[NPC] War Stories, check these out Options

[jonwatts]

Boo-hoo, Al Jazeera hit with DDOS attacks. Yahoo! News
I love the idea of a sweaty Iraqi IT guy pulling his hair out.

And here's an article with information on how to send troops email, care packages, and long-distance phone cards:
Yahoo! News

[74GoKart]

I agree that Saddam is a real fucker and should be taken out!!
He should have been taken out when he used to be best of buddies with our whole White House staff and supporting the world's weapon market.

"Powell condemned Saddam’s “use of mustard and nerve gas against the Kurds in 1988” that killed “Five thousand men, women and children.” True, but he did so with the blessing at the time of many Reaganites who now serve Bush — including Powell. In 1988, “Secretary of State Colin Powell was then the national security adviser who orchestrated Ronald Reagan’s decision to give Hussein a pass for gassing the Kurds,” says former U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, Peter Galbraith in the Boston Globe ( http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/2002/...tire.htm)\"
Dennis Hans
Let's not forget Reagan’s special emissary to Baghdad, Donald Rumsfeld.

How about:

"Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons in the past is repeatedly cited by the US and British governments as justification for his removal from power now. But just what was their response to his use of poison gas against Iranian troops and Iraqi Kurds in the 1980s? Far from condemning his actions, they stepped up their support for Baghdad. One of the most damning revelations to come out of the Scott inquiry into the arms-to-Iraq affair was the British government's secret decision to supply Saddam with even more weapons-related equipment after he shelled the Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988 with gas bombs, killing an estimated 5,000 civilians and maiming thousands more. Saddam said he had punished the Kurds for "collaboration" after the town had been successfully attacked by Iran. The weapons were produced with German-supplied chemicals.

This cynicism and hypocrisy was matched only by the US. Soon after the attack, Washington approved the export to Iraq of virus cultures and a $1bn contract to design and build a petrochemical plant the Iraqis planned to use to produce mustard gas. And while the Reagan administration condemned the use of chemical weapons during the eight-year Iraq-Iran war, US officers were secretly supplying Iraqi generals with bomb-damage assessments and detailed information on Iranian troop deployments.
"The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern," Walter Lang, a former senior US defense intelligence officer, told the New York Times this week. Washington was worried about the threat of Iran spreading its Islamic revolution to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia."
Richard Norton-Taylor
Wednesday August 21, 2002
The Guardian

But the war is not about oil? What do all of these people know the most about?

George W. Bush, 1978-84: senior executive, Arbusto Energy/Bush Exploration, an oil company; 1986-90: senior executive of the Harken oil company. Dick Cheney, 1995-2000: chief executive of the Halliburton oil company. Condoleezza Rice, 1991-2000: senior executive with the Chevron oil company, which named an oil tanker after her....Saddam sits on the second biggest oilfield in the world. America's economy depends on oil for: generating power to run factories, powering cars to get the workforce to those factories, and transporting goods produced by those workers in those factories We will not take their oil. Instead, we will help them rebuild their oil infrastructure along with their schools and hospitals. Bush has promised that they will be able to use their money from oil sales to pay for their nations reconstruction. The Bush administration has already picked companies to help Iraq do this..in a slightly unusual manner. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/i...ract030322.html We will not take their oil, but we will take their oil money...at least some of us will. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/28/...8653848780.html Is it also possible we will be more likely to get favorable trading for the oil we do need to buy after we go through all the trouble of helping them rebuild their country?

Of course, I would never suggest that anyone would try to use this whole Iraq situation to their advantage. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,...,918742,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/st...,924541,00.html
None of the companies that will benefit the most, or their stockholders, would ever try to influence national policy. (Don't even try to suggest something so ENRON-ish)
None of these people will ever be paid outrageous sums to give speeches or be an adviser later on down the road.

Nor would I suggest that having Uzbekistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan under new leadership that is US friendly would have ever been on our minds.
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/uzbekistan.htm

It is true that Iraq is in violation of a much older UN resolution. I just think that it is mighty funny that nobody was in a hurry to deal with Iraq until we got the son of the man, who's war brought about the first resolution, in the driver's seat. Of course, it is all about disobeying a UN resolution. If this is true, why do we support Israel both politically and monetarily in its continuing disregard for UN resolutions? Is it about getting rid of an evil dictator? We can't stand evil dictators...except when we need them. Read up on Pakistan and Uzbekistan. For that matter, we killed off the Indians, we blew up nukes near our own troops to test the after effects, but there is no UN resolution for either one of those.

I will say once again..Yes, Saddam is BAD!! He probably has reserved parking in Hell. Just don't tell me how he is doing all this shit, and never show me the proof. Don't tell me that we know he has chemical and biological weapons, but leave out the part about how we helped him acquire them and finance him because he was needed at the time. Don't give me every reason but the truth in a long winded speech. It is in our best interest to have stable, American friendly governments in that area. Fine!