiratory, liver and kidney dysfunction, memory loss, headaches, fever, low blood pressure. There are birth defects among their newborn children. DU is a leading suspect for a portion of these ailments. The effects on the population living in Iraq are far greater. Under pressure, the Pentagon has been forced to acknowledge Gulf War Syndrome, but they are still stonewalling any connection to DU.

Communities near DU weapons plants, testing facilities, bases and arsenals have also been exposed to this radioactive material which has a half-life of 4.4 billion years. DU-weapons are deployed with U.S. troops in Bosnia. The spreading toxicity of depleted uranium threatens life everywhere.

DU weapons are not conventional weapons. They are highly toxic, radioactive weapons. All international law on warfare has attempted to limit violence to combatants and to prevent the use of cruel and unfocused weapons. International agreements and conventions have tried to protect civilians and non-combatants from the scourge of war and to outlaw the destruction of the environment and the food supply in order to safeguard life on earth.

Consequently, DU weapons violate international law because of their inherent cruelty and unconfined death-dealing effect. They threaten civilian populations now and for generations to come. These are precisely the weapons and uses prohibited by international law for more than a century including the Geneva Conventions and their Protocols Additional of 1977.

"Iraq didn’t counterattack because even with the help of the rest of the Arab world, the Israelis would still kick their butts"

" . . . if Israel counterattacked. We never found out if he was right because the Israelis showed restraint."

So when Israel doesn't counterattack its showing restraint, but if Iraq doesn't, it's because it has suddenly gotten terrified . . . great logic there.

What I'm finding is that men who think they know every reason behind every ordinance fired during an attack have no concept of any larger picture - it has to do with over-dominance of the left brain.

Please do us all a favor and continue to talk about historical war details, but stay out of the big picture of the here and now and what we should all be doing. You're more than welcome to go git yur gun and shoot it with the soldiers, but don't try to convince people that you see the big picture, when really you only manipulate details of battles from history.

Lots of people don't want to fight or die OR (bizarre as this seems outside of a mental ward) claim to be killing for peace or democracy in the year 2002!!, so leave us alone and go huff and puff on a pro-military site.

Ahh, the depleted uranium armor penetrator.
It's a pencil sized rod of U238 inside the round.
Its effect is something else. A high velocity
gun(as in a tank cannon or a-10 30 mm round) hits
the steel plating and cuts through like a knife
into butter. As it contacts the ferrous materiel
comprising the armor its piroporic properties become
evident producing white hot spray of steel and vaporized
U238 (highly radioactive) into the target, burning
and shredding anything inside.

The resulting by-products of combustion are also
radioactive i.e. smoke and resultant dust.

Hardly harmless.
How to Avoid Exposure:

Stay away from any vehicle, equipment, or structure which you believe may have been hit by DU rounds
or Tomahawk cruise missiles. Do not pick up or collect DU rounds found lying on the ground. Inform
NATO forces and/or relief workers (in writing, if possible) you suspect DU contamination of an area, and
mark the area as potentially contaminated. If you are in a potentially contaminated area (such as near
destroyed tanks), wear respiratory protection and gloves at a minimum, and adhere to good personal
hygiene (wash frequently). Visually examine clothing and skin for deposition of black DU dust and
decontaminate as needed. If you suspect you were exposed to DU dust or fragments, contact a
physician or relief worker and arrange for a 24-hour urine test to be analyzed for U-238, U-235, U-234,
and creatinine.
http://www.ngwrc.org/Dulink/DU_fact_sheet.htm

Israel has been under attack since day one of its creation in 1948??? You are obviously a sucker for all the Zionist revisionism of history and all their propaganda.
Ha! The truth is when the UN gave away land that was not theirs to give away in the first place to the Zionists in 1948, on that very day Israeli terrorists massacred thousands of Palestinians and over 750,000 Palestinians fled in terror from their homes, to which they were never allowed to return to, even though it is their right according to UN Resolution, international law and world opinion. In doing this, Israel took even more land that was partinioned to it by the UN! How do you think you would have felt about racist, Jewish-supremacist Israel if you were a Palestinian? PULLEEZ! You should really do your homework on this subject before you go around regurgitating Zionist propaganda. Read "Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict" by Jews for Justice in the Middle East at http://www.cactus48.com. Also you can go to http://www.discovery.com and call the 800 number and ask for the 3 part series called "Behind the Hatred" about the Palestine-Israel conflict that BBC, NY Times TV, and NBC co-produced, which is amazingly unbiased. They show and tell all about the massacres by "Israeli terrorists "(THEIR EXACT WORDS) in 1948. Israel instigated all the wars in "pre-emptive" attacks against its neighboring countries. So PULLEEEZ don't try to paint poor little Israel, with the 4th largest army in the world (making it an army with a country rather than a country with an army) AND the nuclear bomb, as the "victim". That is so pathetically false. Also perhaps you are unaware of Israel's deliberate treacherous act of aggression against our own USS Liberty, which they had hoped to blame on the Egyptians, killing 34 navymen and wounding 129 more? http://www.ussliberty.com Yes, this was during the 1967 6 Day War that Israel pre-empted, destroying all of Egypt's planes before they even moved an inch. Israel is not the victim, Israel is the terrorist, oppressive, fascist, apartheid country that has defied 80 UN Resolutions and whose only ally is the US, which doesn't do us any good. Au contraire.

Ramsey Clark? Give me a break. Leftist lawyers don’t make the most persuasive arguments. Let me guess, Barbra Streisand says DU is bad too. And so do those eminent legal minds the Traveling Clintons.

Literal genocide? Where the hell is that occurring? You want the sanctions lifted on Iraq? The UN sanctions would end IF THE IRAQIS WOULD COMPLY WITH THEIR PROVISIONS. That was a tough one. The sanctions that the Iraqis labor under are the direct result of their behavior. They invaded Kuwait, remember?

As far as bombing civilian infrastructure – this is part of war. Bridges have military value. So do mines. So do a lot of other structures you think are civilian. Comply with the sanctions and the international community would be in Iraq in a New York minute to help them repair. The reason that Saddam Hussein won’t comply is there is no reason to. He gains much more traction in the Middle East and Europe and with the Left in the US by playing up the martyr routine. If he’s the put-upon one, how can he be the bad guy? Saddam Hussein doesn’t have to answer to his people, so why should he care about their condition?

As far as Gulf War Syndrome is concerned, its cause has not been conclusively proved. For the first several years after the war, people were convinced that it was experimental anti-nerve agents that were administered to soldiers. It might be possible that some soldiers have been radiated by DU, but certainly not a significant number. It is entirely possible that the Syndrome was caused by the release of a biological vector.

-- "The UN sanctions would end IF THE IRAQIS WOULD COMPLY WITH THEIR PROVISIONS."

Actually, according to official US policy as stated by Madeleine Albright, it didn't matter what Iraq did, the US was never going to lift the sanctions.

Scott Ritter on the sanctions:
FRONTLINE: Now, tell me about that. There's a lot I want to talk about here, but Madeleine Albright, at one point, gives a big speech [in March], '97, where she says that we are going to keep economic sanctions, we, the United States. ... [W]hat was wrong with Madeleine Albright, in that speech and that policy?

RITTER: Well--economic sanctions were put on Iraq because Iraq invaded Kuwait. After the liberation of Kuwait, in 1991, early 1991, economic sanctions were extended, as part of a package to get Iraq to disarm. Economic sanctions would be lifted, especially the provision on oil sales, would be lifted if Iraq complied with its disarmament obligations. The priority and the emphasis should be on disarming Iraq, not on the maintenance of economic sanctions. That's not what it's about. That's a tool. It's about disarmament.

So, when Madeleine Albright comes out, and makes the most ridiculous statement, saying, it doesn't matter if Iraq complies with its disarmament obligations. Regardless, we're going to continue to keep economic sanctions in place, until what? Until Saddam Hussein is removed from power. Well, show me the Security Council resolution that says that's the case. It's the U.S. that started jumping in to operating outside the framework of international law.

And now you have a situation where Iraq says, What are we supposed to do? If we cooperate, it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. And now they start looking at UNSCOM, now there's an implementor of Security Council policy, but actually, as an organization designed to create confrontation, that gives the United States an excuse to maintain sanctions, we became not just an inconvenience, we became the bad guys. And it's the United States that's to thank for that. Madeleine Albright's mindless policy. And that's the beginning of the end for UNSCOM.

"As far as bombing civilian infrastructure – this is part of war"

Please go read your weapons manuals from WWII and stop bothering people who are discussing peaceful solutions. You're obviously still lost in history. This is 2002 and we have lots of ways to solve things without bombing civilians and their associated infrastructure.

How about this instead:
"As far as bombing civilian infrastructure - this will be tried under the war crimes tribunals in the world criminal court, coming to your neighborhood soon."

Also, in 1998, when UNSCOM left Iraq, it wasn't because they were kicked out, but because the US was about to attack Iraq (Desert Fox).

And what was attacked was every single installation UNSCOM had visited, leading most people involved, including Scott Ritter, to conclude that UNSCOM was used as a spy agency to identify targets.

Even so, Iraq recently allowed them in again without condition. But even this is not enough -- UNSCOM picking over the remains of Iraqi sites. The fact that the US has recently said that we are going to war with or without inspections is an indication that this is not about weapons of mass destruction. UNSCOM and Scott Ritter have said that Iraq has complied with all necessary provisions and Iraq had been certified free of weapons of mass destruction. But we have to fabricate bullshit in order to attack. We don't care about their civilians but about installing a dictator who will send their oil profits our way and make sure Iraq is sufficiently Israel-friendly.

Scott Ritter:
You have a United States administration, the Clinton Administration, which, as we've seen with Madeleine Albright's unfortunate statements of 1997, have decided to pervert international law and say that it doesn't matter what Iraq does with disarmament, we're going to keep economic sanctions in place.

Now, these sanctions are becoming harder and harder to defend, on two fronts. One, what good are they doing? Are they having an impact on the target, Saddam Hussein? The answer is no. Who suffers under sanctions? Innocent Iraqi people. Thousands of children under the age of five die every month because of these sanctions, and while the American public might be oblivious to this, believe me, the rest of the world is not, and the longer we continue this program of economic sanctions targeted against Iraq, the more isolated the United State becomes.

Douglas O'Brien,

I assume you are signed up and ready to go fight the good fight in Baghdad, correct? I expect we will see you in combat and on the front lines, gas mask and all. After all, you are willing to give your own life to see Saddam put down, are you not?

Please let us know exactly what you are willing to do in Baghdad, if you are willing to go there and give up your life to end the evil of Saddam.

Or is it just other of our boys you'd be glad to see die? And as for Iraqi citizens, well, they don't even count, do they? I mean, to you they're barely human, right?

War should always be a last resort and ONLY for defending your country from direct attack.

That's why the only wars worth fighting are the ones you are willing to fight yourself because your family or loved ones are actually in jeopardy.

During the first Gulf War, a US soldier -- disgusted with all the pro-war fever -- said these people ought to "put their asses where their mouths are" and enlist to fight alongside him.

"It might be possible that some soldiers have been radiated by DU, but certainly not a significant number."

Ya think, Pvt. O'Brien?

Indeed, you may wish to read the following article, which shows that not only American citizens have been severely injured by DU, but the infants and children of Iraq have suffered terribly from them. It is the ignorance of "Americans" like yourself that would inflict this cruelty again on other Americans. Not to mention the children, of course (because, in "minds" like yours, they don't really count). To wit:

"Many of the birth defects, especially those in southern Iraq, are multi-malformational, reminiscent of children born after Hiroshima and Nagasaki or after the nuclear testing in the Pacific. Babies are born without limbs, eyes, genitalia, internal organs or with additional abnormal organs and many with extraordinary tumors."

Your pro-war apologies are frankly obscene. I hope you find the following article illuminating, Pvt. O'Brien. Rest assured we all confidently look forward to watching you in robust action on the front lines in Baghdad.

2002-09-26 | Whilst we in Britain are debating the possible hazard of Iraq acquiring biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, the Iraqi people need be in no doubt at all that the formidable array of munitions now being ranged against them by the US and allies will contain substantial amounts of radioactive material, which like all other weapons of mass destruction, will continue to kill for generations after the attack is over. Although our Ministers of Defense, like Dr. Moonie, would have us believe that the risks of depleted uranium are minimal, previous experience in Iraq, the Balkans and more recently Afghanistan, has shown otherwise. According to Dr. Moonie, "there are two potential hazards arising from the use of DU: a low level radiation hazard....; and a chemical toxicity hazard, similar to that posed by other heavy metals such as lead." These are not, he assures us, "‘of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering’ within the meaning of Article 35 of the first Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949." How strange then that an epidemiological study made by Professor Alim Yacoub*, shows that it is in precisely those areas where depleted uranium munitions were used and where levels of contamination of soil, plants and water are highest, that a substantial increase in childhood malignancies and leukemias have been recorded. There has been a steady percentage rise in cases since 1993 due to the cumulative effects of exposure. The figures for the year 2000 were a 300% rise in leukemias and 384.2% rise in malignancies. His study shows a shift of incidences in leukemias in recent years towards younger children consistent with exposure to ionizing radiation.

There has also been a marked rise in congenital diseases and birth malformations in Iraq. Down’s syndrome has increased by 4.5 fold with many of the mothers below the age of 35. Many of the birth defects, especially those in southern Iraq, are multi-malformational, reminiscent of children born after Hiroshima and Nagasaki or after the nuclear testing in the Pacific. Babies are born without limbs, eyes, genitalia, internal organs or with additional abnormal organs and many with extraordinary tumors. There is an increase in hydocephaly and anencephaly. These children are either born to mothers who were living in the areas of southern Iraq where depleted uranium was most heavily used or their fathers were veterans from these same areas. In most of these cases there is no previous history of genetic disorder in the families. Many women are now terrified of giving birth and the sanctions prevent proper ante natal care and scanning. Should Dr. Moonie ever visit the hospitals of Iraq, he would see for himself ample evidence of 'superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering’. Ward after ward of children and adults dying, in all probability, from the effects of internal radiation: tiny ceramic aerosolized particles which have entered the body through inhalation or ingestion to lodge in the deep lung or migrate to the lymph or bone giving off a steady pulse of alpha radiation. The one year old baby with a huge stomach cancer, the two year old bleeding hopelessly from the ear and throat, the eight year old leukemia victim who buries her head in the pillow to hide her silent tears.

These are not Saddam’s propaganda pieces any more than the valiant doctors, who for all their training and skills, must simply watch them die. Since sanctions were imposed on Iraq, no child has survived leukemia All die in pain with even morphine denied. Parents sell everything they have ever possessed to buy cancer drugs and still the children die. Depleted uranium is also known to cause neurological disorders, immune breakdown with AIDS like symptoms and rare bowel and kidney problems. Many Iraqi children have suffered from a fatal epidemic of swollen abdomens due to kidney failure. Lowered potassium levels, the result of kidney damage, can lead to cardiac arrest and potassium has also been banned at times as a dual use item. Healthcare under the ‘oil for food’ deal is criminally inadequate. British government officials tell us that the Iraqis could have as much medicine as they wanted but the figures published by the United Nations prove otherwise. Money for healthcare amounts to less than $1 a month per person - this in a country which prior to 1990 had the best modern health service in the region. A quantitative analysis of depleted uranium isotopes in British, Canadian, and U.S. Gulf War Veterans by Col. Asaf Durakovic, published recently in the journal ‘Military Medicine’, shows that more than 50% of those tested were expelling depleted uranium in their urine more than nine years after the end of the Gulf War.

An autopsy of a Canadian veteran who died, showed depleted uranium in the lung and bone. These same people are suffering from a range of health problems which include chronic fatigue, rare bowel and kidney disorders, respiratory problems, neurological problems, depression and mood swings, skin disorders, loss of hair and teeth, painful joints and cancer. The body not only attempts to rid itself of the radioactivity through the urine, but through the semen. This can lead to painful internal burning for the partner after intercourse, known as ‘burning semen syndrome’ and causes genetic damage to the foetus. Many veterans have produced children with rare genetic disorders and birth defects. British troops now being cheered on to war by Blair and Bush would do well to mind the words of Carol Picau, a US Gulf War veteran: "Take us in our basic training, firing our weapons, climbing mountains, rappelling, doing all these wonderful things the army teaches you to do, and then show us now, with our crippled bones, our incontinence. Take all of us in our wheelchairs, missing arms and legs, and dying of cancers and brain tumors. Take our graves and put that on a commercial."

Depleted uranium is a by-product of the nuclear enrichment process which removes most of the isotopes U-235 and U-234 used in fission. The resulting radioactive ‘waste’ is known as depleted uranium hexaflouride, around 99.7% of which is composed of the alpha emitting isotope U-238. It is 40% less radioactive that natural uranium and can be transformed into an oxide or a metal. As a metal, it has qualities which are very advantageous to the military. It has a hardness and density similar to tungsten, a melting point similar to copper, is very malleable, highly pyrophoric and the nuclear industry is happy to give it away to save itself the high costs of radioactive waste disposal.

Depleted uranium is most dangerous when it burns, creating a fine dust which is easily airborne. Left in the soil, the metal will quickly oxidize and enter the water and food chain. The clean up of testing grounds in the United States has been costed at $1000 per cubic meter. In munitions, depleted uranium is usually alloyed with metals such as titanium, niobium, molybdenum or beryllium. Beryllium dust is itself known to cause severe respiratory problems. Some batches of depleted uranium are contaminated with spent nuclear fuel. This means they contain small amounts of plutonium, americanium, neptunium, telechnecium and U-236. Anti- tank penetrators analyzed in Kosovo by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) found definite traces of U-236 and plutonium 239/240. Damacio Lopez, director of the International Depleted Uranium Study Team, took readings of penetrators and holes in tank armour in Iraq in January 2001 and found readings as high as 2 100 - 2 450 counts/minute. He himself received radiation burns.

An urgent question to put to the US and UK governments while they threaten to launch another attack on Iraq, is how much depleted uranium is being used in current weaponry? Both governments have long since admitted to its use in anti tank penetrators and tank armour and it is now known to be used in shape charged warhead technology. According to Jane’s web site , depleted uranium is also used to increase the penetration effect of some guided weapons. There is a high probability that it is the main component of the advanced unitary penetrator war heads used in guided bomb systems. These were used extensively in Afghanistan and will be used again in Iraq. With weights between 100 - 1500 kg and a deep penetrating effect, the result could mean the flooding of ground water systems with large amounts of radioactivity.

In November last year Dr. Moonie stated that "whether DU is used in munitions for the United States forces is a matter for the US Government". Surely it is also a matter for the civilians of target countries and the countries which border them, as well as for allied and regional troops. The more extensively depleted uranium is used, the more extensive the cover up has to be. If the truth were admitted, compensation claims to the US and UK governments from troops and civilians would already be phenomenal. Instead we have veterans hounded by MI5, scientists fired from their jobs and journalists threatened and harassed.

One of the propaganda designs of recent wars has been to avoid troops coming home in body bags and reassure domestic populations that civilians are not really being targeted. "We have no quarrel with the people of Iraq, the Balkans, Afghanistan...." , our politicians assure us. On this note we can be comforted by the possible deployment of new ‘non-lethal’ weapons designed to attack electronic systems without inflicting ‘visible’ collateral damage. In a recent article in the New Scientist, David Windle writes: "US intelligence reports indicate that key elements of the Iraqi war machine are located in heavily-fortified underground facilities or beneath civilian buildings such as hospitals. This means the role of non-lethal and precision weapons would be a critical factor in any conflict. High Power Microwave (HPM) devices are designed to destroy electronic equipment in command, control, communications and computer targets and are available to the US military. They produce an electromagnetic field of such intensity that their effect can be far more devastating than a lightning strike."

We do not know what microwave weapons will do to human health but our bodies are electrochemical in nature and any force that seriously disrupts their molecular functioning will cause irreparable damage. Microwaves, for example, are used in gene altering technology to weaken the cell membrane. Impaired cells are open to viruses, fungi and other microorganisms. Russian research on thousands of workers exposed to microwaves during their work with radar in the 1950s showed serious health effects known as ‘microwave sickness’. This is described in Robert O. Becker’s book, ‘The Body Electric’. "It's [Microwave sickness] first signs are low blood pressure and slow pulse. The later and most common manifestations are chronic excitation of the sympathetic nervous system [stress syndrome] and high blood pressure. This phase also often includes headache, dizziness, eye pain, sleeplessness, irritability, anxiety, stomach pain, nervous tension, inability to concentrate, hair loss, plus an increased incidence of appendicitis, cataracts, reproductive problems, and cancer. The chronic symptoms are eventually succeeded by crisis of adrenal exhaustion and ischemic heart disease [the blockage of coronary arteries and heart attacks]." The effect of heart seizure was emphasized in a US Defense Intelligence Agency Report ‘Biological Effects of Radiowaves and Microwaves’ 1973, along with the other vital issue of electronic mind control.

As Iraq has already been bombed back to the stone age (1991), does the US government really believe an electronics blackout would be anything very unusual? Is it worth targeting these weapons at the already chronically malnourished and cancer ridden children in the Baghdad hospitals? Are we to believe that to zap them with electric bolts far greater than lightning will do them no harm at all or are our politicians and military cynical enough to think that as they are dying anyway, no one will know nor care? It would seem that as weapons technology advances so the victims themselves become less and less visible. No bloody massacre or mushroom cloud to shock and appall - just hundreds of thousands of slow, lingering, silent deaths. Some conditions might take many years to unfold, others are passed on from generation to generation. The result is an irreversible and insidious deterioration of our common gene pool.

Please also see: U.S. SUPPLIES, CALIBRATES AND ENDORSES USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS IN IRAQ http://www.gulfwarvets.com/news11.htm

America's Weapons of Mass Destruction Steven Rosenfeld, September 24, 2002 http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc746.html

You guys are all experts. Yep, a computer and knowing how to type makes you one.
You know conclusively what causes Gulf War Syndrome. I'm sure you all were soldiers, right? And doctors too. I didn't think so.

You boys should stick to discussing dungeons & dragons or comic books. You're out of your depth here.

That posting above must've spooked him.

Nah, I'm just bored with this. That article is b.s. from a lefty english source.

You opposed the Gulf War, we won and Kuwait is free.
You opposed the Afghan War, we won and Afghanistan is free.
You wanna go for three?

Adios, all. Weekend.

Sure, from the thugs we put in there in the first place. Even congressional records show that we put the Taliban into power. These are just excuses for the US pursuit of oil and domination. 3000 Afgans died while we were 'freeing' them. Their new 'leader' is an oil man himself.

What are you, a corporate robot?

...high probability we pay his salary
with our taxes.

"I'm just bored with this."

Translation: I cannot defend my position in the face of facts, and thus I will slink away on the pretext of the "weekend."

When you get back, perhaps you will answer the question about your willingness to serve your country in Baghdad.

Found this on the web today:

Last night (Sep. 25) on the O'Reilly Factor, Col. David Hackworth was a guest and explaining to Bill O'Reilly that 10,000 US gulf war veterans have already died prematurely mainly due to exposure to depleted uranium.

Bill O'Reilly, with a disgusted look on his face asked Hackworth what the Iraqis were doing with that depleted uranium (how did they obtain it?). Hackworth was visibly shocked. He had to explain to O'Reilly that the uranium killing our vets was from our own laser-guided missiles, and not from Saddam's inventory!

It was interesting to look this guy up and see what he's about . . . too bad the Factor doesn't have the transcripts on there.

excellent comment.

This clown Douglas O'Brien spews all the usual propaganda justifications for American aggression against Iraq.

The funniest of them all is this bullshit about promoting Democracy and Freedom in Iraq.

The American definition of Democracy is an American controlled neo-colony subservient to US capitalist interests--especially oil corporations. Kinda like in
Afghanistan or Kuwait.

Its about time this All American Lie be ripped apart.

Hell, you don't have a democracy in America. You have a global Empire--a global Dictatorship which terrorizes the world with weapons of mass destruction greater than any nation in the world by far.

Maybe, there should be a pre-emptive strike against the American Terrorist State

There was a preemptive strike against the American Terrorist State. It didn't work, in part, because hit the wrong targets. Slaughtering innocent civilians , in addition to being grossly immoral, is futile. It will never bring an end to American state terrorism. It will only strengthen American popular resolve. But then, maybe that was it's real intent.

To understand what happened on 9/11, we must first ask ourselves, qui bono?

exactly who was this preemtive strike against anyway?

There in lies a question.
I think most of us are beginging too see the tent comming down which covered the bricks and iron. Look around, put
down that news paper.

those of you who are anti-israel anti-war we've heard your points and discussed your arguments and quite frankly they just dont stand up. we realize that you believe they should be given more consideration but actually they dont and they wont. while you want to talk more about it there are people in the world who want to destroy our way of life (which we realize is what you want to do also) and they are actively planning on ways to accomplish this. we'd rather hit them before they hit us because you see these people like saddam are just not interested in listening to a bunch of pacifists who are asking them to be nice and quit being a dictator of a police state and all. so thats why we're not listening to you. keep talking amungst yourselves if it makes you feel better or more empowered. at least you can channel your disappointment that youre being ignored towards something.

"we'd rather hit them before they hit us"

Let's start that as a new game in the US - hit people before they hit you! It's legal! And FUN too! If someone is walking down the street and frowns at you - Hit Them! - Excellent work! You got them BEFORE they got you! And if they get up and hit you back, call the police - they should be arrested for hitting anyone!

that kind of jibberish and misrepresentation is exactly why youre being ignored

What if Europe had said that about Hitler's Germany?

Poi,

Ever heard of a thing called "civilization"? Perhaps not. In your mind, we would revert to the Dark Ages, when people could and would attack each other without any cause. Yet some nations still believe in the rule of international law. France, for example, came out today and warned the U.S. that preemptive strikes would be against all norms of international law.

Law, Poi. Law is the measure of civilization. It is a grand idea, a noble ideal, a tradition that is being assaulted on all sides in this country by a hard-right administration bent on achieving sole superpower status at the expense of thousands and thousands of lives.

Lives, Poi. Flesh and blood. Mean anything to you?

The facts remain, Poi, that the United States and Britain have yet to make a *single logical or compelling factual case* for invading Iraq. Iraq has even allowed journalists to inspect for themselves all those places in Blair's now infamous "dossier" that allegedly contain weapons of mass destruction.

In a civilized world, Poi, people try to work things out diplomatically. If someone had struck Hitler first, no doubt he would have struck back, and perhaps the West would have exhausted all of its military capacities before the end of the war, leaving Hitler the final victor. Who knows? You cannot make the case that Hitler would not have succeeded had the West struck first.

Hitler is used as a justification for attacking first. Yet the strange irony here is that Hitler was and is so reviled precisely because he DID strike first -- without justifcation. HITLER STRUCK FIRST -- marking a short but terrifying era of lunacy, darkness, and the nihilistic violation of the norms of decency, civilivation, and intelligence, which, after al, the world had been striving toward all these centuries.

So instead of sidestepping the issue, make YOUR factual case Poi. Tell us exactly why we should attack Iraq -- give us the evidence. Please. Because Bush and Blair have not given us the evidence. We have no facts, no concrete trail of proof that would justify our president acting precisely as the Hitler did in 1939.

So instead of yapping about leftist pacifists, which tells us nothing, show us the proof, the evidence. If this is impossible (and I'm sure it will be), tell us why the United States has the right to disregard all standards of international law and become a bully of the West, just as Hitler did.

By the way, are you out there O'Brien? We're all dying to see some photos of you in your manly fatigues.

--Ever heard of a thing called "civilization"?--

Thats that thing the terrorists, Saddam and some pacifists on here want to take away from from the rest of us.

--France, for example, came out today and warned--

Who cares. It's France. They think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius. In hindsight, we should have let nazi Germany keep them. Would've served em right.

--Law is the measure of civilization.--

Anarchist, speak up!

--a tradition that is being assaulted on all sides in this country by a hard-right administration bent on achieving sole superpower status at the expense of thousands and thousands of lives.--

Not buying it. Neither are many.

--The facts remain, Poi, that the United States and Britain have yet to make a *single logical or compelling factual case* for invading Iraq.--

'Facts' to you because you hate Bush.

--You cannot make the case that Hitler would not have succeeded had the West struck first.--

Yeah you can. I just did. They knew he was dangerous but sat by and did nothing.

--Tell us exactly why we should attack Iraq -- give us the evidence.--

The evidence is there. Just because you dont believe it or it doesn't meet yours or some other peoples personal criteria doesn't mean its not real. Those of us who recognize it as substancial evidence are moving forward with or without you.

--If this is impossible (and I'm sure it will be),--

Of course it is to you. You've already made up your mind. I don't believe if you personally heard it from the lips of Saddam you would believe differently. That why we're going forward with or without you.

In every war the US has been engaged there were pacifists. Youre one of a long list of current and past. Fortunately, the founding fathers didn't listen to you, Lincoln didn't listen to you, FDR didn't listen to you, Bush, Sr. didn't listen to you, and now Bush, Jr isn't listening to you.

--If you think only pacifists are opposed to this war, or to war in general, you are sadly mistaken. Take me, for example. I'm a gun owner.--

Who said pacifists weren't gun owners?

---If you think only pacifists are opposed to this war, or to war in general, you are sadly mistaken. Take me, for example. I'm a gun owner.
--Who said pacifists weren't gun owners?
-I didn't say you did.

I never brought up gun owners, you did. I could care less if your armed or if you'd use it.


-Ergo, not everyone opposed to war is a pacifict.

I never said that was the case.

I said 'In every war the US has been engaged there were pacifists."

Show me where's that's not true?

Hey poi,

I asked you to lay out the facts. Facts -- compelling evidence -- you know, material substance that can be *proven* to show Iraq currently possesses weapons of mass destruction which can be targeted against America.

Instead of giving any facts, you just said oh, the facts are there, you just don't believe them because you hate Bush.

That's no argument. Please, step up to the plate. Be a human being. Tell the truth and lay out the facts. Pretend we are in a court of law, and that you must prove the imminent threat to America by Saddam because of his weapons of mass destruction.

So far no one has made a convincing case. But we're waiting. We're all waiting. Perhaps you will be able to. Or perhaps you could just cop someone else's notes -- please, anything! Just some facts.

What good does it do to defend your position with childish insults? (Although I did find the Jerry Lewis remark rather funny.)

Hey, but thank god for the French -- at least they are still decent enough to call a spade a spade. They are calling the Bush push to war unjustifiable and against all international law. And they're right, unfortunately for you and the war-mongerers.

Who cares what France thinks? Actually, France still wields enormous power on the international stage, whether you like it or not. France has long acted as a powerful and faithful ally to the United States. As a U.S. citizen, I rightly care what such a powerful friend thinks.

You can denigrate France, but you cannot provide any real facts!

Also, you totally sidestepped the issue of why Bush is NOT acting like a tyrant or dictator (like a Hitler) by striking without provocation. Last I checked, that was grounds for war by the rest of the world. The reason the West took out Hitler is because he attacked without provocation. Think about it.

PS: I am not an "anarchist."

It isn't really able to make substantial claims on anything, and anyone who responds with phrases like - "Who cares. It's France. They think Jerry Lewis is a comic genius" - isn't worth bothering to seriously discuss anything with.

This is another one of those people who feels that some people count in the world, and some don't.

We can spend our time more wisely, like getting out fliers or making phone calls for upcoming events that support the opposite of poi - peace and social justice.

Later!

That's your opinion.

--Pretend we are in a court of law

I'm not going to pretend anything. I don't care to try and convince you. Don't be convinced. Never be. If Saddam himself tells you he's building WMD's don't believe him. I could care less.

The facts are there. Many believe them. If you have chosen not to believe them, that's fine. I can't help it if you don't. There's some people who will never be convinced no matter what evidence is presented. You prove to them one thing and they just keep raising the bar. We can't let that stand in the way of doing what needs to be done.

Here's your fact. We're moving on with or without you.

"The facts are there," Poi says, while coming up YET AGAIN EMPTY HANDED.

You haven't been able to present a single fact. Not a one! Yet you accuse us of irrelevance (laughter).

You have no argument -- nothing useful to state.

The above poster is right -- why waste time on someone who cannot even present a single cogent thought?

You write like a person of 12 or 13. Really.

Since you cannot present a single fact that would justify this war, if America does strike we can blame the brutal death of thousands and thousands of Americans and Iraqis on complicit and immoral idiots like you.

Oh, and I suppose we'll see you at the front lines, right Poi?

Didn't think so. Cowards like you are content to see poor American schmucks die for the sake of your medieval "holy war."

Good luck in the afterlife, little man. Every thought, every word, every deed, EVERY TINY INSIGNIFICANT ELEMENT about your life will be replayed to you, and all the thoughts and actions you take now that contribute to mass murder will mean you will feel the pain and suffering of ALL THOSE WHOSE MURDER YOU SO BLITHELY CHEER.

Don't believe me? Type in "near-death experiences" in Google and see the scientific proof for yourself.

Immoral and irresponsible invertebrates like you will have to account for their war-mongering mentality with the Big Guy.

YOU will suffer the agony and brutal terror of people you would terrorize!

I imagine Sharon's life review will take several years -- he has caused so much pain and agony. He'll feel it all, every particle of pain, every drop of blood he spilled. What a spectacle that will be -- the cringing and terrorized Sharon forced to go through his life yet to feel ALL the terror and pain he has caused!

At least in the afterlife there is perfect justice.

There are plenty of authenticated Jewish accounts of the afterlife.

This has nothing to do with religion -- it has everything to do with Light and Love.

The pro-Zionists who support war on this board may find the accounts of those Jews who have had near-death experiences and life reviews particularly illuminating.

--"If Saddam himself tells you he's building WMD's don't believe him."

Even if he was, this does not give us a right to bomb the Iraqi people...again.

Israel is more of a threat to the region than Saddam Hussein. But we're not reeling them in.

Saddam and Iraq never did a thing to the US. That might seem like a strange statement, but it's true. And the only reason it might sound strange is because of all the propaganda. True, Saddam is horrific, but Sharon is equally horrific.

Iraq attacked Kuwait in 1990, not the US. Get over it.

1990 "attack"
Iraq invaded Kuwait- they were given encouragement from ...
April Glaspie, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq officially conversing
with Saddam Hussein, Baghdad, Iraq, July 25, 1990
http://www.brianwillson.com/awolaggression.html
We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait....We have many Americans who would like to
see the price go above $25 because they come from oil-producing states."
1999

"We do not have any defense treaties with Kuwait and there are no
special defense or security commitments to Kuwait."
http://www.brianwillson.com/awolaggression.html
--U.S. State Department, July 24, 1990
Kuwait,( an early British "no fly zone" See link1 )was slant drilling into Iraqis' oil
fields and underselling the market to hurt Iraq rebuild after the U.S.
sponsored Iran/ Iraq war.
1. http://home.achilles.net/~sal/iraq_history.html
All of this is yet another setup. Can't most of you see the stage settings
by now for Christ's sake?
Q How do you know it's a set up?
A All of the media focus on it in lock step- for the preparation; journalism my ass.

It's time to organize with YOUR neighbors and friends, neighbors and friends
because we don't have a whole lot of time left. The other side is well funded.

Query; Would it NOT be in the interests of the hidden hand to be
preparing us for another horrific "accidental failure of intelligence" and the
total final shredding of the pretense of POSSE COMITATUS because MOST of
the sheep are frightened ignorant and confused?
We sure are trying to give them ( the rest of the entire fucking world except
Shorans' Israel) every excuse to want to get together and kick OUR butts
and they could do it. For a starters, just embargo us and watch the
manufacturing base try to ramp up in time to prevent chaos. HMMM...
Use real tack up bulletin boards and talk not about changing the direction
of the juggernaut but forming resource groups and you know, connecting.
Get up and walk around, all sorts of places you can still talk. Just not
loud, we can't let it look threatening like Falun Gong.
http://www.web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/index/ASA170112000
Time for social clubs.
Above all remember, its been rolling down hill for a long time and it's bigger
now than it's ever been; time to start, not with a road block but by lots
of gravel thrown by many hands.

We CAN stop them anytime We really want to without lots of bloodshed.
Because they know this.
1A. Its our cherished belligerent nature to get REAL pissed now and then and
scare the shit out of the useless roach droppings that have their foot on our collective necks keeping us fighting each other on TRIVIA while we get tax raped each and every way that they think they can get away with,
then we get charged to pay them to do it.
And We all of a sudden realize that this is the same foot and things get real interesting. That is their greatest fear. They will back down.
Hence the moron drumbeat, constant and loud, thinking is dangerous.

--You haven't been able to present a single fact.

Let me simplfy this for you.

You have access to the internet and to newspapers I take it. There's nothing I can offer you that you haven't already read about somewhere and rejected. I'm not privy to any new information that others don't have. There aren't any arguments I can make that you haven't already heard and rejected. Why should I restate them all over again? You've made up you mind already.

Now if you feel like you've won some type of victory because I'm not discussing with you point by point the very evidence we've all already been provided in the papers and on the net, then give yourself a big pat on the back and feel good about it if that's what you need to float your boat. I'm not going to waste my time with someone who's mind is already made up. As I said, the facts are there. Many believe them are are moving forward.

--you will have to account for their war-mongering mentality with the Big Guy.

Since the Big Guy has a book, show me where war is a sin? Book, Chapter and Verse please.

Tell me this, after God gave the Law of Moses to the Israelites, there was a law that said "Thou shalt not kill". He then commanded them to go to war against the inhabitants of Canaan. How does "Thou shalt not kill" and killing enemies in battle match up?

You seem to have contrived this impression that I wish for war and believe it's all peachy keen. I don't. I believe that sometimes it is necessary.

'(1)For every thing there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven.........(8) a time for war, and a time for peace." Eccl. 3:1,8

(Some of you probably thought The Byrds wrote that)


--At least in the afterlife there is perfect justice.

Amen.

That's one version.

Here's another:

"Deception is the essence of war." -- Sun Tzu

Here's another:

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war." -- Mossad motto

The Big Guy doesn't have a book. War is always a sin.

Bible<-------- Big Guy's Book

It don't matter whether or not you believe it is. It is.

The above posts were not by me (10:44 and 11:02).

Looks like someone else is using my handle.