Jeff, Somehow I knew that, were you to read this topic, you'd see where I was coming from ... thanks Rockit ------------------
I don't remember this at all. Unless you're talking about the Egypt Air flight that crashed (I believe in 1999). Many who listened to the cockpit recording assumed that the pilot purposely crashed the plane in a suicide plot based on what the pilot said before the plane went down. Egypt Air officials (and some others) noted that what the man said was a prayer and was not evidence of suicide by the pilot. (Of course, there was other stuff, too, on the tape. An apparent struggle between pilots. The fact that the back-up pilot who crashed the plane took over earlier than he was supposed to, etc. so it wasn't just the prayer they were basing the suicide theory on, but that was a big part of it, according to the reports). If that's what you were remembering, it wasn't the fact that they were speaking Arabic that raised suspicions (it was an Egyptian plane with Eqyptian pilots. Speaking in Arabic would be normal except for communications with the tower), it was what was said on the tape, etc. But you may be talking about an incident that I just didn't see or hear about. If so, then nevermind. ------------------ Houston Sports Board The Anti-Bud Adams Page [This message has been edited by mrpaige (edited February 19, 2001).]
It could very well be just the case that my sarcasm detector is at fault here, but how seriously did you mean the previous statement? Rockit, why was that immediate suspicion ignorant? At that time several Middle Eastern terrorist group had bombed busses, mosques, planes, etc. When was the last time (prior to 1995) when an American terrorist targeted America? Even threatened to target America? It would certainly by ignorant to continue to believe Middle Easterners were behind the Oklahoma City bombings after dissenting evidence appeared but the initial assumption was not. When a crime of that magnitude is committed, investigation should commence immediately. At that time you begin looking into all possible leads, the most probable being the first investigated. So how was it ignorant to assume that Middle Eastern terrorists were behind OK City? dylan ------------------
Oh boy oh boy. So many fun things to say. Surfguy- From a military standpoint, it doesnt matter who turns against us. In both a conventional and nuclear war, the U.S. can defend it self against the entire combined world twice over. However, it is true that from a economic standpoint, it would be extremely disadvantageous to have the whole world against us. Again, if Saddam calls for a Jihad, hes calling for his suicide. 48 hours after he declares a war, B-2 stealth bombers from Germany level Iraq. America will not invade Iraq. The cost would be extrodinary and the lives lost would be costly to Bush in the political scheme of things. Smokey- thats the best plan. Commandos take out Saddam. But what then... dc sports- the U.S. Navy actually has 4 decommisioned Iowa class battleships in mothballs. They can be refitted rather quickly. Its the U.S.S. Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, and... damn. cant remember. even though missle cruisers are more modern, the battleships are much better as a symbol of naval supremacy. ive been on one of those new guided missle cruisers, and they are freakin awesome. but not nearly as awe-inspiring as one of those old dreadnaughts. rockets 2k- the other nations of the world, excepting britain and israel, would be happy if the iraqis conducted a strike on those stupid American's soil. the world is jealous of America's power. simple as that. rockit- completly, 100% right. we fought iraq because they threatened our supply of oil from kuwait. and regarding the Panama incident, your right again. that was teddy roosevelts policy of "gunboat diplomacy". nothing wrong with using force to get what you want. survival of the strongest. also, about the assumptions that every bombing is a result of middle easterners, its because its happened that way before. but your right, that doesnt make it correct. Jeff- Our interests in Israel also have something to do with the enormous political power American Jews posess. The British Empire was doomed to fail. The geography of England forced Britain to develop a formidable Navy. when air power became more important than naval power, their empire crumbled. The geography of the U.S., is ideal. Plenty of land, protected by large oceans on either side. not the same situation. ------------------ The next time I have meat and mashed potatoes, I think I'll put a very large blob of potatoes on my plate with just a little piece of meat. And if someone asks me why i didn't get more meat, ill just say, "Oh, you mean this?" and pull out a big piece of meat from inside the blob of potatoes, where ive hidden it. Good magic trick, huh?
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have been investigated. There is no reason for that. But for somebody in such a high profile position to pretty much put the blame on one group before any substantial information was gathered is not right. If we were talking about two hostile enemies ... blame the other side right away. Like Israel-Palestine, Russia-Checnya, India-Pakistan. (Side note: Things are so bad between India and Pakistan, that when a cow dies in India/Pak, its pretty much blamed on the other country :-D ) I am not claiming that Arabs are these innocent, helpless angels, but at least give them the benefit of the doubt. Most of us aren't out to destroy the US, and the handful that are, are such a minute percentage of the population, its ridiculous to generalize to that extent. I believe that there are more internal threats to the country than any outside threat. Just wondering ... has anyone seen Wag The Dog ... ... It is one of my favorite movies of all time. It makes you think. As Jeff was stating, the powerful do what they like. Britain is the perfect example ... they looted, destroyed and created the most remarkable empire. Ditto for the Mongolians, Romans, Japanese to a certain extent. Same holds for the Muslim empire of the 1000s and the 1100s. I guess my main point all along was to say that you should get your facts in before handing out such a sweeping verdict. I used to be of the mind that killing Hussein would be the ideal thing. It would be the stupidest thing the US could do ... speaking strictly from the US perspective. The US isn't ready for that kind of backlash. Besides, if they wanted to kill Saddam back in 1990 ... it was no big deal for all the intelligence that the US army possesses ... don't tell me that a country with such advanced systems can't pinpoint one individual and blow him up. The truth is they need him there to keep the threat alive. Wow ... I don't think I've posted this much in my entire 4-5 years on the BBS. ------------------
Nomar ... had to say this ... what goes up, must come down ala the British empire. It has nothing to do with how well the country can protect itself, others just eventually learn how to overcome adversity. As far as other countries being jealous of America ... that might be true, but that didn't stop them from allying themselves with the US earlier? Russia, France and many other nations, now voicing their displeasure were once, not too long ago, strongly allied with the US; still are, but not on every occasion. I'd state what I really think is going on, but I don't think I'll be able to take the heat ------------------
Nomar, Did you look at a map and see how far the nearest large body of water (ocean/sea/gulf) was from the area that was bombed/attacked? Laser guided weapons are more accurate than the turrets on a battleship. Even if the Command & Control areas were just five miles from the Persian Gulf, the battleships would require a tremendous aircap to support and protect them. Mango ------------------ Spring Cleaning!!!
Rockit It's called RACIAL PROFILING The US does it to their own Citizens why do you think it would be different for foreign citizens [Wasn't an Arab Connection looked into at the Atlanta games?] I worry more about the Militias and White Supremist than Arabs. My problem is that we need to 1. Solve this issue with Iraq Rockit What does Suddam want? Why does he want it? What will he do if he got it? What is your feeling on the other Arab Nations perspective of Suddam. We need to search for a resolution The US disstabilize countries and reasons all the time. . .nothing new. . .I think it is wrong. . . I'm for peace. Rocket River Sometimes you have to break a few eggs . . . ------------------
They hate us because we meddle in their affairs overtly and covertly. They hate us because we aid their enemy, Israel. Don't be so blind as to not at least realize that much.
Dang DOD! Don't delete that beautiful post! It was heart felt! If you regret deleting it, I have it on my clipboard... just let me know when you need it back.
A few people here have some misconceptions / don't understand what's going on. I saw this thread and felt a grinding need to explain why Iraq is about to come under a new storm... Look at what we're sending and where we're sending it. At least 4 CVBGs (carrier battle groups, which each also have a ARG - Amphibious Ready Group) are moving into theater. 1 in the Med, 1 in the Persian Gulf, 2 in the Indian Ocean. But wait, the ones that were to go to the Med and Gulf were supposed to relieve other carrier groups on rotation. The carriers that were to be rotated are now staying. That makes 6 CVBGs + 6 ARGs. Only two of those can hit Afghanistan (IO), while 4 can hit Iraq (Med & PG)... I'll bet my left nut that SOGs (Special Operations Groups - "Green Berets") are already in Afghanistan. The 75th Rangers is apparently also in theater, and is ready to move against any targets inside Afghanistan that need a "special touch"... Two CVBGs / ARGs will be able to support them amply. In Afghanistan, we'll hit small with SOGs, and coordinate with the Northern Alliance. We've already linked up with them. Every time you see a report on TV about the Northern Alliance taking a town, you can bet that there were US Army troops involved. But in this particular war (in Afghani lands) our involvement won't be talked about unless it's noticed. I.e., there will be some bombimg, but most of it you won't ever hear about. Iraq - where we seem to be sending most of our forces - is another story. I'd expect a 2-3 division assault, backed by airpower there, with the goal of destroying the Ba'ath Party. Of course, they won't say that's the goal to the public, but... We're mobilizing the 82nd and the 101st divisions. These units would be massive overkill in Afghanistan, and totally unnecessary. They could defeat the Iraqi Republican Guard very easily in urban combat in Baghdad, however... Also, we have a full armored brigade prepositioned in Kuwait, and another on MPS at Diego, that is currently moving towards the Gulf. That's a small division of Armor - more than enough to demolish the armore the Iraqis managed to save in the Gulf War. If you think I'm wrong, ask yourself why the 2nd ACR is getting ready. (The 2nd ACR - Armored Cavalry Regiment - fought the battle of 73 Easting, in which a single squadron/battalion destroyed an entire brigade of Iraqi armor in about 30 minutes - it's standard training now at US armor schools)) They are not going to fight Afghanis. And I guarantee that the MPS won't be used there. That Armor is for Iraq.
Oh, I forgot to tell the WHY of WHY we're going to hit Iraq: Saddam Hussein has ruled too long, and his sons (Udday and Qusay) are even worse. There is undeniable evidence that Saddam's Ba'ath Party was involved in the Sept 11 attacks in some form or another, probably financial. Iraq has anthrax, at least, and smallpox at worst. Saddam has sponsored several WMD attempts against us in the past decade, and he'll do it again. If you think the FBI and INS can protect you, then you probably already live in a bubble. Mohammed Atta had already applied for a crop-duster license, and tried to acquire training... If you guys think that the WTC was bad, wait until you see (or din't see, more to the point) anthrax spores raining down on a stadium packed with 50,000 people in it.
Rockit, good post. Glad to see you stopped the hate fest that was rolling at the start of this thread. I'm dying to know what you really think. What a unique perspective! A Kuwaiti, an exile, who doesn't have a simplistic outlook toward your old enemies. Jeff and Rimbaud good posts. You know, Rimbaud I'm starting to think my remarks about the value of this board compard to a graduate seminar might have been premature as the hateful name calling escalates. I acknowledge my role in this, but I don't think you can always be mild mannered in your rhetoric when racists and their like are yelling "kill, kill, kill." bomb them back to the stone age etc. It is tough sledding , but on the other hand it is good to do missionary work among the heathen.
Nomar wrote: ". nothing wrong with using force to get what you want. survival of the strongest. I'll leave it to the philosophers but couldn't this almost be an operational definition for complete lack of morality.
