Political:Powell Spoke.

[Kaiddin]

Originally posted by qerlin
Won't convince those who don't wish to be.

Proven correct within 5 minutes.

That is why I consider it a waste of time undergoing the fiction of a debate with some people on this forum.

That is why I considered Powell's address to the UN as just slightly above a complete waste of time and energy. Did it convince anyone? Maybe. Please reread qerlin's post. Did it strengthen the UN's image with the world in general and Iraq in particular? I'll let you know but not holding my breath.

So both camps will strut and crow since they will only see what they wanted to see. And we will be entertained by more crap on this and other fora!

[First of Two]

The jet was a Mirage F-1, with a centerline 2000l droptank converted into a bio-chem sprayer.

A plane of French make and manufacture, non?

[C5]

Originally posted by First of Two
A plane of French make and manufacture, non?

The French being the only people to have sold weapons to Iraq, of course...

[First of Two]

Oh, not at all, the Russians sold many, many tanks and aircraft. We blew a lot of them to bits during the 1991 war, if you recall.

And the Chinese.
And the Brits.
The Egyptians, The Yugoslavians,

And occasionally, the US.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...raq/index.html

This is cool, too, but a bit long. It gives an idea of "business as usual" in Iraq, as well.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/li...603-unscom.htm

A bit of the UNSCOM reports of 1998. I especially enjoyed the "Documents" and "Concealment" sections.

[C5]

Originally posted by Kaiddin
And we will be entertained by more crap on this and other fora!

If you are one of these people to whom "different opinion than yours" means "crap", I'd suggest you just don't bother participating in a debate, since it's obvious you'll either hear agreeing advice, or crap.

Sorry if this seems harsh from me but... well to be honest I get tired of seeing most Europeans on this board trying to be polite while on the other side some Americans don't mind throwing insults and never apologizing. Debates may be heated, right, they don't have to turn into a unilateral epithets contest.

Anyway... like I said some months ago, who cares about Iraq anyway. If the USA want to go to war, they will go to war. It's as simple as that. What I think of it is irrelevant.

History might tell us who was right. Or not. For now, I just hope not too many people will be killed (on both sides).

And now I think I'll definitely avoid this particular subject. It'd be like discussing whether phase pistols in Enterprise break continuity or not.

[C5]

Originally posted by First of Two
Oh, not at all, the Russians sold many, many tanks and aircraft. We blew a lot of them to bits during the 1991 war, if you recall.

My point was that everyone sold weapons to Iraq before the Gulf war. Actually, I could even nitpick the fact that, of all things, the USA choosed to show a French plane.

Eh, rejoice : if all Iraq has is French weapons, then most of them are probably broken now.

[Evan van Eyk]

Great we are a mud-throwing again - this time even without me getting the starting throw


But I want to do my part as well, but this time on me myself

I just read, that a German Engineer was sentenced for 6 years in jail for selling tools to Iraq, which may used for manufacturing Gun-*** ( oh my, how do you call the front part where the bullet comes out - yeah I know its silly, but nevertheless I do not know the word ). He used another company to buy that tools - the head of that companyies selling department was also sentenced for two years ( he could proof, he knew no where that tools went ). The jordian Contact man is in arrest in Hungary and will be delivered to Germany soon.

[Aldaron]

Originally posted by C5
The French being the only people to have sold weapons to Iraq, of course...

One is forced to think of the joke currently doing the Internet rounds:

Journalist: "So, Mr Bush. How do we know Iraq has all these illegal weapons?"

Bush: "Because we keep our receipts!"

Or something like that.

Yet again, the "With us or against us" rears its ugly head. Dan seems to be the only person currently posting a reasonable perspective at present.

As to those who dismissively, aggressively and arrogantly lump all those who disagree with you, or question the accuracy, content and/or sources of Powell's evidence, into the peacenik/Euro/pro-terrorist/pro-Hussein/anti-American stereotype, welll, good luck to you. If you wish to simply follow a politician's words without question, have a great life.

We learned that lesson down here at the beginning of last year (2002), when the Federal government produced photographic evidence that asylum seekers had thrown their own children overboard to get the attention of the Royal Australian Navy, and prevent them from turning the boat back out of Australian waters.

"Look at them!" crowed John Howard and Philip Ruddock, "We don't want people who would do that in this country!"

And they won an election on it.

Guess what? 3 months later, the rest of the photos were released, weren't they? The ones which showed the boat was sinking and everyone was in the water, not just the children.

They lied. They lied thru their teeth, bald-faced and unashamedly.

Now I'm not saying Powell/Bush et al are lying - they may well be telling the truth. But to attack anyone who questions the evidence of political figures which supports the agenda of those political figures is the height of not only arrogance, but evidence in itself of blindingly mindless following of one's own politicians.

The people questioning the evidence are essentially saying: "Would it stand up in court?"
I haven't seen Powell's presentation, so I cannot directly comment on it. From following what people here have said, it sounds, however, like it probably wouldn't stand up in court, or would at least be grounds for appeal.

Whatever the case, the evidence must be compelling for a person to be convicted of a crime that would lead to the death penalty. Considering that's what's being planned for several thousand (or more) Iraqis, I don't see that it's unreasonable to expect a nation to hold to the same standards as the prosecutors in a capital case.

And for those of you who are preparing the "We can't divulge intelligence sources" argument...well, tough shit, basically.

You want people to believe you? Provide sources. If you can't, or won't, expect an argument. There's been more than enough time to protect the intelligence sources there - or if you can't, don't try and use their evidence to support you.

And if you do try and use it...expect a "You've got to be kidding" type of response. Perhaps it's a problem with the division on the board between the Military/Intel guys and the Civilians.

As a civilian, I expect and demand a reason before I support an action my government takes - or any government, for that matter (though I only actually have a say in mine). I do not, will not, not ever, "Follow Orders". Moreover, those reasons must be logical, and coherent, and presented with supportive, corroborated evidence - not just the "say so" of some politician or general.

In the mean-time, however, a message for the more aggressive species of Hawk that is nesting on the boards.

As incredulous as it may seem to you that people are dismissing Powell's evidence, as absurd as it may seem to you that people are questioning the motives of the US administration in this whole Iraq matter...

...it is every bit as incredible and absurd to people on the other side that you believe what your president is telling you, and that you accept Powell's evidence at face value.

So how about we lay off the personal attacks for a while, hmm?

How about we stop throwing out trolling comments like "I don't like the French"?

How about we stop labelling the "other side" as ignorant morons who couldn't find their arses with a piece of toilet paper?

[First of Two]

Originally posted by Aldaron
The people questioning the evidence are essentially saying: "Would it stand up in court?"

http://www.msnbc.com/news/842500.asp?vts=020520031425

Following a White House breakfast that Bush had with congressional leaders in advance of Powell’s presentation, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware said: “If I had this evidence before a jury that was an unbiased jury, I could get a conviction.”

Unfortunately, the UN has no unbiased jury.

[Kaiddin]

Originally posted by C5
If you are one of these people to whom "different opinion than yours" means "crap", I'd suggest you just don't bother participating in a debate, since it's obvious you'll either hear agreeing advice, or crap.

Yeah, right, exactly what I mean. After all if I'm sick of crap thrown around here it must be because I'm anti-European. Give me a break.

Let me guess, I'll come right out and say it, since I have no opinion of Evan because he has proven himself not worth an opinion that makes me anti-European? I guess sincer I have opinions about Iraq, that makes me anti-European?

This is just bullshit! I wonder why I bother!

[Evan van Eyk]

Originally posted by Kaiddin

Let me guess, I'll come right out and say it, since I have no opinion of Evan because he has proven himself not worth an opinion that makes me anti-European?

I wonder why that is? So anybody who agrees not blindly to your opinions, which you fail to base with facts is not worth an opinion?

[holyone]

Impressive. You made up your mind with 2 audio tapes about a war. You know what we can do, at this time, with computers, ain't you? If you want, I can send you a tape of Mickael Jackson saying he loves Hitler.... Easy to do...
Can't you see these proofs ain't proofs, and that you can't kill people for that?

[C5]

Originally posted by Kaiddin
Yeah, right, exactly what I mean. After all if I'm sick of crap thrown around here it must be because I'm anti-European. Give me a break.

Let me guess, I'll come right out and say it, since I have no opinion of Evan because he has proven himself not worth an opinion that makes me anti-European? I guess sincer I have opinions about Iraq, that makes me anti-European?

This is just bullshit! I wonder why I bother!

OK, there must be some subtelty of the english language I failed to grab, since on my end I never said you were anti american. Then again maybe my wordbook was lying, or I failed to understand a joke.

I just had the impression from your previous post that you said every disagreeing comment was crap, and reacted to that. I did not, read, NOT, said you were anti european. Actually, I now could say a number of things I think you are, but anti European would not be amongst the first.

And now I'm going to have some well deserved sleep. Read you tomorrow for a new round of mindless flaming if this thread hasn't been locked since or has evolved to something more interesting and intelligent (wich I doubt).

[Kaiddin]

Originally posted by Kaiddin
Proven correct within 5 minutes.

That is why I consider it a waste of time undergoing the fiction of a debate with some people on this forum.

Yeah this statement is very anti-European. Very pro-US!

That is why I considered Powell's address to the UN as just slightly above a complete waste of time and energy. Did it convince anyone? Maybe. Please reread qerlin's post. Did it strengthen the UN's image with the world in general and Iraq in particular? I'll let you know but not holding my breath.

Guess this one is too. After all if you think the UN is much akin to the Imperial Senate in The Phantom Menace, you must be anti-European.

So both camps will strut and crow since they will only see what they wanted to see. And we will be entertained by more crap on this and other fora!

Both camps? Hmmm. That must be the anti-European and the pro-American. Give me a break.

I thought there was only one person on these fora that could spin that bad.

[First of Two]

For those of you who haven't seen, the full text can be found at:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/869007.asp

or

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030205-1.html

with slides and audio.