The W
Views: 99874526
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.10.14 0345
The W - Current Events & Politics - new subject almost
This thread has 12 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(2104 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (17 total)
cokeman
Chorizo








Since: 12.4.03
From: nj (back from iraq)

Since last post: 3284 days
Last activity: 3074 days
#1 Posted on
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=444162003

So what do you think, should we fry him or let italy fry him???
Promote this thread!
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2828 days
Last activity: 2670 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44
Tie one of his legs to an American ship, tie the other to an Italian ship, and let them both steam off for home.

It should be noted that the perfectly legitimate, committed-to-peace Palestinian Authority wants this guy back.

Can anyone confirm whether Clinton made us a signatory to the Oslo accords, or simply witnessed them? I've heard both. Because if we're not bound by the thing, let's bring this bastard here to the States and get some justice for Leon Klinghoffer. To quote Walter Sobchak: "Fucking anti-semites."



"May God bless our country and all who defend her."

George W. Bush, 3/19/03
brick
Bockwurst








Since: 17.1.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 537 days
Last activity: 533 days
#3 Posted on
According to the reports I've seen we only witnessed the Olso accords. So we are in no way binded by them.



if "Washington is a Hollywood for ugly people," then, considering the remarks coming out of Tinseltown about Iraq, "Hollywood is a Washington for the simpleminded."
John McCain
"Iraq will not be defeated" in the war, Iraqie Ambassador Mohsen Khalil told a news conference in Egypt. "Iraq has now already achieved victory - apart from some technicalities."
cokeman
Chorizo








Since: 12.4.03
From: nj (back from iraq)

Since last post: 3284 days
Last activity: 3074 days
#4 Posted on
so, lets cut his frikin head off.
or somthing like that. The boat thing is good. But that would be to fast of a death. How about we surgicaly(think i spelled that wrong) remove his arms and legs, and throw him in a jail. Then he can be the jail bitch untill some one kills him anyway.
HairRaiser
Kishke








Since: 13.1.03
From: S. Attleboro, MA

Since last post: 2608 days
Last activity: 1943 days
#5 Posted on
I heard some commentary on FoxNews recently that the speaker believed that Oslo would prevent prosecution, but that because he was tried in abstentia before Oslo's effective date, then he's not being really being prosecuted.

As for me, let's see what Italy does and if there's anything left of him, we get it. That way, he's less of a drain on our prison system. :-)
cokeman
Chorizo








Since: 12.4.03
From: nj (back from iraq)

Since last post: 3284 days
Last activity: 3074 days
#6 Posted on
That sounds doable.
Dahak
Frankfurter








Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 2024 days
Last activity: 1677 days
#7 Posted on
I am shocked. I mean who would have guessed that Iraq supported terrorists? I guess that Saddam didn't have time to check out all the people living in his country with his charity work and raising bunnies. Of course the Annihalation or Iraq was only about oil nothing else right?

(edited by Dahak on 17.4.03 1835)

Marge I am just trying to get into heaven not run for Jesus.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
It was about getting this guy?

Look, there was a nice little bonus at the end there, but let's not go calling it a justification for war.



It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Michael Novotny, A smart guy, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, not racist, a Chihuahua, Data, an Asian Gangster, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, White Chocolate, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Mr. Peabody, Bjork, Spider-Man, Tom Daschle, Boston, a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage, not a Hipster, and a Gringo.
Dahak
Frankfurter








Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 2024 days
Last activity: 1677 days
#9 Posted on
No getting a second rate terrorist from 15 years ago is not a justification for a war. But a country that officially sponsors terrorists that attack US citizens is an act of war. People were claiming there was no evidence linking Iraq with terrorists. This kind of weakens that theory. Payments for suicide bombers, training camps in their borders for international terrorists, and money to support their causes.
Of course it's only about oil and making Haliburton an extra billion isn't it? That is why the US is going to spend 100 billion or so. So that a couple of companies could make 2 or 3 billion in total. So what we could get the oil that Iraq wanted to sell us.
People who oppose the war for religious, moral, or ethical reasons are fine. But people who think it's only for money need to look at the facts. People in other countries who worry that the US is setting up an Empire (which is understandable) don't really know much about America. Americans who think Bush is trying to set up an empire are idiots.



Marge I am just trying to get into heaven not run for Jesus.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1313 days
Last activity: 79 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on
Yeah- people seem to pretty easily forget the more direct links to terrorism (like the training facilities they have already uncovered), in favor of this sort of thing. With each passing day, there is more and more proof of Saddaam's support of terrorism, and I definitly feel the war has been justified many times over. It is just that there are some people who will never, ever admit to that, because of who is in the White House.

And that whole Haliburton thing still bugs me- everyone is pointing fingers over this, but I have to ask: what other company is as qualified as Haliburton to take this job? I can't think of any.

This is a classic example of a coincidence, and if anything, Disck's involvement witrh them only means that he is intimatly familiar with the company, and knows they can handle the job.

Again, who EXACTLY got unfairly declined for this job in order to give it to Haliburton?

And again- if the Bush Admin really WANTED to help their "Oil Buddies," they would have had the UN lift the sanctions without a war. That would be a much less costly way of getting what they want..





Still on the Shelf #4
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3746 days
Last activity: 3216 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on

    Originally posted by Dahak
    Of course it's only about oil and making Haliburton an extra billion isn't it? That is why the US is going to spend 100 billion or so. So that a couple of companies could make 2 or 3 billion in total. So what we could get the oil that Iraq wanted to sell us.


That argument is friggin' ridiculous. The money the US is spending on the war is tax money. Halliburton isn't bankrolling the war, we are.

And Pool-Boy... this isn't a "coincidence". It's a conflict of interest, pure and simple. Whether or not Halliburton's the most qualified to do the job isn't an issue because Cheney's association with them makes the motivation for giving them the contract very shady. Bush Senior's position on the board of a major defense contractor is the same thing.

If they wanted people to think this was on the up-and-up, all they had to do was award the contract to another company or companies. They're not. They're awarding the contract to a company that they've already given preferential treatment to in the past.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
cokeman
Chorizo








Since: 12.4.03
From: nj (back from iraq)

Since last post: 3284 days
Last activity: 3074 days
#12 Posted on
What happened to ways we can kill the guy???



cranlsn
Liverwurst








Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#13 Posted on


    Originally posted by Nate The Snake

    If they wanted people to think this was on the up-and-up, all they had to do was award the contract to another company or companies.



So...even if Halliburton is the best and most qualified company for the job, they should award it to another company to avoid all the liberal knee-jerk reactions to anything that the Bush administration does?

It wouldn't matter who they awarded the contract to, there would be cries of "Oh look! See, we told you! It was always about the oil!"








Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3746 days
Last activity: 3216 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on

    Originally posted by cranlsn
    So...even if Halliburton is the best and most qualified company for the job, they should award it to another company to avoid all the liberal knee-jerk reactions to anything that the Bush administration does?


No, they should avoid doing it because it's a CONFLICT OF FREAKING INTEREST.

If your wife is a district attorney and you get put on trial, no matter HOW good an attorney she is, she won't be assigned to your case because a CONFLICT OF INTEREST exists. No matter how honest she may be, the fact remains that there's a preexisting relationship there that is likely to affect the process.

The fact that Dick Cheney RAN Halliburton, the fact that George H. W. Bush, the father of the President of the United States, is on the board of a major defense contractor, and the fact that the Bush family is tied to the oil business, all point to a serious conflict of interest when you're going to war with an oil-producing nation and hiring Halliburton to rebuild it.

It's not rocket science.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
I am a lowly municipal worker. I have no real position of authority, I'm not management, or anything like that.

Neither I, nor my immediate family are allowed to take a second job - even if it's unpaid - with any organization that does business with the City of New York. Not even just my department - the whole city. In NEW YORK, a town that's not exactly know for good government.

I have no idea why I can't coach Little League if the team is sponsored by Firehouse 52, but there seems to be no problem with this whole Haliburton thing. I mean, I'd expect the Vice-President of the United States to be held to the same ethical standards as a $32,321/year city employee.

Of course, holding the rich and powerful to different standards than the rest of us seems to be the main platform of the Connecticut Yankee wing of the Republican Party.



It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Michael Novotny, A smart guy, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, not racist, a Chihuahua, Data, an Asian Gangster, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, White Chocolate, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Mr. Peabody, Bjork, Spider-Man, Tom Daschle, Boston, a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage, not a Hipster, and a Gringo.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1313 days
Last activity: 79 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on
How is it different standards? To me, it looks like they are exactly the same. Cheney QUIT his poistion in order to be VP. He does NOT have 2 jobs.

And if you were working at McDonalds prior to your city job, you could STILL go to McDonald's even while you were working for the city.

Haliburton IS the best company for the job. There is no denying that. They are one of a very few companies that specialize in this kind of work.

If you ask me- people complaining about this just want something to say "See, I told you so!" If no one else can do the job in the time we need it done, are we just supposed to let Iraq suffer, and not rebuild, just be cause Cheney used to work with them? Ridiculous.





Still on the Shelf #4
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1267 days
Last activity: 1064 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    Of course, holding the rich and powerful to different standards than the rest of us seems to be the main platform of the Connecticut Yankee wing of the Republican Party.

Don't kid yourself Moe; the Democrats do the same thing...




Pages: 1Thread ahead: just in
Next thread: The Syrian resolution
Previous thread: They've stopped dancing in the streets
(2104 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
1. The bill wouldn't outlaw shotguns, so perhaps you're overstating the case 2. Doubtful the voters would pass it, even in San Francisco 3. Existing state law probably trumps any local plans they might make in this area 4.
The W - Current Events & Politics - new subject almostRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.248 seconds.