In order to give people a chance to discuss the war with others who share their views I'm creating two threads. This thread is not for debate and I will delete any posts that are not appropriate.

I am very serious about this and will strongly consider suspending anyone who posts in an attempt to start a debate.

This is the appropriate thread for debate...

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?s=&postid=70766

Lets hope this is in the right thread:

1- the war is illegal without an agreement of the UN.
2- Bush knew he was going to start an illegal war al along that’s why he overruled the agreement that supported the ICC
3- America and Americans all over the world will face a blow-back for years to come because of the way bush has handled this.

On 3: I hope that VB’ers or their relatives will not be (severely) hurt by the blow-back.

(Note: maybe I should have used back-lash instead of blowback)

Originally posted by 1vegan
Lets hope this is in the right thread:

1- the war is illegal without an agreement of the UN.
2- Bush knew he was going to start an illegal war al along that’s why he overruled the agreement that supported the ICC
3- America and Americans all over the world will face a blow-back for years to come because of the way bush has handled this.

On 3: I hope that VB’ers or their relatives will not be (severely) hurt by the blow-back.

(Note: maybe I should have used back-lash instead of blowback)

No. 3 is something I worry about (also for my fellow Aussies thanks to our deceitful Bush-ass-kissing government)...... I know several people in the US (whom I call friends) and converse with many more, and I would hate to see them (and in fact most US people) face a back-lash due to their government's actions.

What disgusts me more than anything is the excitement people have over us going to war. I used the term "whipped into a frenzy" earlier and it reminded me of Lord of the Flies. It's bringing out a side of people I wish I hadn't seen. :(

Sorta, like your friend, KC?

Actually, I'll let that one slip...be good KC, be good little buddy...

....ah, I would consider our friendship much broader than the scope of a Veggieboard thread, Mike knows the real me, not an online character known as KC :)

Just to be on the safe side:

When I read this, I get a uncomfortable feeling:

Rumours of torture by U.S ?
(New York, February 3, 2003) - Before U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell presents evidence on Iraq's weapons programs and terror links to the United Nations on Wednesday, the Bush administration should respond to allegations that intelligence has been obtained from detainees through torture, Human Rights Watch said.
http://hrw.org/press/2003/02/powell20303.htm

In a letter to President George W. Bush, Human Rights Watch said it was “deeply concerned” by allegations made in the Washington Post that detainees had been subjected to torture or other forms of mistreatment while in U.S. custody in Afghanistan or while held by U.S. allies.
http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/12/us1227.htm

The Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have denied Human Rights Watch access to detention centers that hold people arrested in relation to the September 11 terrorist investigation.
http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/12/USdetainees1214.htm

Does any one have any news on this?

This also doesn’t contribute to see the U.S army in a “positive” way:
(New York, January 23, 2003) The U.S. military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy of discharging gay and lesbian servicemembers who reveal their sexual orientation violates human rights and deprives the military of skilled personnel, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today.
http://hrw.org/press/2003/01/us012303.htm

Not to mention this:
“As the world seems relentlessly driven to the brink of war, we are increasingly concerned that some governments that have banned antipersonnel mines will find themselves engaged in joint military operations with U.S. military forces using mines. The last time the United States used antipersonnel mines was against Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War,” said Jody Williams, co-recipient of peace prize with the ICBL.
http://www.icbl.org/news/2002/218.php

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is preparing to use anti-personnel land mines in a war with Iraq, despite U.S. policy that calls for the military to stop using the mines everywhere in the world except Korea by 2003.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-12-10-landmines-usat_x.htm


Note: This is something I found on the net. I think, but am not sure that the sites are reasonable reliable. This post must not be seen as a “attack” on Americans. The links make me wonder what’s going on ? :confused:

I read this and I have to say, it sounds funny:
"Make no mistake, when the president says go -- look out, it's hammer time. It is hammer time..." Vice Adm. Timothy J. Keating told CNN aboard the USS Constellation.

With dancers and everything?

I saw that on tv, and I'm sorry, but he looked geriatric and totally uninspiring.

The part that really bothers me is there are people I know and care about between the ages of 18 and 23 who are there, stationed in Kuwait at this very moment, and who could possibly die. How can Bush send these people, pretty much children, to die for his stupid vengeance? That's why I'll never understand war. I hate it when people say, "Yeah, well, casualties are a part of war, it must be done." That's the stupidest rationale I've ever heard. To me, nothing will ever justify sending innocent people who never asked for a war to do the dirty work of a spoiled little Texas oil brat.

People seem to forget the soldiers who will be fighting this have mothers, fathers, siblings, and friends who care if they die. :rolleyes:

Skylark is officially crying now... I know, you didn't think you'd see that day, but she is.

PLEASE GOD, MAKE IT STOP!!!

While I may not be a close relative or friend to any of the soldiers (afaik), I despise the idea of anyone, known or unknown to me, killing or being killed by another person. *shakes head vigorously* Why do people do these things to each other? Duh, we're messed up, and that's why.

yarnblossom,
I wish the majority of people I know were against this war. Sadly, it seems like most of the people I come in contact with support this whole fiasco.

Originally posted by yarnblossom
I just sent George Bush an email telling him just how evil war is and that it doesn't do anything good. I am sure he will never see it. But it made me feel better to send it.

I sent him a pretzel.

Originally posted by Thalia
I read this and I have to say, it sounds funny:
"Make no mistake, when the president says go -- look out, it's hammer time. It is hammer time..." Vice Adm. Timothy J. Keating told CNN aboard the USS Constellation.


(1vegan :spew: )

I don't know if you know this, but I remember "hammer time! "

http://www.sledgehammeronline.com/alanspeaks.htm

http://www.phrank.com/sh/season2/219-htymh.html

http://www.phrank.com/sh/season2/202-bnoc.html

http://www.phrank.com/sh/season2/215-srnr.html

I wanted to make a separate thread of this, but it isn't possible.

The following mail was recieved by me:
Greenpeace: Resistance is not futile - next steps against the war

In the last 2 days, more than 18 thousand people from 119 countries have sent letters to their UN ambassadors asking them to support a "Uniting for Peace" resolution in the UN General Assembly to make clear the world's opposition to a devastating and illegal war in Iraq waged by the United States and a small group of allies.

This is the fastest response to any Greenpeace international action alert ever. Our team at the United Nations would like to thank you for your support.

Now we ask you to take a second step by calling on as many of your friends and colleagues as possible to write to their UN ambassadors to support this resolution. Even if a war has broken out by the time you read this, we are going to continue to push for a resolution to set in the historical record the world's opposition to this illegal war.

Please send this e-card:

http://act.greenpeace.org/ecs/s2?i=730&sk=std

to as many of your friends and colleagues as possible. A short personal message from yourself and a Greenpeace call to action will be included with each e-card. Our e-card system allows for the sending of 6 e-cards each time, and in this time of emergency, we'd like you to think of at least 6 people to send this to.

If you haven't sent a letter to your UN ambassador yet, please do so now from:

http://act.greenpeace.org/aas/e?a=ufp&s=amb_s

You can find more information about the Uniting for Peace resolution here:

http://greenpeace.org/news/details?item_id=179491

and follow the Greenpeace No War campaign here:

http://nowar.greenpeace.org

Thank you for your continued support.

VISIT THE CYBERCENTRE

Please don't forget to visit the Greenpeace Cyberactivist Community at:
http://act.greenpeace.org

I also found this one:


http://www.arabia.com/newsfeed/article/english/0,14183,381198,00.html

Coming Weeks Could Be Bloodiest in History of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
March 20, 2003, 09:55 AM
RAMALLAH - As a possible US attack on Iraq drew closer, leading Palestinian activist and HDIP Director Dr Mustafa Barghouthi today warned that the coming weeks could be some of the bloodiest in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as it appeared increasingly likely that Israel will use the distraction of the worlds media as a cover for massive violations against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories.
enlarge image

"We are very worried that in the coming days, Israel will use a war to upgrade attacks and commit further atrocities against a Palestinian people already beleaguered by more than two years of constant killings, closure, curfew and economic collapse," said Barghouthi, speaking at a press conference in Ramallah in the West Bank.

The the Union of Concerned Scientists have a page that you can use to mail to the president :
http://www.ucsusa.org/news.cfm?newsID=333

From the Union of Concerned Scientists

The deployment of US and British troops undoubtedly contributed to Iraq's recent limited compliance with UN inspections. However, the US decision to attack Iraq, when the UN inspectors wanted more time to complete their task and without the sanction of the UN Security Council, will likely have far-reaching negative impacts on the future proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and on the prospects for effective international controls on such weapons.


The Bush administration's preventive attack on Iraq undermines the authority of the United Nations in addressing future threats to international security, and encourages other nations to take unilateral, preventive military actions. By acting outside of international law, the Bush administration weakens that law and further erodes the non-proliferation regime.


Moreover, even as the Bush administration attacks Iraq over the issue of possession of weapons of mass destruction, it is expanding the capabilities of the US nuclear arsenal. The administration is researching new, earth-penetrating nuclear weapons; seeking to repeal the current research ban on very low-yield nuclear weapons; and pressing to cut the time required to resume US nuclear testing. At the same time, it has articulated a new nuclear policy that calls for an increased role of nuclear weapons in US defense policy, including their first use on the battlefield, and for the maintenance of thousands of nuclear weapons indefinitely. By reinforcing the idea that nuclear weapons are essential to US security, these policies further undermine the US goal of preventing the proliferation of these weapons.

And see the other page:
Write the President About the Iraq War
The international community has the responsibility to stop Iraq from acquiring or developing weapons of mass destruction. However, the US-led invasion is the wrong approach, as it undermines UN authority and weakens international non-proliferation efforts. Tell President Bush that you oppose the US invasion of Iraq and support a UN-mandated non-proliferation regime rooted in international law.”

http://www.ucsaction.org/index.asp?step=2&item=2538

There was an English MP on tv this morning talking about trying to get a ceasefire long enough to get a few million kids bussed over the border into camps in Jordan, and how to raise the money and interest to do it quickly. I don't know who or where it's being promoted by though.

I didn't find it on the bbc site.
I found this though:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2867913.stm

Blix criticises US 'impatience'

”Former chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has expressed regret over US "impatience" to go to war with Iraq - and suggested Washington had little interest in peaceful disarmament from the outset.”

/-----/

“Dubious tips

Mr Blix also criticised the information US and other intelligence services passed on to Unmovic and the IAEA - the UN's nuclear watchdog agency.
He said few experts believed that aluminium tubes imported by Iraq were designed for were designed for centrifuges to enrich uranium.
"And you had the even more flagrant case of the contracts that Iraq was alleged to have tried to conclude with Niger about the importation of raw uranium (...) and the IAEA found that it was a fake."
Mr Blix added that Unmovic found little at the sites pointed out by intelligence services - which, he said, further undermines their credibility. “

> > Global Politics Quiz
> >
> > 1. Which is the only country in the world to have dropped bombs on over
> > 20 different countries since 1945?
> >
> > 2. Which is the only country to have used nuclear weapons to take the
> > lives of thousands of civilian women and children?
> >
> > 3. Which country was responsible for a car bomb which killed 80
> > civilians in Beirut in 1985 in a botched assassination attempt, thereby
> > making it the most lethal terrorist bombing in modern Middle East
> > history?
> >
> > 4. Which country's illegal bombing of Libya in 1986 was described by the
> > UN Legal Committee as a "classic case" of terrorism?
> >
> > 5. Which country rejected the order of the International Court of
> > Justice (ICJ) to terminate its "unlawful use of force" against Nicaragua
> > in 1986, and then vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling on all
> > states to observe international law?
> >
> > 6. Which country was accused by a UN-sponsored truth commission of
> > providing "direct and indirect support" for "acts of genocide" against
> > Mayan Indians in Guatemala during the 1980s?
> >
> > 7. Which country unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile
> > (ABM) Treaty in December 2001?
> >
> > 8. Which country renounced the efforts to negotiate a verification
> > process for the Biological Weapons Convention and brought an
> > international conference on the matter to a halt in July 2001?
> >
> > 9. Which country prevented the United Nations from curbing the gun
> > trade at a small arms conference in July 2001?
> >
> > 10. Aside from Somalia, which is the only other country in the world to
> > have refused to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
> >
> > 11. Which is the only Western Country which allows the death penalty
> > to be applied to children?
> >
> > 12. Which is the only G7 country to have refused to sign the 1997 Mine
> > Ban Treaty, forbidding the use of land mines?
> >
> > 13. Which is the only G7 country to have voted against the creation of
> > the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998?
> >
> > 14. Which was the only other country to join with Israel in opposing a
> > 1987 General Assembly resolution condemning international terrorism?
> >
> > 15. Which country refuses to fully pay its debts to the United Nations
> > yet reserves its right to veto United Nations resolutions?
> >
> > ANSWER to all 15 questions: The United States of America
> >
> >
> >

Q: are you sure on 13 ?
I read clinton signed something that agreed to the errection of the ICC but it was revoked by bush in may 2001 ?

Today, I Weep For My Country...
http://truthout.org/docs_03/032103A.shtml


Another article...
In a speech Monday, Daschle, of South Dakota, said he was "saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war.''

Can anyone relate?

Mr. Osbourne, Mr. Butler, Mr. Iommi and Mr. Ward sum up my postion best.

War Pigs

Generals gathered in their masses
just like witches at black masses
evil minds that plot destruction
sorcerers of death's construction
in the fields the bodies burning as the war machine keeps turning
death and hatred to mankind
poisoning their brainwashed minds... Oh lord yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away
they only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor

Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait 'till their judgment day comes, yeah!

Now in darkness, world stops turning
as the war machine keeps burning
No more war pigs of the power
Hand of god has struck the hour
Day of judgment, god is calling on their knees, the war pigs crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan, laughing, spreads his wings
ALL RIGHT NOW!

Originally posted by 1vegan
Q: are you sure on 13 ?
I read clinton signed something that agreed to the errection of the ICC but it was revoked by bush in may 2001 ?

1veagn - for the last flippin' time, the Senate must ratify treaties. It is not only up to a president.

"Politicians hide themselves away
they only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor"

What seems most relevant to the continuation of war and wars, is: why do the poor join the armed forces and obey orders? Is there really no other way for them to have food clothing and shelter, unless they become soldiers? Why do "enlisted" men take orders from "officers" why do the enlisted men agree to do all the dirty work -- and at the same time tolerate it when the officers get special priveleges, better food, the right to go out and party with women while the enlisted men scrub floors and dust furniture, and even get better medical care? What is it that the politicians have that convinces poor people, in a paroxism of low-self esteem, to tolerate this nonsense?

I could see it if -- you fight, do the dirty work, and then yo get the spoils. You get to party afterwards. If your'e injured, you get excellent medical care instead of languishing away in second class veterans administration hospitals. But they don't. They risk their lives, lose their limbs -- and then get stepped on. While the officers who don't do any actual combat -- get the good stuff. The poor who do the actual combat must know that they are getting shafted? Don't they? Or are they just really really stupid, and think that if you are an officer, because your family could get you into a military college, and don't have to get your hands dirty fighting -- that you deserve a better life.

"Treating people just like pawns in chess"

Actually, chess was apparently designed to imitate war, not the other way around. It was obviously developed as a mind-sharpening pastime for troop leaders to sharpen their troop movemen strategy skills of keeping all the possible moves that the opponent might come up with, in mind, when planning one's own moves, so as to foil that oponent by out-thinking him, and develop one's mental capacity for keeping lots and lots of possible moves and counter-moves in mind, all at once, and to think strategically, in regard to dealing with people, rather than emotionally.