Monsieur the "poor lay"

Saddam = a WMD
btw, FTW

You summed it up well Jrv.

>>>Yes there were connections between Iraq and Al-Quada.

Care to explain?

"They also supported other terrorist groups (Palestians terror groups)"

What do Palestinian "terror" groups have with the attacks on NY or USA? Why exactly are Palestians terrorists?

"They found the equipment used to make WMD but not WMD itself"

When? Where? Still under the impression of Powells UN BS?

"No one doubts Saddam would have hestitated for a second to turn this over to a terror group"

This makes a lot of sense doesn't it.
Sadam was "connected" with terrorists, Sadam had the equipment for making WMD yet the terrorists used ordinary US standard planes. Go figure.

"The UN is full of shit. Everything that was pointed out was true. Don't use Micheal Moore as a reference."

The same UN Bush is begging now? Didn't somebody loose becouse of that UN stunt?

" If this means a brutal dictator gets his ass kicked in the process, I'm sure I'll get over it"

And if that means pissing off millions and inspires somebody to do something really nasty.....well shucks huh?

"You had better believe it does. ANY fission reactor that has ever gone critical is a WMD."

That a bit silly isn't. Almost every country in thw world has a reactor (even Iran) but that doesn't mean it has "WMD" (as most people understand WMD. Blowing up nuclear reactors isn't really a offensive weapon

"Why not? 100 gallons of used primary coolant shipped DHL"

Ok, Iraq was bombed, thousands killed, billions! spent to prevent a minor "accident". Makes sense I guess.
They might have had knives 2!

Sanctions could have stopped DHL but hey... why not killed thousands. Btw, do you think it could be delivered now?

-Why exactly are Palestians terrorists?

"With the definitions described one can now put a terrorist organization into a specific group. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is an analytical terrorist group, even though they can be part of each. The PLO was created in 1964 during a meeting known as the Palestinian Congress. This was an effort to give a voice to the many Palestinians that were located in refugee camps in Lebanon. The leader of the group is one of the most recognized terrorists in the world, Yasser Arafat. It did not take long for sub-divisions to break off of the PLO. Most of these groups felt they could better achieve Palestinian liberation. The most notable of these groups were the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command, and al-Fatah. The PLO changed its main theory to the destruction of the state of Israel in 1967. This caused massive terrorist acts against Israel, which resulted in hundreds of casualties on both sides. In 1974 the PLO changed into not just a terrorist group to a group which included political elements. Some members of the PLO did not like this idea and founded another sub-division called the Rejectionist Front. At this time Arafat took over all control of the PLO. Arafat provided support for highjacking a major cruise ship. With help from the PLF they took the passengers hostage. In cowardly act members shot to death a wheelchair-bound Jewish man named Leon Klinghoffer. This formed a new meaning to the world terrorist. After many years of terrorism, Arafat ceased all terrorist acts by the PLO on September 9, 1993."
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/1517.php

Arafat ceased his terrorist career in a transparent attempt to appear like a viable statesman to legitimize his presence on the world stage.

-This makes a lot of sense doesn't it.
Sadam was "connected" with terrorists, Sadam had the equipment for making WMD yet the terrorists used ordinary US standard planes. Go figure.

This makes no sense. Terrorists don't ONLY use planes. The ones on 9/11 did, maybe if you lost somebody on 9/11 you'd feel differently. Come talk to some of my neighbors about it.

-The same UN Bush is begging now? Didn't somebody loose becouse of that UN stunt?

Lose what? what stunt? The UN hardly has ANY crediability in this or any international circumstance. It's politics & Bush has gotta play the same shill game every country does there. The UN wasn't helping shit in Iraq cept scamming oil and money while Saddam & sons were terrorizing a nation. There's an example of why they should be classified as terrorists. The rapes, murders, torture & mass graves filled with people Saddam killed. By your shoddy logic nobody should've done anything about Hitler.

-And if that means pissing off millions and inspires somebody to do something really nasty.....well shucks huh?

Peaceniks will never realize that the terrorist shit has been going on for years and would still be a threat no matter if we went into Iraq or not. Holding hands, marching with banners and playing protestor won't stop a terrorist from killing you. What don't you get about that? The jihad isn't going to be turned off like an air conditioner if things cool down. Whether you have a flower or a gun they'll still view you as the Infidel to be killed. Wake up, don't let your hatred of Bush blind you to the truth.

Terrorist are out to kill... lets hope they go for all the piece loving hippies first.

Really though anti-American sentiment has been breeding there since World War 1 and anti-British since before then. This kind of hate can only be spawned by hundreds of years of hate passed down through generations. Why do you think they fight even with overwhelming odds. I think if we were more like Klingons we would be better off because we would learn to enjoy the hunt and the fight... god that was nerdy of me.

>>>How about Chernobyl?

That was a poorly built civilian nuclear powerplant. Nobody planned to use it as a WMD becouse:
- CCCR had plenty of real WMD
- use of stationary powerplants is rather limited.

Using radiactive waste (or something similar) can be done by using any powerplant and isn't limited to Iraq.
Terrorists "couldn't" buy some from ex-CCCR states?

"Someone in Moscow is going to really regret the Iranian reactor if any Chechnyans ever gets ahold of a used fuel rod."

So the solution is to bomb and destroy every possible supplier? :smirk Better start with Russia and former CCCR states
Let the bombing begin

>>head west into the EU, and deliver to Paris via a commercial truck. How you declare it depends on what you ship and the release mechanism depends on whether you have a conspirator at the receiving end.

So bombing Iraq was a bit stupid wasn't it?

>>>Arafat ceased all terrorist acts by the PLO on September 9, 1993."

I was interested your opinion not some propaganda BS. Let see if I understand this.

a) Palestinian kills 10 Jews while trying to liberete his country is a "terrorist".
b) American kills 10 Iraqis while trying to invade a foreign country is a "liberator".

Huh. Interesting.

>>> Terrorists don't ONLY use planes. The ones on 9/11 did, maybe if you lost somebody on 9/11 you'd feel differently. Come talk to some of my neighbors about it.

Don't tell me you actually believe these stories? Terrorists (as you describe them) are radical muslims (by your standards). Sadam wasn't even religious. Terrorists goals is a state Shari`ah. Sadam didn't want Shari`ah even in Iraq.
Osama never made deals with Sadam, Rumsfeld did. Interesting.

Btw, loosing relatives in XYZ doesn't make you an expert in foreign politics.

>>>Lose what? what stunt? The UN hardly has ANY crediability in this or any international circumstance.

This was the stunt:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html

Everything in that presentation turned out to be a LIE. Person you see on his left (he wasn't there by accident) kind off lost his job.

>>>It's politics & Bush has gotta play the same shill game every country does there.

And he wasn't able to play the same game before killing thousands of people? Ok, he is a bit slow.
But why sell his ideals now? Credibility = 0

>>>The rapes, murders, torture & mass graves filled with people Saddam killed.

Mass graves were filled with people America helped to kill. America's allies (Saudi's) kill and torture people every day (even foreigners) and everything is ok.
Good ol' Pakistan sponsored The Taliban regime and are now allies. Sick!

>>> threat no matter if we went into Iraq or not.

That's not what the terrorists say but you know best I guess. Count the attacks before and after Iraq.

>>>The jihad isn't going to be turned off like an air conditioner if things cool down. Whether you have a flower or a gun they'll still view you as the Infidel to be killed. wake up, don't let your hatred of Bush blind you to the truth.

1. you don't know what jihad means (visit your local library)
2. you have no idea what an infidel is (reffer to Qur'an)
3. u have no clue what the problem is

I think I'm clear on the meaning jihad & infidel. In case you're interested check out some of the links below, but you don't need to you know everything. Your pomposity betrays your ingorance to real problem. Methinks you're never going to listen to reason, just rabidly exhort your mindless conspiracy theory rehetoric blah, blah, blah... perfect name for you. There's no sense beating a dead horse. game over:


Definitions of Jihad on the Web:

literally, "striving" or "struggle," although it is often used in the theopolitical context of a "holy war." It must be either defensive or to right a wrongdoing. Its truer meaning is subjective and psychological, not objective and political; thus it is said that the "lesser jihad" is the external war with an agressor, while the "greater jihad" is the internal war with oneself, i.e., to be a better Muslim.
old.jccc.net/~thoare/gl%20h%20to%20p.htm


This term has never been translated by Muslims to mean holy war. Instead, it means to struggle or exert oneself to his or her utmost potential. In Islam, there are two levels of jihad. The greater jihad most often refers to the inner struggle against evil within oneself with the goal of self-improvement for the betterment of one's community and the world as a whole. The lesser jihad refers to the struggle on the battlefield in self-defense if Muslims have been attacked and their right to practice their faith has been aggressively taken away. " Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits. God does not love the transgressors" (Qur'an 2:190). This is an unequivocal statement that only self-defense makes war permissible for Muslims and the goals of war cannot be worldly gain.
www.omarfoundation.org/Culture/Educators/Glossary.htm


Arabic for "Holy war", that is, a war based on the clash of ideologies.
www.jajz-ed.org.il/hasbara/glossary.html


Defined as a "just war" in the holy Koran
www.websitesrcg.com/ambon/glossary.htm


Arabic for the struggle in the path of Allah. Its primary meaning is the inward discipline in pursuit of well-being and prosperity; only secondarily does it have the meaning of a struggle for or defense of Islam. Some Moslems consider the call to jihad to be a sixth pillar, but it does not officially have that status.
www-relg-studies.scu.edu/facstaff/murphy/courses/sctr011/glossary.htm


Striving in the cause of Allah.
www.wponline.org/vil/Books/Q_Priorities/GLOSSARY.htm


M struggle, "holy war", spreading of the message of Islam
www.jsboard.co.uk/etad/benchbook/mf_14d.htm


Centuries-old Arabic term translated literally as "holy war" or "struggle." In recent years, Muslim fighters, especially in the Arab-Israeli conflict, have used the term almost solely to mean "holy war," often waged through terrorist attacks on civilians.
www.projectinterchange.org/glossary.htm


Literally "holy war," the duty of a Muslim to defend and promote the faith. This term applies to more than simple martial matters.
www.sacredmonths.org/glossary.htm


Arabic term meaning holy war. It is regarded by Muslims as a meritorious work that ensures entry into Paradise. The word is derived from jahada which means to strive for something.
ismaili.net/~heritage/mirrors/74_glossary/glossary.htm


the obligation which is incumbent on Muslims to engage in "struggle" or "exertion" in behalf of Islam, to bring the entire world into the "Household of Islam."
www.northave.org/MGManual/Glossary/Glossary.htm


To strive, struggle and exert effort, in Arabic. In the Quran, jihad is connected with the imperative to command good and forbid evil, especially with reference to the struggle of believers against persecution and idolatry.
www.wral.com/News/1012770/


Literally, striving (for the sake of Allah); fighting (so-called Holy War) for the sake of establishing truth and justice in an unbalanced situation. From the verb jahada: to endeavor, strive, do one's utmost, expend energy. Mujahid is a warrior, fighter.
www.nuradeen.com/Reflections/ElementsOfIslamGlossary.htm


Struggle or fight or effort
www.qadiri-rifai.org/html/pathofsufism/glossary.htm


'Struggle'; the ideal of spreading Islamic belief and practice. 'Struggle'; the ideal of spreading Islamic belief and practice.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0767420438/student_view0/chapter10/glossary.html


Muslim holy war.
www.upway.com/watchmenwatching/glossary.html


The struggle to establish the law of God on earth, often interpreted to mean holy war.
atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/islam/countries/bl_QatarGlossary.htm


Muslim religious war
www.houseofprovidence.com/YorubaGlossary.htm


holy war (can only be justified if Islam is under threat)
jcarling.digitalbrain.com/dbmaterial/web/learning%20objects/ls/Year%207%20History%20Islamic%20StatesWhatisIslam/glossary/


Holy war, participation and resultant death in which assures a faithful Muslim the reward of Paradise.
www.suffernhs.com/themes/glossaryJK.htm


To strive. This can be any kind of striving in the way of Allah.
www.lancashiremosques.com/discovery_glossary.asp


a holy war waged by Muslims against infidels
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


a holy struggle or striving by a Muslim for a moral or spiritual or political goal
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

Nice set of links smutmutant.

What does any of this have to do with Monsieur being a "poor lay"?

>>>I think I'm clear on the meaning jihad & infidel.

Yet you have to copy frome the Webb to explain them but nevermind. If you bother to actually read the explanation you could find out they actually mean.

Going to school IS JIHAD, getting a promotion is JIHAD. Everything that improves you is JIHAD.

There is no plan or will to kill the "infidels" in the Qur'an. Please reffer to Qur'an (Al-Bekare for example) prior to making things up.

Jihad
Other Commonly Used Spellings: JIHAAD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is an Arabic word the root of which is Jahada, which means to strive for a better way of life. The nouns are Juhd, Mujahid, Jihad, and Ijtihad. The other meanings are: endeavor, strain, exertion, effort, diligence, fighting to defend one's life, land, and religion.

Jihad should not be confused with Holy War; the latter does not exist in Islam nor will Islam allow its followers to be involved in a Holy War. The latter refers to the Holy War of the Crusaders.

Jihad is not a war to force the faith on others, as many people think of it. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an that says:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

Jihad is not a defensive war only, but a war against any unjust regime. If such a regime exists, a war is to be waged against the leaders, but not against the people of that country. People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe in Allah.

Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer in Islam, and is to be punished by the Islamic state. during wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions.

Ohh and don't stand up for the "other side" just to prove your point. Americans and the Fighters are equally as responsible for all the deaths caused. If one side just put down there guns there would not be a end to oppression or death. Even if they did make peace other groups would rise and fight because opinions and revolutions are like shit, it smells and it's everywhere.

---

Semantics mean nothing, the U.S. is a fledgling empire that must conquer in order to survive. This game has been played by the Romans, British Empire and Polynesians to name a few. Don't worry there are to many humans on this earth and this is just a natural predatory balance. Its necessary, plus everyone is going to die, so who cares if you die at 80 in your sleep or at 20 fighting. I would choose the latter. If the U.S. becomes a strong empire with longevity they will write the history and all this will become the annals of a rewritten patriotic victory for the cause of good. I have to laugh at all the people that scream morality into the wind only to have there voice crushed by the torrent of the tactical empire.

---

I only wish this were true Chicken, we fight in most wars and then have absolutely nothing to show for it, we are actually one of the few countries in this last century not to start a war to land grab or steal resources. I wish we would take a small portion of Iraq and "lease" it from them for a handful of beads ( 100 year lease) and take the profits from their oil to pay for this war. But it will never happen, the Us citizens tax money as well as that from our allies to a lesser degree will finance this war.