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

Did you hear the Iraqi guy whining to the U.N. today? Then he say's something like, We won't meet the agressors in Baghdad with candies we'll meet them with bullets! Ya, Why would he think we'd expect any different treatment than they dole out to their own citizens? That's ok, our GI's will pass out the candies to your citizens after we kick your old ass!

914 content (914's are coool)

that UN guy is really annoying. I like how he said the US had already killed 2000 civilians, yet we've got surgical teams in the field sewing up more iraqi's than coalition forces. that guy needs a tomahawk missle directed to his living room.

And people are protesting this war.... I dont get it.


"General: Iraqis hang woman for waving to coalition troops"

The Marine general said that what has surprised him most about the first week of fighting is the extent of war crimes carried out by the Iraqi regime. In addition to the execution of POWs, he said, Iraqis have used civilians as human shields, stored weapons in schools, set up command posts in hospitals and pretended to surrender only to open fire.

In one case, an Iraqi woman was hanged after she waved to coalition forces, Pace said.


Now tell me why we shouldnt be there ???

We have support/food/water being delivered to Iraqi people (who are fighting each other to be fed) and they are SHOOTING US soldiers who are surrending when caught ???

B

I especially like how iraqi fighters are now driving vehicles made to look like the red cross. I'm sorry, but the coalition needs to pick up the pace and start making this a little more ugly for them. we are way too nice in all this.

did anyone else see the iraqi fighters with the machine gun mounted in the bed of a PINK late model japanese pickup truck, complete with NYPD bumper sticker and all??

I also heard today that, according to Amnesty International (probably some of the people who are now protesting the war) and other sources, as many as 2 MILLION Iraqi's and Kurdish have gone "missing" in about the last 30 years. In other words, government sanctioned kidnapping, torture and genocide. There are supposedly documented cases where Saddam's people gassed or shot 100K's of their own citizens because they were opposed to his government.

Thanks to Digital cable I can watch NON American war reports and feel that I'm getting a different view on this whole thing. So far I have not seen a reason why we shouldnt be there.

I HIGHYLY suggest people reading this thread watch a Discovery channel documentory called: "Searching For". It tracks a US reporter in the middle east after 9/11. He reports on the roots of "Muslim Rage" and why they hate us so bad. Good Good TV.

B

I admit that its hard not to pay attention, but iIts nice to see that you are all folowing what we are doing in Iraq. When I was in Sand Deigo I had to walk through war protests every now and then, and that was before it started. I dont know what kind of world these people think we live in that they want us to stand by and watch the injustices happen, not to mention the bio/chem weapons this man has. Its nice to see some support from back home. Just thought I'd let you know that although it wont be over in the short time the media portrayed, it is going well. Thanks again....

LCpl OConnor, USMC
Okinowa Japan

Where were all these thousands of protestors during 9/11? You can bet your ass they weren't in there helping find people covered by the rubble.
And what would they do if a terrorist came into their house? Roll over and wave their ass in the air with a sign saying "fuck me please but be gentle"!!! Yes, it is their right to freedom of speech but there's a line that needs to be drawn and, I feel, if they step over it they should be delt with in the most harshest manner. Send them to the sand country to observe the tactics of the Iraqi toward their fellow man. Take out the fire hoses when their protest rallies get un-peaceful and wash 'em down into the gutters where they belong! :gilloutine:
bruce

Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world and thier own people are fighting each other for the food we are giving them.

WTF?

And the wack jobs on the left are protesting the war which will bring help to these people.

Cool. A Marine on the list (I think LB is ARMY) NorCal is making me soft. I have been on the fence about this whole thing until I did what Andy told us all to do: and that was "educate yourself about these people before you comment" I have spent the last several weeks reading and watching as much as I could from outside sources (German TV with subtitles) you name it. I knew the USA coverage would be a little jaded so I went after info from outside sources. Mr. Hussein and sons are worse than I ever thought. We are NO saints by any means, but Busch (who has been called Hitler by some Middle East people) has never GASSED a million Americans. I keep hearing OIL OIL OIL OIL.. we are there for the OIL. Bullshit. The UN and OPEC are going to control the amount of OIL flow out of Iraq after WE rebuild the place. The Iraqi people deserve a little better life whether they know it or not. Oil for food. Yeah.. we are terrible people. They shoot us in the head and we perform surgery on their wounded. How does this work ??

The Discovery channel progem spelled out another piece that I was missing. WHY. Why does the middle east hate us so bad ?? Bottome line: They thought they where the shit and they are no longer the shit. They come here to study and go back with hatred and spread it. So stay FUCKING HOME.

B

You guys missed the one where it is reported that Sadam & his kids have a huge grinder to put their enemies in a grind them up alive. (Think it was BBC)

War protest here last weekend. Some guy drove by with "Support the Troops" signs on the side of his truck. The protesters attacked his truck.

My brother was telling me about a video he saw where Saddam's meanest son (forgot which) would have parties for the Iraqi "in crowd" then they would have citizens -peasants I'm sure- kill themselves in brutal and inhuman ways. The examples he told me of were a guy shoves a sword through his skull-all the way and then the son would parade him around holding him up by his neck until the guy dropped dead. The other 2 he told me of were two swords in the chest, angled in an x going in around the breast area and the other was a sword on the floor point up and they would have to lower themselves onto the point until they died.

This was supposed to be an honor!
FUCK YOU SADDAM!

This made me sick to my stomach, literally, for a couple days. I can't believe any person would make another do this.

I'd be plenty happy if I were the one to be lucky enough to pull the trigger on that bastard. I know I'd lose sleep over it and I know that I'd probably roast in hell for killing another human, but I think it might just be worth it.


God bless our troops!

blah blah blah ...

people (like me) that are against the war are NOT pro saddam or anything he stands for.
whoever thinks that way has not evolved beyond 2nd grade.

the problem with this war is the way how the US (once again) acts like it is above and beyond everybody else.
bush ignores international law just as saddam did.
what makes him think he is above international law?
in a speech from early january, bush made the point that iraq needs to
be attacked because they didn't comply with the UN resolution.
which is exactly what he (bush) did when he went to war ignoring all UN resolutions.

humanitarian? yeah, sure sounds good. kill them first, then bring food for those that are left.
liberate them. get rid of the "evil". jada jada jada ...
problem is, if the US's interest was strictly humanitarian, why isn't the US
present in so many other countries around the world that have similar problems as iraq?
why is it that US military action (in the name of humanity) always seems to be bundled
with little perks, like control over middle-east oil flow etc. ...
face it, this war is about economics!

and what does 9/11 have to do with the war on iraq?
it's quite a stretch to accuse anti-war protesters to be "pro" terrorist.
in fact, i think that is pretty fucked-up Mr. "Bruce Allert" ...

so, if i understand you guys right,
everybody who is against this war is against america?
and "left"? and pro terrorist? anti-patriot? scum?

are you guys really that naive? can it be?

Haven't we been over this before?


If not the U.S.A., than who will?
If not now, when?

I dont think there is anymore "international law" because for the most part the "nations" are only out for themselves ex. france,russia,germany, turkey. like Bush said after 9/11 you are either with us or against us.

yes, we have -_-

who?
the UN, of course ...

when?
leave that up to the UN ...

why now? the US has looked away from the
regime in iraq for more than 10 years now.
why all the sudden? why now?
why didn't all you guys go to the streets 2 years ago,
demanding that we invade iraq NOW? where were you?
fact is, none of you was giving a damm shit about iraq and how
they were treating their own people. and none of you gives a damm
shit about how other countries around the world torture and kill their own people.
all your talk about "liberating" and "humanitarian" is damm fucking hypocritical ...

alright, i vented, now flames on ...

this is even more stupid than saying the war on iraq is "humanitarian".

to answer my own question:

are you guys really that naive? can it be?

it very much looks like it can be

We get to take care of several problems when we take care of Saddam.
1. We remove the WMD.
2. We allow the oil to flow out of Iraq on to the world markets.
3. We get to do what is right for the people of Iraq.

There are very few countries in the world where you can do all this at once.
Why don't we go into Lower East Bumbly Fuck and free those people from thier goverment? Because we can't do #1 or #2 above.

sounds good, actually.
but why ignoring the UN and the rest of the world?

You see, Andy, whether or not there are hidden agendas, government conspiracies, aliens from outer space, or whatever, the reality of this war is that US people are putting their butts on the line (literally) for someone else.

Other nations (two come to mind right way) can not comprehend the mentality of US people. We will sacrifice for the good of others.

But you would not understand...

Also, you better do some leg stretches to prepare yourself for your foot entering your mouth when the oil money stays in Iraq. The US does not work that way. If we did, Honda, Porsche and (gee, I can't think of anything profitable from France) would have been products of the USA for the last 50 years.

Because the countries that are blocking have economic agendas (GREED) in front of human interests.

I have never voted for anyone in the UN.
It's called looking out for #1. And when you are #1, you do what is right for you.
It may not be PC, but it is how we go to be the world power we are now.

The UN is a bunch of washed up politicians with nothing left to do in their own government. What exactly do they do ?? They sit around and hold meetings and WISH things to get better. When do we take action ?? Why sit on our ass and do nothing ??

Andy,

How is it we are ignoring the rest of the world ?? GB/Aus/Spain and many others agreed.

Just for fun:

I would like to know what Russia/France/Germany do for other countries ?? I'm probably wrong... but I'm not seeing them coming to the aid of ANY country.

B

I'm happy we have people like Andy around. Otherwise this would get boring with one sided views.

B

I love it when US residents support saddam and his actions more than that of bush. haha...screwed up people in this world.

Chistopher Walken on Saturday Night Live as French president Jaque Chirac... "We do not oppose the war because we are Pro-Saddam; we oppose the war to be, how do you say, douche bag."

you are fucking hilarious man.

if it wasn't for all those "saintly" americans the whole world would still be in the dark ages, right?
you get a double for this ...

who do you think you are? Mother Theresa ????

I think andy would have a much different view of things if he were iraqi and living in baghdad. then we'd see posts about the US not doing enough for him. LOL.

No, but we'd all be speaking German now.

and i love it when people can't even read (and understand) a post. i do NOT support saddam or any of his actions.

i am as disgusted by him, his regime and everything else he has done as everybody else here.

and i am also disgusted by a american president that ignores the UN and international law in favor his own personal agenda ...

got that?

where in my post did I mention your name? can you read?

(damm, can i have that smily BIGGER?)

the US didn't give a damm shit about the 2nd world war
and any of the suffering in europe until the japanese attacked pearl harbour.
if your interest would really be "humanitarian" why didn't
the US join the war against germany much, much earlier?
i tell you why. because there was nothing to gain from
doing so. only after being attacked themselfs they decided to
go to war. "humanitarian"? fucking hypocritical ....

who else would you be talking to?
i'm the only one here ....

yeah, and you would have a much different view of things if you had been growing up in europe. so what? i'm not in iraq and neither are you. what's your point? because i'm not iraqi, i either have to love your war or must remain silent? i don't get it ...

so, you think because america is #1 you can just go
around and invade other countries whenever you
feel like it? sure, it's not PC, but hey, we're #1, so what?

makes actually sense then that everybody here seems
to think the UN is useless. because the UN was
founded to prevent a single country to do excatly that!
UN = United Nations. does that ring a bell?

if you're above international law you're a THREAT to
the rest of the free world! (and yes, there is more "free world" than just the US)

This is a really good point. The Euro is the first step towards a united Europe. We need to keep those countries fighting with each other for a few more decades before they can be a threat to us. We should start small by annexing most of Canada and Mexico, then move on from there.

hmmmm, you didn't do your homework very well.
let's see, just a few of the things that the US took with
them when they left germany.
(wait, they never really left, they are still there).

what about that moon rocket you guys are so proud of?
a modfied german V2...

and the engineers who built it?
german "imports"...

the atomic bomb?
guess who had the plans for that?
another german "import" ...


you guys were one of four that won WWII,
nothing wrong with taking what you can get.

again, i'm happy we lost WWII because the
alternative would have been much, much worse.
anyone who fought against the nazis has my gratitude,
but don't give me that "The US does not work that way"
BS ...

OK, I hope I can put some words together without beating up on anybody in
particular.

First, you are not anti-American to be against the war. There are of course
many ways to solve a problem, and only the people in charge get to decide
which way they want to use. Like it or not, that is how governments work.
True pacifists are dufuses, though. If you don't fight for your own interests
then don't complain when you are darwinized out of existence.

Second, there seems to be a huge number of protesters and complainers
who think the war is over oil. That's silly, you call me when the US is over
there pumping oil into our tankers for free and bringing it here. Like we
took Kuwait's oil? Or how Reagan nuked Russia for all it's oil? There is
always some polical motives behind major actions by presidents, but this
is about perceived security and not driving Suburbans.

Third, there is no breaking of international law by finishing what was already
decided by the UN. The last war 'ended' by Iraq agreeing to certain things,
which even the UN knows and officially stated were not done.

Fourth, I think one reason most other countries are not interested in
helping the US is because the terrorist threats are generally against
American interests rather than other western countries. That does NOT
affect the validity of the threats to the US, that just shows who's really
an ally or a fair-weather friend.

Fifth, if you want to protest, go right ahead, that's an american thing
to do. But if you break laws by blocking the streets or otherwise
causing police to have to arrest you, I hope they fine you back to the
stone age, because at least in the east, where cities had record snow
removal costs, big security bills, and low revenues because of state
of the economy, I don't need dumbasses making a 'statement' by giving
us huge extra police costs.

Normally I wouldn't bother with politics on boards, but what can I
say I'm not employed and have a bit of extra time right now.

Mark S.
'70 914-6

I don't like the fact that Politics in the UN was stopping action against Saddam for years. I still would have prefered if the UN had united to throw him out. Now we have other countries looking at the US as a big bully and will band together against us however they can... That is the big Foreign Policy mistake here, we can't fight the whole world! I think that if Bush had approched the UN another way than "My way or the highway" it would have worked out fine. Wars are fought for economic reasons not just because its right. Andy is right, the US would have never entered WW2 if we hadn't been attacked by Japan. Why did Japan attack us in the first place? Hmmm, we turned off their oil supply!
Geoff

of course oil is a factor. don't be silly, it's not about filling up some freaking tankers for free ...

the middle east is THE key supplier for the US (and others) oil consumption.
therefore the US has a strong interest in keeping the region politically stable
to ensure undisturbed oil-flow.
and iraq is considered a threat to that stability.
this is not about terrorism. no iraqi has ever attacked america,
no iraqi missile has ever hit american soil. there was no provocation for this war,
except the conceived threat of destabilizing the middle east.

interestingly enough, for exactly the same reasons, iraq (under saddam) was once a US ally.
(funny that back then no-one here seemed to care about the torturing and killing of his own people).
the US trained, supplied them with weapons (which we're now looking for) and paid iraqi troops to
be a counterweight to iran, which at the time was perceived as the main threat in the middle east.
then iraq attacked iran and the US got cold feet and backed out.
ever since, the US/Iraq relationships are a bit chilly ...

the really interesting point here is that
as long as it was in the interest of the US, no one gave a fucking shit
about dead iraqi civilians or human rights or torture.
no one talked about the need to liberate the iraqi people.

Andy

I'm With Andy He yells too loudly but I'm still with him.

Contradiciton Too much contradiction on the board. Half the time the board is pro-war because we're American and we're number one and fuck everyone else. The other half the time you boys are arguing this is a humanitarian effort and that America is selflessly sacrificing lives to do the right thing. Well, which is it? I suspect more the former than the latter.

Oil Mark says: "Second, there seems to be a huge number of protesters and complainers who think the war is over oil. That's silly . . . ." But if this war is not at least partially about oil then why aren't we liberating other people of the world like the Somali's, the Iranian's, the Columbians, or the Cuban's? Fighting a war to liberate an African nation would be a whole lot cheaper and easier than fighting a war in Iraq. Why don't we do it? Oil, is but one of many reasons why.

TerrorismThis war is absolutely not about terrorism. There is not a single credible link from 9/11 to Iraq. I challenge anyone to link me to a magazine article to the contrary. Now there is a significant link from 9/11 to Saudi Arabia. I ask this question to the pro-war posters: after we've disposed of Iraq would you support a war against the Saudis?

No End in Sight On a related note, everyone who argues that we're in Iraq liberating the people, I ask you, which country would you be in support of invading next? The world is full of dictators. How about the Saudi's? How about China? How about N. Korea? How about all those African nations with horrible human rights records? Now if you would not support invading those countries, I ask you what makes Iraq different?

We Didn't Liberate Kuwait Even After We Liberated Kuwait Is Kuwait better now ten years after we liberated them than they were before? They are not the worst of the worst dictators in the region but they have an abysmal human rights record and America is complicit because we put the emir [say dictator] back in power. We have no reason to belive that Iraq will do any better than Kuwait. Is Afganistan doing any better for that matter? It's a mess out there and America has a horrible record for cleaning up our Middle-Eastern messes.

Iraq is not Germany or Japan If we could turn Iraq into a post WWII Germany or Japan I might actually be for the war but the chances of that happening are infinitely small. Do people on this board really believe that Iraq will look like Japan in the next century?

And these are but some of the reasonsy why I cannot support the war.

Flame on.

Douglas

Andy, respect your views on being anti-war. Too bad you didn't stop there.
You posted:
QUOTE (URY914 @ Mar 27 2003, 01:41 PM)
Haven't we been over this before?
If not the U.S.A., than who will?
If not now, when?
yes, we have
who?
the UN, of course ...
when?
leave that up to the UN ...

The UN had a resolution in Oct? that was a follow up to a resolution at the end of the Gulf War about inspectors. Saddam threw out the inspectors doing their job per the 1st resolution, the follow up resolution put inspectors back into Iraq.
What did the UN do in the 12 years between res 1 and 2?
There are 189 countries that belong to the UN, each members vote counts as much as the next one. Is that relevant? If so, how come 3rd world countries get special treatment such as exemptions for global warming? Why are 5 countries permanent members of the security council?
Granted, Bush became frustrated with the process and announced the US would present another resolution requiring the UN to enforce its early resolutions. France, that well known world power, announced that it would veto ANY resolution that the US submitted. Bush drew a line in the sand and here we are.
***
so, you think because america is #1 you can just go
around and invade other countries whenever you
feel like it? sure, it's not PC, but hey, we're #1, so what?

Understand this completely. World was a "little" more stable when there was another superpower but US went head to head with Russia over missiles in Cuba.
The short version is the US has been forced to become the worlds police man, a job no other country wants or can afford. The US economy drives the world.
***
and what does 9/11 have to do with the war on iraq?

This was a terrorist attack on US homeland that killed around 3,000, most of them Americans. Bush declared war on terrorism and went into Afganistan after the perpetrators, Saddam was next on his list.
The US is the most forgiving country in the world. After WWII the Marshall Plan "loaned" money to devastated countries starting with Japan and Germany. Neither seems to be doing to badly today. BTW not a penny of those loans were ever repaid, just forgiven.
Get off your high horse. The US has tried to work with the UN. Yeah, we've got a fucked up attitude when it comes to dealing with outlaw nations but at least we elected our leaders.

A good thread to add this:

22 March 2003
With one phrase, Lt. Col. Tim Collins, commander of the 1st Battalion of the Royal Irish, summed up the task in hand for the British forces waiting to remove Saddam Hussein from Iraq.
Collins was addressing his 800 men, an arm of Britain's 16 Air Assault Brigade, at Fort Blair Maine, a Kuwaiti desert camp 20 miles south of the Iraqi border. Here is as much of his extraordinary speech as has been reported.

"We go to liberate not to conquer. We will not fly our flags in their country. We are entering Iraq to free a people and the only flag which will be flown in that ancient land is their own. Show respect for them.

"There are some who are alive at this moment who will not be alive shortly. Those who do not wish to go on that journey, we will not send. As for the others I expect you to rock their world. Wipe them out if that is what they choose. But if you are ferocious in battle remember to be magnanimous in victory.

"Iraq is steeped in history. It is the site of the Garden of Eden, of the Great Flood and the birthplace of Abraham. Tread lightly there. You will see things that no man could pay to see and you will have to go a long way to find a more decent, generous and upright people than the Iraqis. You will be embarrassed by their hospitality even though they have nothing. Don't treat them as refugees for they are in their own country. Their children will be poor, in years to come they will know that the light of liberation in their lives was brought by you.

"If there are casualties of war then remember that when they woke up and got dressed in the morning they did not plan to die this day. Allow them dignity in death. Bury them properly and mark their graves.

"It is my foremost intention to bring every single one of you out alive but there may be people among us who will not see the end of this campaign. We will put them in their sleeping bags and send them back. There will be no time for sorrow.

"The enemy should be in no doubt that we are his nemesis and that we are bringing about his rightful destruction. There are many regional commanders who have stains on their souls and they are stoking the fires of hell for Saddam. He and his forces will be destroyed by this coalition for what they have done. As they die they will know their deeds have brought them to this place. Show them no pity.

"It is a big step to take another human life. It is not to be done lightly. I know of men who have taken life needlessly in other conflicts, I can assure you they live with the mark of Cain upon them. If someone surrenders to you then remember they have that right in international law and ensure that one day they go home to their family.

"The ones who wish to fight, well, we aim to please.
"If you harm the regiment or its history by over-enthusiasm in killing or in cowardice, know it is your family who will suffer. You will be shunned unless your conduct is of the highest for your deeds will follow you down through history. We will bring shame on neither our uniform or our nation.

"As for ourselves, let's bring everyone home and leave Iraq a better place for us having been there.
"Our business now is north."

Don,

I want to thank you. Good post with good info without "going off"

Your comment about the USA driving the worlds economy is dead on. Porsche wouldnt exist if it wasnt for the US market (I have numbers to back that up) The "world" was doing pretty good before 9/11. Sure some of the US companies where scam artists...

I just want to back US decisions. Good or bad. I dont see any other country stepping up to take action in the world. The attitude seems to be "let the US take care if it"

B

I won't defend the U.N. That debate is a red herring. Their approval wouldn't have made the war right. Their dissapproval does not necessarily make it wrong.

Don Says: World was a "little" more stable when there was another superpower but US went head to head with Russia over missiles in Cuba.

This issue is tremendously off topic. But just for the record the Cuban missle crisis is an example of the most unstable periods in the world's history. There was never a time when we were closer to nuclear armageddon.

Don Says: The short version is the US has been forced to become the worlds police man, a job no other country wants or can afford.

Being the world's police man is not a bad thing if we're doing a good job of it. But up until now the police man has never set out a policy to "pre-emptively" attack any and all nations that we determine to possibly be a threat, maybe not now, but some time in the future. Bush's policy of pre-emption is one of the most destabalizing doctrines ever advanced by an American administration.

Don Says: The US economy drives the world.

Again this is entirely off topic. Whether our economy drives the world or not does not justify (or dejustify) waging war against another country. I've yet to hear no one, except the most crass pro-war protester suggest that because our economy drives the world, we get to invade who ever we want, bomb whoever we want, and drain oil from whomever we want.

Andy asks And what does 9/11 have to do with the war on iraq?

And Don responds: This was a terrorist attack on US homeland that killed around 3,000, most of them Americans. Bush declared war on terrorism and went into Afganistan after the perpetrators, Saddam was next on his list.

Still what does Saddam being on Bush's "list" have to do with 911? Again I challenge anyone to find a credible source linking 9/11 to Iraq. There is no link.

Don Says: The US is the most forgiving country in the world. After WWII the Marshall Plan "loaned" money to devastated countries starting with Japan and Germany. Neither seems to be doing to badly today. BTW not a penny of those loans were ever repaid, just forgiven

Again, totally off topic. We're not loaning Iraq money we're bombing her capital. Rebuilding Iraq after we destroy her will not look like Germany or Japan in ten or twenty or thirty years. See my previous post.

Don Says: Get off your high horse.

I don't have a horse; I drive a 914.

I'm Still With Andy

Douglas

i'm yelling loudly because otherwise my little voice wouldn't be heard
no, actually, i'm yelling because i'm tired ...

I want everybody to think about a couple of questions carefully:

1) Should Iraq be disarmed by force? (Unfortunately I think it has come to that.)
2) If so, who should do it? (The UN should. It's their responsibility.)
3) If the body who should do it chooses not to, does that change the fact that it should be done? (Well, if it should be done then it should be done. Find somebody willing to do it)

Here's the deal. UN member nations joined because of the benefits package, not out of a compelling desire to give service to the world. Germany, Russia, China, France, etc. sit on their ass because there is nothing to gain in liberating Iraq - at least the cost is percieved to outweigh the benefit. The US on the other hand feels that the benefits outweigh the cost.

Also, the UN member nations unanumously agreed to act on Iraq if they didn't fully comply by the specified date. Iraq didn't comply and called the UN's bluff. These nations agreed to act and it was a lie. It was just talk. The resoultion said the UN would act but when the clock ran out they all refused. So who's in violation of the UN? The whole UN is.

You can call the US self-serving cowboys, but you have admit that the reality is that the opposing nations are self-serving liars. How can the US and Britain be expexted to follow the UN if the UN won't even honor it's own promises?

I was very on-the-fence when this was all gearing up. I don't know if it's the right thing. But I do know this - Every UN nation agreed action would be taken and when it came to "Go time" very few nations were willing to keep their promise. What point is there in negotiating with a group that will not honor it's agreements? There is none. Now that the choice has been made and our troops are in there being shot at I am 100% committed to this. Whether or not to go in is irrelivant now. We've committed to the task and so we should perform it to the highest degree of sucess possible. Anything short of full support undermines that.

if i recall the "Marshal Plan" right, it also asked for a strictly "agricultural" germany without any heavy industry, that would never be allowed to have his own armed forces again and would always be under the control of the 4 allys that won the war.
i am sure glad someone didn't follow through on that one ...

No kidding. We'd all be in a tractor club!