Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Saudi Arabia Pushing For Iraq Coup  
User currently offlineBigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 3 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1047 times:

An Exclusive report from "TIME" this week shows the Saudi Arabian Government is trying to push for a coup in Iraq, in order to avoid war between US and Iraq.

Well-placed sources have told TIME that Saudi Arabia is vigorously pursuing a concrete plan to encourage Iraqi generals to overthrow Saddam and his clique. Western and Arab diplomats say the Saudi proposal requires a UN Security Council resolution declaring amnesty for the vast majority of Iraqi officials if they orchestrate a transition of power in Baghdad. Such an amnesty would extend to all but 100 to 120 of the most senior Baath Party officials, including Saddam, his sons, close relatives and others who have long formed part of the ruling circle. It would be offered immediately prior to the outbreak of war as a signal to Saddam's generals that the time had arrived to save their own skins with a U.N.-guaranteed amnesty. And, the Saudis believe, it could well bring the traditionally coup-proof dictator tumbling down....

For the rest of the article, visit http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,408784,00.html


23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1040 times:

I think Saudi Arabia would prefer a coup because it would likely result in a replacement dictatorship, however benign.

The Saudi's fear an American-inspired regime change because it would more likely lead to democracy and freedoms that would threaten Saudi Arabia internally.

IMHO.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1019 times:

I would fear the US as well in this case mainly because it is led by a "nutbar" these days.....

CNN reported today that the US is planning to reveal "evidence" that Iraq is not cooperating with UN weapons inspectors by the end of the month. Don't you think the UN would be able to supply us with that information since THEY are the ones actually doing the inspection??

CNN also stated that the US military buildup in the middle east is merely a "diplomatic" gesture aimed at forcing Iraq to cooperate with the UN inspectors.

What a load of crap. Bush the war monger is going to invade Iraq with or without UN (or anyone elsed) support whether it's warranted or not and I'm convinced that he's willing to invent evidence to sway public opinion in the US.

I think we all know why the US wants to be involved in forming a "democracy" in Iraq....so they can get cheap gas. Remember there is no guarantee that democracies follow popular opinon or the popular vote for that matter.





User currently offlineTwaneedsnohelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1000 times:

i guess this is good news, because irak can't get much worse. but the saudis are putrid and i would hate for them to spread their closed, inward, and intolerant brand of thought anywhere outside their corrupted rotten society.

tnnh


User currently offlineCwapilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1166 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 993 times:

WOW! A ruthless, warmonger dictator with an international conspiracy to control vital parts of the world's energy supply, manufacturing false evidence to provide to the international community, willing to level whole cities and starve the poor in his own country, is loose in the Middle East...

To the informed of the world (look at cnn today to see what Hans Blix is actually saying before blowing your mouth off!), this warmonger dictator is Saddam Hussein. However, to selected Eurotrash and various other misinformed left-wing nuts claiming to be in the know, it is George W. Bush? Nice try!

Yyz717 actually hit it right on the head...Airplay, I can only hope the air isn;t that thin in Canada....




Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!
User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 985 times:

CwaPilot,

And why exactly is the US interested in Iraq? Are you guys gonna save the world?

Nothing you said conflicts with my statements. I never called GWB "ruthless" and Hans Blix is the responsible authority when it comes to the UN arms inspection in Iraq....not GWB. Therefore why is Washington spouting about evidence it will have at the end of the month????

Thin air in Canada? It depends how close to the border you are. It gets pretty thick (and toxic) as you get close to the US in some parts....



User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 982 times:

Thin air in Canada? It depends how close to the border you are. It gets pretty thick (and toxic) as you get close to the US in some parts....

I guess that means that 90% of Canadians who live within 100 miles (130Km) endure this "toxicity" daily.  Laugh out loud

Back on topic...Bush hasn't convinced me about going to war with Iraq. I'd prefer a coup to war.


User currently offlineCwapilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1166 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 980 times:

Save the world? No. Keep a dangerous man in check, and hence the overall stability of a very fickle and important region? We (and the British) will continue to damn well try, while Canada and the rest of the world who benefit from American and British action bury their heads in the sand, only to surface long enough to bitch and moan. "Cheap gas"??? That can't be what you really think. I hope it isn't! There are so many other places and other ways to obtain decently priced fuel, it makes your pitiful attempt at an opinion on a complex international issue that much more laughable. But not as laughable as the rest of your comments...oops, I had better stop so I can go put on my oxygen mask....


Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!
User currently offlineTwaneedsnohelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 973 times:

interesting. why does 90% of canada's population crowd so close to america's borders?

they see something they like?  Big grin


User currently offlineToady From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 724 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 967 times:

For the same reason people crowd so close to the monkey cage at a zoo?

Only joking guys.....


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 962 times:

Regarding the coup.....it seems that a good chunk of the Middle East would prefer Saddam's timely dispatch to outright war.

Isn't it ironic the selective elimination of undesirable regimes is what the US used to be good at? (Mossadegh? Pre-Pinochet Chile?)

The United States could bullseye Saddam Hussein tommorow in a particularly sneaky and violent method, and a good chunk of the Arab world would bid 'good riddance'. Yet we don't.

The United States could negotiate "North Korean style" for 'regime change' in Iraq. Yet we don't. Saddam may have WMD. Kim Jong Il DOES have them. Yet with DPRK, we're taking astep back courtesy of the administration of George II. Hmmmmn. What invites invasion in Iraq that begs restraint in North Korea. Could it be oil?

I predict a coup in Bagdad. Simply because that's the last thing yje Bush Administration wants to see.


User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 956 times:

The United States could negotiate "North Korean style" for 'regime change' in Iraq. Yet we don't. Saddam may have WMD. Kim Jong Il DOES have them. Yet with DPRK, we're taking astep back courtesy of the administration of George II. Hmmmmn. What invites invasion in Iraq that begs restraint in North Korea. Could it be oil?

North Korea is a completely different ball of wax. First off, there’s much, much more to lose in the event of war on the Korean Peninsula. The North-East Asian region is highly prosperous and very important economically to the world and you can bet that would all go to hell with any conflict there. Seoul is only 40 miles south of North Korea. You know "Dear Leader" would level it in a war and that would be the end of South Korea (pretty much EVERYTHING is centered in Seoul). Not only that, he’d probably launch a few missiles over to Japan, which would make even more of a mess. War in this region has far bigger consequences than just oil. We’re talking about the potential destruction of the global economy. Not to mention China just wouldn’t allow it. They have too much at stake to lose in the even of another Korean war or if the two Koreas reunite.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 947 times:

I'm all for the Arab world arranging for this man's demise. It beats spending $50 trillion on a war to throw out Saddam and occupy Iraq for God knows how long. I think if the U.S. were smart, they'd back such a plan, if it is feesable. And, at the same time, there's nothing wrong with a force build up to maybe bring even more pressure on the man to possibly go into exile.

After all, is the goal of this possible war the destruction of Iraq, or the downfall of Saddam Hussein? If it's the latter, who the hell cares how he goes? If he goes without thousands and thousands of lives being loss, it's all the better, isn't it?


User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 944 times:

Hmm...

With all of the technology KYOTO available to them, I wonder why the US doesn't lessen KYOTO it's reliance on oil? Why not come up with a KYOTO way to use alternate KYOTO fuels and in turn reduce KYOTO the emmision of dangerous gasses released KYOTO when burning hydro-carbons. Perhaps KYOTOthe US can make a committment to the rest of the world by joing some global KYOTO accord that achieves this goal. I wonder if it has anything to do with the KYOTO strong oil lobby in KYOTO the US and it's KYOTO successful brainwashing of US citizens, convincing them that gas is cheap and KYOTO plentiful and safe, and that mass KYOTO transit is evil and dangerous....KYOTO KYOTO KYOTO

Note: The subliminal messages in this message have not been placed by KYOTO or any agency associated with KYOTO or anyone living in KYOTO which is in Japan. KYOTO



User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 934 times:

Airply, what in God's name was that nonsense about???

User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 936 times:

I guess you could also criticize Russia, the Philippines, Switzerland, the Ukraine, Israel, Indonesia, Egypt, Croatia and Australia for not signing on with Kyoto (funny how they're omitted in your critique). So, it's not just the US who's "evil" in this regard. And remember, Chretien only signed Kyoto because he had a "gut feeling" about it. That's a pretty poor reason to enlist a whole nation into a huge and impacting protocol. He also didn't really consult the rest of the country on it and signed it in a hasty manner. Speculation about Kyoto's potential effects is already starting to take a toll on Alberta's oil and gas industry.

Now, if Americans are so "brainwashed" against mass transit, then what does that make Canadians? Most Canadian cities like Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Vancouver have piss-poor mass transit. Even Toronto's isn't all that great considering its size and population density.

Lastly, I've been to Winnipeg before and noticed it was a pretty spread out city whose only apparent form of public transit is city buses. So, it begs the questions, how do you get to work? And do you own an automobile?

P.S. Ever been to Japan and Kyoto? Beautiful city.


User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 months 23 hours ago) and read 911 times:

Rai,

Why must you always bash Canada?

 Smile

Speculation about Kyoto's potential effects is already starting to take a toll on Alberta's oil and gas industry.

That's just a false statement. Most oil companies have already declared that the effects will be minimal. besides, maybe it's Manitoba's turn in the sun with our extensive electricity potential.

Rai, we are talking about whether the US is engaing Iraq because of it's oil (or not). We aren't talking about the poor state of public transit in the rest of the world, but of course I concede that Canadians are just as wasteful of energy as our neighbors to the south. But I think Kyoto is a reasonable start to lowering our reliance on oil.

Now, as for Winnipeg, we don't have subways because the ground isn't ideally suited for a subway system. Downtown we have to drive pilings about 300 feet to hit bedrock.

We don't have commuter trains because, let's face it, there is nowhere to commute. Winnipeg is a city of 680,000 people that is surrounded by very few other communities.

There is a rather extensive "indoor" walkway system including underground tunnels that allows you to travel most of downtown out of the weather and bus service on selected downtown routes is free to encourage their use. Not to mention that the bus service while not being the best in the world, is fairly extensive. (And they use busses that are manufactured right here!)

Yes I have a car. I drive it 7 km to work and back every week day (and other short trips) and I put about $30 of fuel in it a month. Why don't I take a bus Because I travel to client's facilities throughout the day.

I guess you could also criticize Russia, the Philippines, Switzerland, the Ukraine, Israel, Indonesia, Egypt, Croatia and Australia for not signing on with Kyoto (funny how they're omitted in your critique).

Yes I could. But those countries aren't about to invade Iraq. Try to stay on topic Rai....




User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 896 times:

Why must you always bash Canada?

I could ask the same thing, considering you continuously bash the US.  Smile Seriously, I don’t hate Canada. I’m just as Canadian as you and, for the most part, I like Canada. I’m just not happy with the way some things are going and some of the attitudes of a lot of the people there. But it doesn’t mean that I “bash it”, per say. I’m sure that there are things we’d both like to see improve in the country; we probably have different approaches in how they should be done.

I’ll admit that the jury’s out on Kyoto as it’s still too early to tell, however, you can’t deny that Chretien was pretty reckless in the way he went about it. You don’t go into something that will have such a profound impact without having a full inquiry or consulting others.

Rai, we are talking about whether the US is engaing Iraq because of it's oil (or not). We aren't talking about the poor state of public transit in the rest of the world, but of course I concede that Canadians are just as wasteful of energy as our neighbors to the south. But I think Kyoto is a reasonable start to lowering our reliance on oil.

Now, as for Winnipeg, we don't have subways because the ground isn't ideally suited for a subway system. Downtown we have to drive pilings about 300 feet to hit bedrock.

We don't have commuter trains because, let's face it, there is nowhere to commute. Winnipeg is a city of 680,000 people that is surrounded by very few other communities.

There is a rather extensive "indoor" walkway system including underground tunnels that allows you to travel most of downtown out of the weather and bus service on selected downtown routes is free to encourage their use. Not to mention that the bus service while not being the best in the world, is fairly extensive. (And they use busses that are manufactured right here!)


I grew up in Edmonton and lived in Toronto for a bit, so I know about the “indoor” walkway system. Edmonton has a combination of indoor walkways and “pedways” (bridges that connect above street level). This is essentially, obviously, because of the cold winters. We also have a light-rail transit system that’s free downtown (or at least, it used to be, they may have started charging since I moved…still, nobody used it) and fairly extensive bus service. Even with the service we have (and, from what I’ve seen and without bragging, probably a lot better than what you folks have in Winnipeg) it still leaves much to be desired compared to cities of like size in Europe and compared to some cities on the East coast -- Boston, New York (we used to get our subway trains exclusively from Bombardier until they messed up the breaks, we now have orders from France), Philadelphia, Montreal and Toronto.

Now if you want to see the urban development done right and a (relatively) small city with an excellent mass transit infrastructure, look no further than Calgary. That place and is simply amazing. I don’t see how Winnipeg or Edmonton can’t develop systems like that. Sure, Calgary is bigger in population, but it covers roughly the same area in land as Winnipeg and Edmonton.

That's just a false statement. Most oil companies have already declared that the effects will be minimal. besides, maybe it's Manitoba's turn in the sun with our extensive electricity potential.

I don’t agree with that. If that was the case, then why did Ralph Klein launch such a huge media blitz against Kyoto? He threatened separation, remember? Furthermore, I have a few friends who work for Syncrude (and others in various other companies/government agencies in the Canadian oil industry) and they tell me that things have certainly slowed down since the beginning of the year. They’re certainly not hiring anymore and prospecting is down. Admittedly, it’s been a warm winter in Alberta, which has affected extraction and drilling, but most people say that speculation about Kyoto’s fallout are not boding too well.

If that means Manitoba will thrive (Quebec seems to be eager to take advantage of their hydro-electric potential), then good for you guys, but what about the Albertans who are working in oil and gas?

Yes I have a car. I drive it 7 km to work and back every week day (and other short trips) and I put about $30 of fuel in it a month. Why don't I take a bus Because I travel to client's facilities throughout the day.

At least you’re honest. But I don’t see how such a proponent for mass transit (I am one myself, but I do not own a vehicle) can criticize other car drivers when he is guilty of the same thing.

Yes I could. But those countries aren't about to invade Iraq. Try to stay on topic Rai....

Actually, this is very relevant to your “subliminal Kyoto” spiel. I wouldn’t be one to lecture somebody about staying on topic when you’re as guilty of straying off as any.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12322 posts, RR: 35
Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 887 times:

The BBC is reporting that Don Rumsfeld has suggested that Saddam be given immunity in return for his stepping down; the immunity would refer to War Crimes issues. Presumably Kuwait's agreement was sought for this and presumably it also applies to other senior Iraqis, including his sons.

Of course, there is a problem about who would actually want to take him? Cuba (a bit too close to America?), Libya (two's company?), North Korea (oh dear, we bombed North Korea and also, tragically, Mr. Hussein.) There must be some deserted Pacific island he could go to, or what about Madagascar?

Still, let's not dismiss this. It is an improvement on Saudi Arabia's offer, where immunity didn't apply to him and his 100 most senior people. It would be a MAJOR ACHIEVEMENT - and superb for the world economy and confidence generally, if Hussein could be got out somehow and if Iraq could settle down to a period of stability and economic growth. Hopefully North Korea would then be sorted out and then the 100% focus could be on tackling Al Qaeda and all the related terrorist groups, wherever they are.



User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 876 times:

I don’t agree with that. If that was the case, then why did Ralph Klein launch such a huge media blitz against Kyoto?

That's because Ralph (the piss tank) has nothing to gain and everything to lose politically if he backs Kyoto. Ralph is on the oil company's political payroll and would be as popular as K.D. Lang if he didn't back oil, beef and cowboy hats.

Ralph's media blitz wasn't supported by our Premier, because we can GAIN from KYOTO. It's simple really...

As for LRT etc, it's relatively easier to do that in Edmonton and Calgary. Winnipeg is a relatively old city. An LRT can't go underground because of the geology and it can't go overground because of the harsh weather in the winter and the logistics of laying rail. Take a look at a map of Winnipeg. Most of our main downtown streets run to the forks (the red and assiniboine rivers). Our streets are merely glorified ox-cart trails that take you to where all the trade was concentrated a hundred years ago!

 Smile

I have one comment about Calgary. You can't drive AROUND it. You must drive through it. Economically it makes good sense, but if your ultimate destination is the other side, it's a big pain!


User currently offlineOvelix From Greece, joined Aug 1999, 639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (11 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 864 times:

Some reading for all of us. The source is:

Trade in Chemical Arms Allowed Despite Their Use on Iranians, Kurds., The Washington Post, 12-30-2002, pp A01.

"The story of U.S. involvement with Saddam Hussein in the years before his 1990 attack on Kuwait -- which included large-scale intelligence sharing, supply of cluster bombs through a Chilean front company, and facilitating Iraq's acquisition of chemical and biological precursors -- is a topical example of the underside of U.S. foreign policy. It is a world in which deals can be struck with dictators, human rights violations sometimes overlooked, and accommodations made with arms proliferators, all on the principle that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Talking about anti-americanism  Smile

The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items that had both military and civilian applications, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague

The best part:

"In late 1987, the Iraqi air force began using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq that had formed a loose alliance with Iran, according to State Department reports...The State Department and White House were also outraged -- but not to the point of doing anything that might seriously damage relations with Baghdad.

"The U.S.-Iraqi relationship is . . . important to our long-term political and economic objectives," Assistant Secretary of State Richard W. Murphy wrote in a September 1988 memorandum that addressed the chemical weapons question. "We believe that economic sanctions will be useless or counterproductive to influence the Iraqis."

Hardly a surprise...

Kostas






User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 854 times:

I have one comment about Calgary. You can't drive AROUND it. You must drive through it. Economically it makes good sense, but if your ultimate destination is the other side, it's a big pain!

NOT TRUE!! OK, somewhat! If you’re coming down from the North, then you can always catch Highway 22 after Red Deer. This goes around Calgary and is an easy way to get to Banff. But if you’re coming in from the West (like you would), then you’re truly up shit’s creek because there is absolutely no way of bypassing the city. Call it what you want, but if I was a Calgarian, I’d say it’s smart business sense.  Big grin Winnipeg has a ring road, doesn’t it?

That's because Ralph (the piss tank) has nothing to gain and everything to lose politically if he backs Kyoto. Ralph is on the oil company's political payroll and would be as popular as K.D. Lang if he didn't back oil, beef and cowboy hats.

Ralph's media blitz wasn't supported by our Premier, because we can GAIN from KYOTO. It's simple really...


OK, OK, OK…Ralph has a drinking problem! So what? LOL. And he’s not the “sharpest knife in the drawer”. Heck, I don’t particularly like him myself, but he’s done a lot for the Alberta economy and made things a lot more efficient since coming in. When my family moved to Edmonton, Don Getty was in charge and -- with the exception of Calgary (Klein was the mayor of Calgary then), the perpetual boom-town -- things were really stagnant, especially in Edmonton. Klein did a lot of good in streamlining the economy, privatizing some inefficient public services and cutting taxes (making them the lowest in Canada). Doctors hate him because he cut their salaries, but the healthcare system in Alberta is still in fairly good shape, especially compared to other provinces. If you want to see a real disaster, go to BC! He was helped by the oil boom, but he really improved the entrepreneurial spirit of the province. Calgary is the richest city in Canada and the fastest growing. Not only that, many companies from BC and Ontario are moving their headquarters to Calgary and, to a lesser extent, Edmonton. Alberta also has a burgeoning R&D and IT sector that hasn’t really been too affected by the “dot-bomb” crisis…yet.

I would agree that oil has been the lifeline for Alberta in the past and still influences a major portion of the Alberta economy. So yeah, Kyoto would be pretty bad for Alberta and Southern Ontario (considering the amount of manufacturing that goes on over there). No wonder why you guys in Manitoba and those in Quebec (with the hydro-electric potential) are all for it.

By the way, I have met Ralph before and he didn’t impress me too much – he seemed pretty stupid. My dad works with some of his ministers and he doesn’t have the best things to say about them (or him) either. But I can’t deny the good he’s done to the Alberta economy. Most people in Alberta like him and are happy with what he’s done.

As for LRT etc, it's relatively easier to do that in Edmonton and Calgary. Winnipeg is a relatively old city. An LRT can't go underground because of the geology and it can't go overground because of the harsh weather in the winter and the logistics of laying rail. Take a look at a map of Winnipeg. Most of our main downtown streets run to the forks (the red and assiniboine rivers). Our streets are merely glorified ox-cart trails that take you to where all the trade was concentrated a hundred years ago!

That is true. Edmonton and Calgary are relatively younger than Winnipeg and their streets are patterned in a grid pattern, pretty much, so that would help us a great deal. However, we do experience as harsh winter as you guys (OK, so maybe you guys feel it more because it’s a lot more humid in your city). Calgary not so much, but they have been known to reach temperatures of -30C…not very often though. Still, their system is completely above ground, while Edmonton’s is underground downtown, but above ground everywhere else (that’s another story in itself). I’m no geologist, but I guess the ground in Alberta isn’t as difficult to dig into as in Manitoba.

By the way, is it because of your street layout that an above ground LRT system was never considered?

And don’t you guys ever shovel the snow in the winter?  Big grin


User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (11 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 846 times:

I’d like to add one more thing. Those numbskull members of the Edmonton city council (including that boneheaded mayor, Bill Smith) recently rejected a proposal to extend the LRT system to the southern part of the city. There was talk about an extension for years, but that move struck down any motion (including research) pertaining to the development of a South line. Absolutely ridiculous because traffic on the North-South routes of the city is absolutely atrocious now (I went back for the holidays and was amazed at how bad it has become!).

It’s kinda surprising as Edmonton is considered a more liberal city than Calgary and the bastion of anything resembling left thought in Alberta, so you’d think they’d be in favor of such a move. Now, I know my political views resemble nothing close to liberal, but this is just a backward, stupid move that will hurt the city in the long run. What a shame and wasted opportunity.


User currently offlinePH-KCA From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 years 3 months 18 hours ago) and read 835 times:

If this is true this is cautiously good news.

But there comes a question to me:
IF Saddamn Hussein and his henchmen are overthrown, who or what will be the next ruler(s) in Iraq and what will become of Iraq?

1. A civil war like former Yugoslavia, as there are different ethnic groups.
2. Riots or worse between pro and anti Saddamn groups.
3. A new and more cruel dictatorship, like the Taliban after the Communists in Afganistan.

Most importantly:
What do the Iraqi people themselves really want?
At this moment they all seem to support Saddamn and his henchmen, but this could be because theyre under the pressure of the Iraqi Gestapo.

In a broadcasting on BBC-World today I saw that in the 1950s the Royal Family was kicked out due to a coup.
How do the Iraqi people look against the former Royal Family?
Would the heir to the Iraqi Throne be an option?

BTW, in the 1990s Bush sr. and the UN-coalition had the opportunity to solve the Saddamn-problem during Desert Storm but they neclected this.
I hope Bush jr. doesnt invade Iraq without the permission of the UN.
If they go in without UN-permission, then who is Bush jr. to judge f.i. North-Korea for restarting nuclear power without UN-permission?
If the government of the United States of America (Bush jr.) ignores the UN, then they cant demand that other governments stick to the UN.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Who Is Responsible For The Attack In Saudi Arabia? posted Sun May 2 2004 09:19:52 by RONEN
Moran Says Jews Are Pushing For War In Iraq. posted Tue Mar 11 2003 06:17:48 by Jcs17
NYT Confirms: Dems Have No Plan For Iraq posted Mon Nov 13 2006 16:22:44 by Cfalk
More Troops For Iraq? Bush Ignores. posted Fri Sep 29 2006 22:00:38 by ArtieFufkin
As For Iraq, Let's Get One Thing Straight: posted Sat Sep 9 2006 22:41:29 by Aloges
Lebanon's True Friend: Saudi Arabia posted Thu Jul 27 2006 09:14:27 by OD720
Saudi Arabia Warns Of Middle East War posted Wed Jul 26 2006 00:48:11 by BA
More Oil In Alberta Than Saudi Arabia! posted Wed Jul 5 2006 22:12:55 by Emirates773ER
House Jabs Saudi Arabia In Foreign Aid Bill posted Sun Jun 11 2006 22:30:12 by RJpieces
Human Rights Violations In Saudi Arabia. posted Thu Jun 8 2006 09:38:38 by Himmat01