1. To use that reasoning, they must have known (or at least they have to think they know) what kind of weapons the Iraq has before. So why have the bogus controls at all then if it's all known anyway? Not quite logical.

2. And what do these 30-year-old housewives say?

The thing is, the Bush administration has made up its mind that there will be a war since about early Autumn. They grudgingly toned down their pro-war arguments in the UN, partially because they didn't want to lose all their potential allies, and partially because the return of UN inspectors to Iraq would in fact allow them to appear to be taking a legalistic and multi-lateral approach to the issue, while giving them time to plan the attack and unleash it when they saw fit.

If you read the statements of some US officials, or of some of the leading opinion-makers in Washington it becomes quite clear that their strategy from the start was to make sure that whatever the results of the inspections were, they would never be enough to satisfy the requirements of the US, giving them -- in accordance to the UN resolution -- a justification for military action.

Can't help but wonder, Autumn of what year?

'91

These people support the war with all their might. They say Saddam is complete evil and will nuke us any time he has the chance. They also believe that the US Army outmatches Iraq's army by so much that there won't be casulties.

Argh! Their arguement is so closed minded it makes me want to jump off a cliff.

Tuss

Very likely

Just heard a (for me) rather typical example of the Bush-administration on the news here... It would appear that they are salvaging metal from the debris of the WTC-towers to maufacture a memorial for the victims of the assault. Nothing wrong with that of course. the innocent victims who fell there deserve to be remembered just as much as the Jews who lay there lives in WW2 but you would think that a memorial like that would be in the form of a statue or shrine or the like... Well, guess again, they're going to use the metal to build a warship called the New York... I don't understand how you can honour those who died by building a thing which sole purpose lies in taken other lives. Just a thought...

Well that's stupid, I would expect a statue, but then again, America is full of them already!

Plus that scrap metal is 100 tons worth at least (per building) they said at the day the towers came down, that would make a very very big statue.

I don't see the point of statues, monuments and / or memorials either (they're mostly just cheap ways to buy away the guilt), so I don't care much.

The thing about such 'memorials' that pisses me off is that I don't understand why these victims are so 'special'. I'm sorry, but I can't feel worse for the people who died there in the WTC than I do for the thousands that probably die comparable or even worse deaths every day and that you never hear about, so why couldn't I watch television on the 11th of september of this year without having tearjerker documentaries and Bush speeches and such thrown in my face? It's disgusting to see how the Bush administration continues to abuse this terrorist attack as a cheap excuse for being total imperialist bastards, and building a military ship from the metal scrap of the towers is exactly the sick finishing touch they needed...
P.S.: Sorry if anyone feels offended but that's my opinion.

Edited by The Mole at 18:42 on December, 29th 2002

For what?

Edited by Mr Creosote at 22:36 on December, 29th 2002

For not caring more, I guess, or maybe even for having an opinion...
It could seem to some that I'm saying I don't care about the victims at all, which is of course not the case, it's just that I don't care exceptionally much about them just because they happen to look a little more like us than your average genocide victim... But I'm sure everyone already got that from my previous post.

That's just stupid - they wouldn't have to use all of the metal. And there's no question building a weapon of destruction as a memorial is the most stupid thing they could do.



Very true. I feel very similarly, there are many who die every day who deserve recognition. And September 11 is over the top - blown completely out of proportion. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't honour them and make a memorial... Simply it cannot be done if only one or two people die - too expensive.

And what about the several thousand (likely to be more) people who starve to death every day? Don't they deserve recognition? Or isn't it worth it because they pass away without a huge explosion and thus it's not media-compatible?

Perhaps we should stop erecting memorials all over the place and use the money we save that way to send structural aid to those who are still alive

You lot will appreciate this photo. This is todays front page on the British Daily Mirror.

BTW, just incase peolpe havent heard of them, the first logo isnt clear on this photo but its 'Shell', a petrol company. So when reading the front page, read that first symbol as Shell.

God bless the British Tabloid newspapers, there isnt anything like them anywhere else in the world.....

Hehehe... Couldn't have said it better myself.

It's almost unbelievable for me that someone working for the tabloid press apparently knows the term "irony"...

That page sums it up well.

The thing is though Iraq may have missles and such but they only have the capicity to fire them about as far as Israel.

That really does say it all...

It was just that, a joke, just like the warship :p