I would turn dick cheney over to the iraqis for trial on crimes against humanity. That would make interesting TV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifuge
Printable View
I would turn dick cheney over to the iraqis for trial on crimes against humanity. That would make interesting TV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifuge
How bout I bring the popcorn and we can watch it together :DQuote:
Originally Posted by andruejaysin
Ozark...you are firmly set on believing whatever your government tells you so I am really wasting my time debating you. If you believe the people in the Iran Contra scandal were innocent and just doing their patriotic duty then I am afraid the kool-aid has already saturated your brain. You should be able to find something saying Bush Sr. was innocent in the Iran contra scandal if it were true. It isn't. You really should not call someone a liar when you can't provide evidence to the contrary. Bush was the vice president for gods sake wake up.
You honestly think that they did not profit from the arms deal? Who do you think profits when weapons are sold? Who owns stock in those companies?
And NO selling weapons is not part of his DNA that's pretty dumb...its part of the Bush bank account why is that so hard to believe? I will try once again to explain it. Bush the grandfather sold weapons and profited. He was charged with treason, Bush Sr. was involved on a arms sale scandal....but we are suppose to believe he is innocent?
And under the present day Monkey Bush more weapons have been sold than EVER before in history and most of them have gone to the middle east! Just what they need more weapons to use on our soldiers.
And as for releasing the papers...I am fully aware of the FOIA I have filed 2 of them. Bush is not holding the papers until a later date. In case you missed it he passed a law that makes those papers tied to his daddy the property of the family so they will never be released to the public. PERIOD. Never. Now isn't that convenient? Those are historic documents. They are part of America's history. We have the right to see them but under this new law the papers will be the property of the Bush twins!
I suppose you believe Dick Cheney doesn't profit from Halliburton either...give me a break.
Why don't YOU do some research
The Arms Transfers Database
Database of all transfers of major conventional weapons since 1950
Financial value of the arms trade
Government and industry data on the financial value of arms exports
http://www.sipri.org/contents/armstrad/at_data.html
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolit...tradeiscorrupt
# The United States has agreed to sell to the United Arab Emirates advanced 80 F16s. The deal is estimated to be around 15 billion dollars. However, in return, the US will be able to build military bases there with improved access to the only deep-water port capable of housing carriers in the Persian Gulf. In this particular example, there are also concerns about the resulting stability in the region and the possible arms race it could start with the neighbors.
# Many weapons are also sold to Turkey. These have been used against the Kurds, in what some have described as the worst human rights violations and ethnic cleansing since the second World War. The US turns a blind eye to these atrocities because they are able to set up bases in such a key geopolitical location, giving access to places in the Middle East, and because Turkey could be one of the main receivers of oil headed to Western countries, from the Caspian sea.
# There are also many arms trade-related interests in the Middle East. By having pro-US monarchies and other regimes (not necessarily democracies) at the helm and promoting policies that often ignore democracy and human rights, arms deals are often lucrative and help continue US foreign policy objectives.
# Furthermore, the Middle East is the most militarized region in the world procuring more arms than anywhere else.
IT IS WRONG TO SELL THESE WEAPONS. YOU CAN"T BITCH ABOUT MASS GRAVES AND PEOPLE BEING SLAUGHTERED WITHOUT LOOKING AT WHO PROVIDED THE WEAPONS IN ORDER FOR THE KILLINGS TO TAKE PLACE!
i know , and have known for 50 years how dangerous capitalism is to the earth and the living things that inhabit it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifuge
dai*ma
i aint no capitalist
i aint no communist
i aint no socialist
I am a human being that cares about my planet and all that call it, home.
dai*ma
the fact of the matter is, we are committed to iraq now, and it would be worse to pull out sooner than later, leaving the country in an unstable state. my father has spent over two years total in iraq and i would trust his valid opinion of the situation over there better than the news that i see on tv, partially because it is very biased against the conflict. he has stated more than once that a huge majority of iraqi citizens prefer having the united states over there rather than not. this is not to say we should establish a permanent presence in iraq, but that it is in reality a small minority of the population that is against our occupation. saddam hussein a.k.a. the "butcher of baghdad" was a terrible dictator who needed to be removed from his tyrranical and self-serving rule (this is evidenced simply by the golden plated toilet seats in his baghdad palace that my dad saw). whether there were wmds or not, the u.n. was doing nothing to stop his massacring of kurds and shiites. if president bush had committed genocide on an ethnic or religious group of our country, i have no doubt about the uproar that would follow. forget meaningless u.n. sanctions, he would have immediately been taken from power and executed for crimes against humanity.
my basic point in this is, that you should forget why we went there right now. focus on what is before us and what needs to be done. hindsight 20/20.
sorry to say this, but the chief source of illegal arms comes from the former soviet union. the most recognized AND used small arm is the ak-47. the collapse of the ussr led to widespread proliferation of nuclear weapons, not from sales by the united states.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCat
I just hate it when people make comments and do not back up what they say!!! sorry but YOU ARE WRONG!Quote:
Originally Posted by wrasler
Post your evidence I want to see it. :mad: :mad:
According to the report, "Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations 1994-2001," released on August 8th, the United States has had the largest share of both new contracts and deliveries to the world for at least 8 years in a row. In calendar year 2001, U.S. arms manufacturers made new agreements worth $12.1 billion and delivered $9.7 billion worth of arms, capturing 45% of both markets.
The United States' closest competitor, Russia, came in a distant second with $5.8 billion in new contracts and $3.6 billion in arms deliveries. But Russia is not a real rival for U.S. arms makers. Its main clients are China and Iran, off limits to U.S. firms, and former Soviet bloc states in Asia and Africa that cannot afford expensive U.S. weapons systems. India, on the other hand, may be one place where Russian and American firms go to battle over a large market. In September 2001, the U.S. government dropped a ban on arms sales to both India and Pakistan, permitting transfers even during the height of the crisis between these nuclear-armed states. India is a longtime major Russian client. When making a case to loosen export controls, U.S. weapons makers usually cite intense competition from Western European firms. But this claim is also belied by the CRS figures. New contracts signed by the top four European exporters combined (France, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy) only totaled $4.5 billion, and deliveries were only worth $5.1 billion.
http://www.fas.org/asmp/library/arti...dreams_02.html
And if you want to talk NUCLEAR
The Ford administration -- in which Cheney succeeded Rumsfeld as chief of staff and Wolfowitz was responsible for nonproliferation issues at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency -- continued intense efforts to supply Iran with U.S. nuclear technology until President Jimmy Carter succeeded Ford in 1977.
That history is absent from major Bush administration speeches, public statements and news conferences on Iran.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Mar26.html
In November 1987, as the Reagan administration was still scrambling to contain the Iran-Contra scandal, then-deputy CIA director Robert M. Gates denied that the spy agency had soft-pedaled intelligence about Iranā??s support for terrorism to clear the way for secret U.S. arms shipments to the Islamic regime.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/112306.html
Dude the Soviet Union fell in 1991, try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifuge
Ummm are you backing me up or wrasler...its confusing because you quoted me but said dude you're wrong....
But if ya got my back then *big kiss to ya* :D