Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Agrees To More Inspectors  
User currently offlineIllini_152 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1000 posts, RR: 2
Posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1265 times:

AP) Washington DC Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:45 PM

President George Bush has announced that the US will not attack Iraq. The
President announced that he is agreeing to deploying additional inspectors
throughout Iraq.

The US will send 250,000 additional inspectors:

24,000 members of the 1st Infantry Division

15,000 members of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)

15,000 members of the 82d Airborne Division

More than 5,000 members of the 4th armored division with their "M1-A1
all-terrain vehicles"

Additional US Army personnel, as needed for inspections

A variety of US Air Force personnel for aerial recon missions and other
"surveillance" activities

A significant number of United States Marines to aid with inspections

United States Coast Guard personnel to inspect coastlines

An undisclosed number of Rangers, Green Berets, Navy SEALs, Recon Marines,
Delta Force, and other Special Operations personnel to inspect Iraqi
"hideaways"

Special air deliveries to aid the inspections will be made by aircraft from
the USS Constellation, USS George Washington, USS Abraham Lincoln and USS
Enterprise.

The President said: "With these additional inspectors, the inspections
should be completed in a few weeks."

-----

OK, everyone happy now?

ps: I hope you all can tell it's a joke...

--
Mike


Happy contrails - I support B747Skipper and Jetguy
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

Great joke, Mike...too bad the real joke is the current administration running the US. Bush & Co. HAVE to go to war, if only to save face, whether Saddam complies or not. Gotta love the male ego at work.  Yeah sure

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1219 times:

Actually, it's pretty close to the truth. If he makes a speech to this effect on the day an attack is launched, He'll crack up the whole world on a day that normally everyone would be hopping mad.

Charles


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1208 times:

Very funny.

The inspectors under Mr. Blix and Mr. El Baradei just happen not to kill thousands of civilians in the process, if that means anything to you.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16865 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1192 times:

" kill thousands of civilians "

Where do you come up with the idea that the US is going to kill thousands of civilians, do you REALLY believe that or are you just being dramatic. Honestly, thousands?...

I mean thousands?.

What are they going to do crash planes into Bagdad sky scrapers?.

I would really like to know how many innocent civilians were killed during the Gulf War by the US, I think save the one incident where about 50 people were using a bomb shelter at a former Iraqi intelligence building I think it was less than 100 people.

I would say more US troops died during the Gulf War than Innocent Iraqi civilians.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1180 times:

Where do you come up with the idea that the US is going to kill thousands of civilians, do you REALLY believe that or are you just being dramatic. Honestly, thousands?...

I mean thousands?.

The UN has said one million children will die as a result of the war from disease and famine.


User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4857 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1165 times:

Considering that just in Israel 74 civilians died, I highly doubt the number "less than 100".

Iirc, about 400 people died in the bunker you mentioned.


User currently offlineClipperhawaii From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2033 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1140 times:

"The UN has said one million children will die as a result of the war from disease and famine."

And whose fault was that? That's right, Saddam Hussein. And if it's not, it's the hollier than thou U.N. which "started" these sanctions because of...that's right, Iraq having and not eliminating weapons of mass destruction. Or have you forgot history?

Give it a rest already and go read a book and let the United States handle this for you... and the rest of the world.

You people will never be convinced of anything.

Start counting the days because you are powerless to do anything. (Maybe that's why you guys whine and make such a big deal so much)

Have a military technological sort of day...

And one final not as I leave all of you...

Kofi Anan, the WORST Secretary General the U.N. has EVER had. When they passed out leadership he was trying to figure out which restaurant in New York to eat in. Disgraceful!








"You Can't Beat The Experience"
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1139 times:

And 1.5 to 2 million Iraqis have died due to the UN's policy of containment (which it, France and others still seem to prefer to see continued). So the they should just shut up and stay out of it They do not have the high ground on morality.

Charles


User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4857 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1128 times:

"Kofi Anan, the WORST Secretary General the U.N. has EVER had. When they passed out leadership he was trying to figure out which restaurant in New York to eat in. Disgraceful!"

And who's favorite was he? Yep, the USA's. They didn't want Ghali to continue.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 10, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1114 times:

According to the "International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War":

IPPNW Opposes
US War Against Iraq

"Collateral Damage"
New Report From Medact
on Consequences
of War on Iraq!

Physicians' Report Forecasts Large Death Toll,
Long-Term Health, Environment Damage
From US-Led Attack On Iraq;
Seeks To Avoid Pre-Emptive War,
Massive Humanitarian Catastrope

Washington -- A US-led attack on Iraq could kill between 48,000 and 260,000 civilians and combatants in just the first three months of conflict, according to a study by medical and public health experts. Post-war health effects could take an additional 200,000 lives.

The report, Collateral Damage: The Health and Environmental Costs of War on Iraq, was issued by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), recipient of the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize, and produced by Medact, the organization's United Kingdom affiliate. It is being released today by IPPNW member groups in more than a dozen nations, including Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) in the US.

Amy Sisley, MD, a Professor of Surgery at the University of Maryland Medical System, explained the report's findings, "In an era where images of combat are beamed from aircraft, it is too easy to forget about the direct, physical consequences of war. Bombs deafen, blind and blow apart people, riddling them with shrapnel, glass and debris. They collapse buildings on victims and destroy infrastructure vital to finding and treating the wounded. Unexploded ordinance left behind kills and maims, and battlefield toxins can contaminate the environment for decades."

Collateral Damage is based on projections from the 1990-91 Gulf War, which led to nearly 200,000 casualties. It analyzes current US combat scenarios and concludes that a new conflict will be much more intense and destructive than the first Gulf War. If nuclear weapons were used, the death toll would rise into the millions.

[...]


Read more here: http://www.ippnw.org/CollateralDamage.html

You´ll find all kinds of information about the past war and about forecasts on the planned invasion in the above article.

You might remember that in Gulf War I, there was not even an attempt to invade Iraq or to attack Bagdad, so there were "only" several thousand immediate civilian deaths (many more in the aftermath). This time, it´ll be much, much worse.

But don´t worry, the Pentagon has already announced that any "rogue journalist" who should dare to go astray from his military minders and who should use a satellite phone for evading military censorship will be attacked and shot at. So if you´re lucky, you wouldn´t need to know about how many people will get killed...


User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1107 times:

Klaus
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 2646 posts, RR: 57
Reply: 10
Posted Sat Mar 15 2003
But don??t worry, the Pentagon has already announced that any "rogue journalist" who should dare to go astray from his military minders and who should use a satellite phone for evading military censorship will be attacked and shot at. So if you??re lucky, you wouldn??t need to know about how many people will get killed...


Yeah riiiiiiiight. And you got this info from were now? This is really sad to see how you really think the US military does business, yup that's all we do is go around bombing hospitals, orphanages and old folks homes, yup we never target legitimate targets, we always try to inflict major civilian casualties.



"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1089 times:

Galaxy5: Yeah riiiiiiiight. And you got this info from were now? This is really sad to see how you really think the US military does business

The pentagon has informed journalists that any "unknown" satellite phone signals would be attacked by air patrols.

It may or may not be the kind of "black propaganda" Mr. Rumsfeld is so fond of, but in any case it´s a political decision, not a military one. Quite a few high-ranking military officers seem to be a lot more critical of the planned invasion than their civilian superiors.

Accredited journalists are already being selected by the pentagon, and apparently, Rumsfeld & Co. don´t like to have independent journalists around...

Pretty difficult to see this in a favourable light.


User currently offlineKLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1089 times:

Even Norman Shwarzkopf (sp?) is skeptical about war in Iraq at this time.

-Clovis


User currently offlineSilverfox From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1058 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1085 times:

STT757 said

i would say more US troops died during the Gulf War than Innocent Iraqi civilians


The really sad fact is that the US fighting machine killed more British Soldiers than Iraqis the Iraqis did
Anyway US friendly fire is not new, if you read the blurb by the sub in SFO you will find that in WW2 it sank a shipload of POWs

Oh love the original article very funny and now being circulated over here


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16865 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1063 times:

I saw everyone tip toed my question ,

I asked does anyone really (I mean really) believe the US is going to directly kill thousands of innocent people, that means anything more than 1,000.

Does anyone truely believe that the US killed thousands of innocent people during the combat phase of the Gulf War, does anyone believe thousads will be killed this time?..

Silverfox avoids the direct question by mentioning tragic "fog of war" accidents in which British troops were killed.

777236ER mentions the "possible" after affect on the health and well being of the Iraqi people.

Racko comments that the one incident I was refering to there "might" actually have been 400 lives lost, and he then mentions Israel.

Stop dancing around the question,

Does anyone Honestly believe that thousands (meaning more than 1,000) of innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in 1991, or that thousands will be killed this time.

Your just being dramatic, right?



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1061 times:

Just read the article.

User currently offlineDelta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1055 times:

The physicians' article may or may not be accurate, but one thing is certain .... if the status quo remains, people will still die, mainly because of Saddam, not the UN or the US.

The war is a huge risk, of course, and no one knows the outcome as far as casualties are concerned. I recall the conventional wisdom in 1990 was that body bags will be returning home (to the US) by the tens of thousands. I guess that prediction was off by a few orders of magnitude.

Another thing that is certain is that if Bush & Co. manage to pull this off successfully, there will be some very happy Arabs and some very unhappy Frenchmen, Russians and Chinese.

Pete


User currently offlineScotty From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1050 times:

That' meant to be a joke??

I dont see the funny side really.

I'm sure the people of Iraq or the forces who are going in there knowing that the dont have the support of people back home wouldn't see it either.

By the way, can anyone send out some sand coloured T-shirts to the Gulf because the British Army guys are phoning home to get some - seems like Tony hasn't got round to providing little things like, well desert camouflage, yet.

Stand by for a disaster

Scotty


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 19, posted (11 years 6 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 1032 times:

To Klaus & STT757,


Do you guys realize that these two quotes made by each of you do not equate?

Klaus: "The inspectors under Mr. Blix and Mr. El Baradei just happen not to kill thousands of civilians in the process, if that means anything to you. "

STT757: "Where do you come up with the idea that the US is going to kill thousands of civilians..."

Honestly, I figure this is how most arguments start, nobody really knows what the other is talking about.  Insane


Although I thought the initial post intended as a joke was a nice touch.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineSilverfox From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1058 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 968 times:

STT757

Fog of war??

Bad feckin aiming by the US more likely.

I havent sidestepped the question as i am broadly in agreement with you. However that is notwithstanding the wayward fire factor. All i will say is let us sit back and wait
Hopefully it will be mercifully quick, so the lads can the go on and sort out Israel


User currently offlineAdvancedkid From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 762 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 950 times:

For the record:
"F*ck the war!"


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 940 times:

In war people get hurt, that's the way of things.
Like they say "shit happens", all you can do through training is try to limit it as much as possible.
Because of all the reductions in training over the last decade, there may be more collateral damage (due to increased mistakes in identifying targets and errors using equipment) but if you believe for a moment it's US policy to shoot at civilians you're as sick as Pol Pot!

Nor is the US intending this conflict to go nuclear. They hope that the mere thread that they may respond to chemical or biological attack with nuclear weapons will be enough to prevent the employment of those weapons.

But don??t worry, the Pentagon has already announced that any "rogue journalist" who should dare to go astray from his military minders and who should use a satellite phone for evading military censorship will be attacked and shot at. So if you??re lucky, you wouldn??t need to know about how many people will get killed...

ANY transmitter on the battlefield not known to the mission commander is a potential enemy spy.
Any journalist who'se transmitting something uncontrolled is likely transmitting the position of US or allied troops to the enemy and thereby putting those troops in danger. He's acting like an enemy spy. In war spies are shot on sight.



I wish I were flying
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...
Congress Sends Bush Bill To Ban Contact With Hamas posted Fri Dec 8 2006 18:42:31 by RJpieces
Bush Prepares To Launch October Suprise? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 18:43:58 by ArtieFufkin
Snapshot: Foley Hurting GOP, Bush Down To 36% posted Fri Oct 6 2006 19:46:57 by Falcon84
Bush Trying To Pardon Self For War Crimes..sick posted Fri Sep 29 2006 23:56:05 by Mdsh00
Bush Tries To Evade Geneva Convention posted Thu Sep 7 2006 15:01:35 by Texan
Olmurt Agrees To UN-Brokered Cease-Fire posted Sat Aug 12 2006 00:07:50 by Falcon84
Bush Wants To Destroy American Unions posted Sun Jul 16 2006 11:12:31 by NWDC10
More Milk And More Meat Leads To More Twins? posted Sun May 21 2006 01:09:52 by SATX
Who Will Be The Next Bush Staffer To Leave? posted Fri Apr 21 2006 00:44:41 by Bushpilot
Bush Coming To Cleveland On Monday! posted Sat Mar 18 2006 15:11:27 by Luv2fly