h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

btw, anyone want to talk about the international legal status of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay? Awfully convenient that they can never be extradited or tried under international law since they fall under Cuban law that simultaneously has no jurisdiction.

haven't been here in a while. (hi, zoomer. Guantanamo sucks.) just thought I'd bring something in out of the blue:

Is the writing on the wall for the Persians?

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/030525/w052540.html

alec, is that the best you can do? The same tired old allegations against the French, the same naive belief in the rightness of all the Americans assert...
If the UN inspectors couldn't find the WMD, maybe that's cos *they're not there to find*!

How about the Ku Klux Clan? I'm not sure if that's a fair comparison anymore since Al'Quaida's support has grown so much in recent years, but certainly before the attacks on the World Trade Centre and escalation of conflict between Israel and Palestein they would be pretty comparable.

*alec, is that the best you can do? The same tired old allegations against the French, the same naive belief in the rightness of all the Americans assert...
If the UN inspectors couldn't find the WMD, maybe that's cos *they're not there to find*!*

Della were you not one of the ones saying that the UN WMD Inspecters be giving 'all' the time they need. Why now that it is the US looking for these weapons is it that you are stateing "there not there to find" after only a few weeks of srerious searching?

*Is the writing on the wall for the Persians?*

In big bold letters.

I doubt it. How will they start there when they can't even finish what they started?

Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

"But transforming Iraq will not be easy, quick or cheap. Clearly, the administration's planning for the post-conflict phase in Iraq was inadequate. I am concerned that the Bush administration and Congress have not yet faced up to the true size of the task that lies ahead, or prepared the American people for it. The administration should state clearly that we are engaged in "nation-building." We are constructing the future in Iraq. It's a complicated and uncertain business, and it's not made any easier when some in the Pentagon talk about quick exit strategies or say dismissively that they don't do nation-building. The days when Americans could win battles and then come home quickly for a parade are over."

Senator Lugar will be holding a series of hearings at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about post-Saddam Iraq, starting today. He believes the total U.S. bill for rebuilding Iraq may be $100 billion and take at least five years, but he doesn't see that committment from the Bush regime. As the pro-war New Republic points out, the Bush regime is preparing to drastically reduce U.S. committments in Iraq at the very moment when we are needed the most.

Should have been quotes after that last comma.

>>And they were even more upset when the citizens welcomed them with celebrations and hugs, rather than AK-47's and Molotov cocktails.<<
It is possible to say - give it time?
As the Occupation continues, the mood of the Iraqis will darken, mark my words...

Words are marked, Della:

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/26/ambush030526

"Why now that it is the US looking for these weapons is it that you are stateing "there not there to find" after only a few weeks of srerious searching?"

Come on starbirth, it was many nights ago that a CIA representative was on CBS saying that there was nothing to find and that it was embarrasing.

--------------

"*Is the writing on the wall for the Persians?*

In big bold letters."

Look what taking on two of the worlds weakest countries has done to the US economy. The only option left for the US is a return to dirty wars.

-------------

">>And they were even more upset when the citizens welcomed them with celebrations and hugs, rather than AK-47's and Molotov cocktails.<<
It is possible to say - give it time?
As the Occupation continues, the mood of the Iraqis will darken, mark my words.."

don't bother. any credability was lost with "pro sadam party"

I have a feeling the short nature of the war and the promise of a new market and supply of raw materials could have a dramatic positive impact on the US economy.

I guess it really depends on how many and for how long troops have to be stationed there to maintain stability. Deployed troops are a pretty large drain on resources, and U.S. military spending is already at an astonishing level.

While I'm at it, I just read that article linked to about Iran, where the US government is said to be accusing Iran of harboring Al'Quaida members.

"There's no question but that there have been and are today senior al-Qaida leaders in Iran, and they are busy," Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Well, if they are then they're busy preparing an attack on Iran. When Iran claim to have been Al'Quaida's enemies before the US, they aren't kidding. Bin Laden and company basically want total extermination of the type of Muslims that are in power in Iran. The idea that Iran would be supporting them is totally ludicrous.

As was the link between Saddam and terrorism.

*The only option left for the US is a return to dirty wars.*
When did they ever get out of that business after Korea?

Pentagon focus
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0526/dailyUpdate.html

Pentagon focus
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0526/dailyUpdate.html

Fantastic link! I love the NY Times quote about OJ and Hitchcock! Nice to see some balanced reporting again.

"Well, if they are then they're busy preparing an attack on Iran. When Iran claim to have been Al'Quaida's enemies before the US, they aren't kidding. Bin Laden and company basically want total extermination of the type of Muslims that are in power in Iran. The idea that Iran would be supporting them is totally ludicrous."

That's interesting. I know Iran has a nominally religious government (and almost certainly harbours terrorists) but the Iranian electorate have shown a tendency away from hardline fundamentalism. By "the type of Muslims" did you mean the Presidency or the Mullahs, the revolutionaries? And what did bin Laden/al-Quaida say that makes you think they are against Iran? Did they name Iran specifically, or has he attacked the more "liberal" tendencies shown in Iran recently?

"alec, is that the best you can do? The same tired old allegations against the French, the same naive belief in the rightness of all the Americans assert..."

Della, is that the best you can do? The same tired old allegations against the Americans, the same naive belief in the rightness of all the anti-war movement assert...

Opposite sides? Same coin?

* I know Iran has a nominally religious government (and almost certainly harbours terrorists) but the Iranian electorate have shown a tendency away from hardline fundamentalism.*

Interesting. The mullahs still are in control however, despite the work of the more secular elected officials. Recently figures indicated that the majority of the population is under 30 and is working hard to undermine the mullahs' grip. As to terrorism their economy prevents any financial assistance so if assistance is being given it is probably on a personal level. The mullahs would only be interested (nominally) in religious based jihads and the moderates are trying for westernisation, so that doesn't leave much wriggle room for that theory.