New Mars Forums

American settlers?

Yes, almost all of them. Colonization was a commerical venture.

As for homosexuals teaming up... well, yeah, they have all the right equipment... but the idea of sex with the opposite gender, is well, a rather disgusting proposition to them.

You hetero sexual men, how fast would you jump to go have sex with someone of your own gender? Most respond to the idea with some level of revulsion- the same is true for homosexuals.

You likes what you likes, and I personally have no problem with that. More power to ya. But the question remains, if the goal is to colonize Mars, is it really rationale to spend the time and resources to send people who can't help with this goal?

Bullshit.

In case you have not noticed, the state department, as well as the CIA has been doing the god damned hardest to get the Bush administration to get as far away from Chalibi as possible.

Unfortunately the Civilain leaders in the Pentagon are attached at the hip to Chalibi... that is until very reciently.  The "NeoCon" civilian camp in the pentagon is now divided over Chalibi.

Alt, just a bit of advice: If you spent a bit less time cursing -- recently its become constant -- and reacting without first bothering to read closely enough to understand what others on this board actually say, and going out of your way to try to make yourself look good by making others look stupid, you might have found the time to realize that I wasn't in disagreement with you.

Bill, back on May 11th, I posted the following in the "What if we lose" thread:

"Chalabi: I read *somewhere* about this guy back in the 90s that he was an iranian spymaster, a mass murderer, torturer and an admitted and convicted bank robber. Then I saw him on TV advising the US on policy last year and thought, 'What? -- maybe I better start learning Farsi . . .' "

If *I* was aware of this back in the 90s, when I had no more access than open news sources, I'll bet half my trucks our intel agencies did too. There was nothing sophisticated about it -- or even secret. This is disinformation, meant to lead us astray.

Senior U.S. officials have told 60 Minutes Correspondent Lesley Stahl that they have evidence Chalabi has been passing highly classified U.S. intelligence to Iran. The evidence shows that Chalabi personally gave Iranian intelligence officers information so sensitive that if revealed it could, quote, "get Americans killed." The evidence is said to be "rock solid."

On Friday, Stahl reported that senior intelligence officials stress the information Ahmad Chalibi is alleged to have passed on to Iran is of such a seriously sensitive nature, the result of full disclosure could be highly damaging to U.S. security. The information involves secrets that were held by only a handful of very senior U.S. officials, says Stahl.

Meanwhile, Stahl reports that "grave concerns" about the true nature of Chalabi's relationship with Iran started after the U.S. obtained "undeniable intelligence" that Chalabi met with a senior Iranian intelligence, a "nefarious figure from the dark side of the regime - an individual with a direct hand in covert operations directed against the United States."

Hi Alt2War,
    The hardcore of the left-wing in any country are passionate people. I admire them for the strength of their convictions (even if I've 'been there; done that' and understand now the futility of their position) and their willingness to get out into the streets.
    But, as an indicator of the general feeling, big protests, like the ones you mention, leave me cold. Even if we assume the figure of 500,000 for New York is accurate (always difficult to judge these things), it still represents only a small percentage of the local population, about 6%. And the fact that left-wingers tend to be younger, more radical, more vocal and possibly more excitable, means that such protests are to be expected. They certainly shouldn't be taken as any indication, on the day, that the majority of people feel the same way.

    Having said that, I hear you about the political backlash in certain countries. Tony Blair has certainly been doing it tough in Britain in recent months, Australia's John Howard has been sniped at repeatedly in the press over Iraq, and your President Bush's popularity ratings are, I believe, pretty low.
    Given Spain's popular antagonism towards involvement in the liberation of Iraq, I applaud the new socialist government's adherence to its promise to bring the Spanish troops home. This is democracy at work and, despite its inherent flaws, it's the best system we have. My personal belief, however, for what it's worth, is that the Spanish people have got it wrong.

    The coalition has made an example of Iraq in a world full of religious extremists who cannot be bargained with. Sad to say, but someone who cannot be bargained with will only understand strength. Witness the mood in Iran and Libya.
    Bill White's plea to tackle the root of the extremist problem, the Islamic hate schools, is typically intelligent and should be listened to, but having Saddam as a loose cannon in the Middle East was unacceptable politically and morally after 9/11, and his removal was justified.

    History will judge the coalition favourably, in my view, just as it has judged Reagan favourably for his stance against the Soviets. You'll no doubt recall the protests against him in the 80s - not against the cruel Soviet Empire, mind you, against the voice of liberation!
    The left-wing is one mixed up bunch of well-meaning fools.
                                                 

but having Saddam as a loose cannon in the Middle East was unacceptable politically and morally after 9/11, and his removal was justified.

History will judge the coalition favourably, in my view,

*There is another issue bothering me, about Iraq and etc. 

I saw on the news last night that one of Saddam's old generals is back in Fallujah -- in charge apparently, and wearing his old uniform.  Of course, we're pulling out of Fallujah.

How is -this- progress?  A visible sign of Saddam's regime -- that general's uniform. 

How can we possibly be ready to pull out of Iraq next month?

Yes, I know Fallujah is just one portion of a large country.  But there will be a civil war regardless of anything, I think.  I want our troops out of there ASAP, but I realize that prematurely leaving will cause more problems. 

Anyway, does anyone here believe Bush wants our troops out of Iraq by the end of June because he really feels Iraq will be able to stand on its own two feet by then, as a democratic nation besides...or is he looking to improve his re-election odds? 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … 19]Article:  General in Regime uniform

--Cindy

::EDIT::  New Yorker magazine claims it's obtained *53-page* internal U.S. military document outlining abuses of Iraqi prisoners.  This report adds to the list of abuses, including rape, pouring chemicals on detainees, etc. 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … _dc_3]read me

Suppose we'll get another 9/11 for this?

I do agree with Shaun and Cobra Commander as to the nature of punishment the abusive soldiers should receive.

Just to return the favour you did me, Alt, the last time I got a little forthright about politics, I'll give you the same advice you gave me:-
    "You need to relax, man."

    You make it sound like I'm very naive to quote an editorial - as though I'm breaking the simplest rules of good debate and showing my ignorance. (I wasn't even trying to start a debate - just state an opinion.)
    I think you may not realise what it is I'm trying to tell you. That editorial is about all I've got on the story so far! It's the lack of news items about this alleged corruption that forms one of the main planks of my complaint. Considering that verification of the allegations would, at a stroke, eliminate any pretence that the U.N. occupied some sort of moral high ground in the Iraq affair, I thought the news item should have been given at least as much airtime or as many column inches as the anti-war propaganda has received, in such generous measure, here in Australia.
    Incidentally, I've been reading The Australian newspaper for many years and I've almost always found the editorials to be frank and sensible in their general tone. I admit I was a little nervous quoting this one, since I'd seen no other reference to the story, but I had enough faith in the objectivity of the paper to go ahead anyway. I'm relieved to hear that CC has found some reference to it in the American media because there's precious little about it here!

    By the way, CC, since you seem to live on another flat face of the same cubic bizarro world I occupy (according to Alt    ), perhaps you would let us know if you hear any further news about the guys at the U.N. who opposed the war on a matter of high moral principle? As and when I hear anything I'll try to do likewise.
    It could be a very interesting tale!   

Hi Alt!
    I believe I'm detecting a bit of a diversionary red-herring in tackling the definition of an 'anti-coalition-pro-UN' news medium, rather than the main point of these revelations about possible major corruption in the anti-war camp.
    But O.K., I'll go along with it briefly. I don't know which of the American media are more likely to give you a balanced evaluation of the Iraq situation but, here in Australia, it's quite difficult to find any which aren't, or weren't in the past, distinctly anti-war (not to mention distinctly anti-American).
    Our ABC and SBS television services have been discussed on the letters pages of newspapers with regard to their obvious stance against the liberation of Iraq. Just the other morning, I witnessed the veteran presenter of our "Today" program visibly squirming with stifled aggression towards our Prime Minister over Australia's involvement in Iraq. Many of our group chat shows, on almost any channel, feature young luminaries in the world of T.V. journalism jeering at your President Bush, Britain's Tony Blair, and our John Howard.
    As I've mentioned, it's really very difficult to find any reference to the growing scandal of this oil-based, U.N.-anti-war-group corruption in any media outlets here in Australia. It's not surprising, in view of the plainly anti-war pro-U.N. position of the majority of Australian journalists during the past year or more, that this shocking story is being soft-pedalled as much as possible. If found to be even half true, it will pull the rug out from under the carefully fabricated anti-coalition worldview we've been plied with for months. If there had been the slightest whiff of President Bush being involved in any such scheme, the left-wing ferrets of the Australian Journalists Association would have been into it like rats up a drainpipe!   :;):

    But enough of this little detour away from the important point. Has anyone heard any further news about widespread and high-reaching corruption in the U.N.-administered oil-for-food program?
    You may need to look pretty hard for details because I don't think information will be readily forthcoming.

    As an aside, and despite the doom-and-gloom "Iraq is a flaming cauldron" views we see all day on T.V., I add this, written by British liberal commentator, William Shawcross, in "The Spectator":-

The numbers are obviously inexact. But the new Iraq Human Rights Centre in Kadhimiya has calculated that more than 70,000 people would have died in the past year had Saddam [Hussein] still been in charge. Even if that is too high, UNICEF argued that sanctions were killing 5000 children a month. Liberation ended sanctions at once, so if UNICEF is right, that would be 60,000 lives saved in the past 12 months.
    There is violence and there is progress in Iraq. Most visitors understand that, and most Iraqis are using their freedom well. Municipal elections have been held in 17 cities so far; according to Iranian-born author Amir Taheri, they have all been won by democratic and secularist parties. There are now more children in school and university than at any time in the past 20 years. There is not yet enough clean water and electricity, but there is more in more places than under Saddam.
    There are 200 newspapers in Iraq, instead of the few that mouthed the ghastly Saddamite lies a year ago. Iraq's Mafia-style command economy is history and foreign capital has been rushing into the country. Many marsh Arabs are moving back to their traditional rivers, which are being reflooded after Saddam drained them in a brutal act of ethnic cleansing.

    I know there are many things wrong with the situation in Iraq and the terrorism, inflicted by a few thousand well-armed religious fanatics, has caused more problems than anticipated. But I like to try to balance the monotonous diet of pessimism orchestrated by the media with some of the (deliberately?) overlooked good news.
    Be thoughtful about what you are fed by the media. Whenever I witness a mass campaign by the media to whip people into a frenzy of condemnation about something, I fetch out my trusty bull***t detector! It's telling me we're all standing, up to our ankles, in left-wing bulls***t!!
                                               :laugh:

But O.K., I'll go along with it briefly. I don't know which of the American media are more likely to give you a balanced evaluation of the Iraq situation but, here in Australia, it's quite difficult to find any which aren't, or weren't in the past, distinctly anti-war (not to mention distinctly anti-American).

Our ABC and SBS television services have been discussed on the letters pages of newspapers with regard to their obvious stance against the liberation of Iraq. Just the other morning, I witnessed the veteran presenter of our "Today" program visibly squirming with stifled aggression towards our Prime Minister over Australia's involvement in Iraq. Many of our group chat shows, on almost any channel, feature young luminaries in the world of T.V. journalism jeering at your President Bush, Britain's Tony Blair, and our John Howard.

If there had been the slightest whiff of President Bush being involved in any such scheme, the left-wing ferrets of the Australian Journalists Association would have been into it like rats up a drainpipe!   :;):

Be thoughtful about what you are fed by the media. Whenever I witness a mass campaign by the media to whip people into a frenzy of condemnation about something, I fetch out my trusty bull***t detector! It's telling me we're all standing, up to our ankles, in left-wing bulls***t!!