The Shrine

<div style='font: italic bold 14pt ; text-align: center; '>Ya'll ready for Operation: Freedom Strike? Is it just me or is that just really dumb</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Operation Terror Strike would be more fitting. OIr perhaps operation death strike since a lot of human beings are going to be murdered by the invading troops.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>Is that the official codename? Yuck... even "Gulf War II" would have been better than that</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>is that the only thing you can think about? When half the military and 90% of the population of Iraq surrender to our troops what then?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Of course, it's the most important thing, there is nothing more important than human life. Where is this 90% of the population surrendering come from? I haven't heard anything of that.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>dont be so short sighted, saving lives now by not going to war would end up leading to more deaths with Saddam in power and probably another local invasion of a Middle Eastern country by Iraq.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>Fucking retarded. This is exactly what i was talking about with the goddamn freedom fries. I hate it when my government patronizes me, treating me like a braindead moron that will support the war due to its so patriotic name.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I very highly doubt it. The US government is responsible for WAY more deaths in Iraq than Saddam has been. Also, what exactly is Saddam going to invade with and why?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>you always pull out the 'The US government is responsible for WAY more deaths in Iraq than Saddam has been' and its complete bullshit, I dont know what you read but Saddam is not humane to his citizens.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>I love these assumptions and exaggerations you make about how bloodthirsty the US is. You make it sound like we send soldiers to the DMZ to learn how to kill civilians</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>sadly stuff like this worked in past wars and it'll take a while for them to figure out the population isn't as unintelligent as they used to be</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>...but what about how we supported Saddam's rise to power, sold him WoMD (including anthrax and serin), used him to fight a proxy war against Iran for years (all the while secretly supplying both sides with illegal weapons to prolong the war), allowed him to used gas to kill thousands of innocent civilians and Iranian soldiers (even encouraged the later), looked the other way while he murdered hundreds of thousands of his own civilians with his gestapo... He used to be our buddy! However, according to Bush we've ALWAYS hated Iraq, Saddam's ALWAYS been evil, we've ALWAYS condemned his actions... and we don't know WHERE he got all these weapons from. Get real, it's only now that he's lost his usefulness that we want him dead. Bush Sr. was the one who installed him into power as head of the CIA when the former Iraqi dictator was talking the crazy talk (nationalizing the oil industry) but you never hear ANYTHING about that now do you?

Beware, John Ashcroft is watching you!</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>...but what about how we supported Saddam's rise to power, sold him WoMD (including anthrax and serin), used him to fight a proxy war against Iran for years (all the while secretly supplying both sides with illegal weapons to prolong the war), allowed him to use gas to kill thousands of innocent civilians and Iranian soldiers (even encouraged the later), looked the other way while he murdered hundreds of thousands of his own civilians with his gestapo... He used to be our buddy! However, according to Bush we've ALWAYS hated Iraq, Saddam's ALWAYS been evil, we've ALWAYS condemned his actions... and we don't know WHERE he got all these weapons from. Get real, it's only now that he's lost his usefulness that we want him dead. Bush Sr. was the one who installed him into power while he was head of the CIA. The former Iraqi leader had started talking crazy talk about nationalizing the oil industry to support the nations economy and he had to go. You never hear ANYTHING about that now do you?

Beware, John Ashcroft is watching you!</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I think Operation Re-elect Bush has a nicer ring to it, they shoulda kept that one</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light"; text-align: left; '>Unpredictable? He ASKED us if he could invade Kuwait. We said YES.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light"; text-align: left; '>Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999? A: 20 million</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>Where do you get this stuff? We said "Yes" then decided to help Kuwait? How does that make any sense at all.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>This person was summarily fired. I can't give a source. Don't have one. But I imagine some looking on Google could find either a source or a refutation of this.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>You'd think he would learn...</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>April Glaspie, the US ambassador to Iraq told Saddam it was fine to invade Kuwait. I thought that was a fairly commonly known fact.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>No these are facts, I know far more about the Iraqi situation than you ever will. Besides, you're a perfect example of someone who doesn't care about human life. I recall your whole argument before was that the deaths are a trivial matter, or something along those lines.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>The attacks on the Kurds twenty years ago by Iraq and Turkey were both seen as justified by the US government, in fact, the weapons Iraq used were given to them by the US government.

The attacks on the Shi-ite fundamentalist groups and Iran were actually supported by the US government, spending tax dollars to fund war efforts.

The invasion of Kuwait was OK'd by April Glaspie, the Ambassador to Iraq from the US.

To see a more clear picture of what has happened in Iraq, picture this, Iraq is slightly smaller in population than the city of New York. The 2-3K deaths on September 11th 2001 seamed to effect the people of that place immensly. Around 200,000 Iraqi's have been killed by US led military strikes, and another 2M+ civilians have died due to strictly enforced sanctions on Iraq.

Doesn't it strike you as very odd that they picked such a convenient time to begin the war? When Iraq was busy signing trade deals with Russia and China for the benefit of their shattered economy? As I have before stated: Prior to the Gulf war Iraq had the highest living standards of all of the Islamic Middle Eastern Nations, they were also the most secular nation in the region. The sanctions cut off supplies for pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers which caused massive crop failures; lack of doctors supplies severely limited what doctors could do, and people who became sick would die from simple ailments. None of these problems existed before the Gulf War and the sanctions.

Saddam has no weapons that break the UN resolutions, he has disarmed, yet the US government has still ordered an attack? That is a fairly evil and deceitful move if you ask me.

Also, why is an invasion necessary? Especially one that uses so many bombs and missles.. Now, if Saddam had attacked another nation then I would of course see why, but he has not done that nore given any indication that he even wishes to do that let alone the actual means to do that. Weapons of mass destruction? They can be defined as weapons capable of destroying entire cities, the reason Bush originally said that Iraq should be attacked, because Saddam had those weapons and was going to use them on the US or US allies; of course his claims proved to be completely false. In fact, as it turns out, all Bush really wants is for Saddam to stop selling oil to his families business rivals. Does that sound like a justifyable reason to invade a country and blow a city to bits?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt "Cooper Black"; text-align: left; '>Yeah, we all do book reports on April Glaspie in 2nd grade here in the US, its a household name no matter where you go, dumbass.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Hopefully that will happen. I mean, there's no real reason for them to oppose us other than the fact that we're "infadels" or whatever Muslim BS they think.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light"; text-align: left; '>Only extremist Muslims think that.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Now, no need to start name calling to cover your own shortcomings. I posted about this numerous times and its been in the news enough, your ignorance isn't my fault.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light"; text-align: left; '>While I partly agree with you, your snobby attitude is only going to piss people off.</div>