OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 07:08:49 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Absolutely, totally DISGUSTED!!!  (Read 6138 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« on: August 13, 2004, 08:32:51 AM »

NAJAF, Aug. 13 -- U.S. forces ceased offensive operations in the embattled city of Najaf Friday morning, according to Marine and Army officers, barely 24 hours after launching a multi-pronged offensive against the Mahdi Army of Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr. Commanders indicated the new cease-fire orders were designed to allow political negotiations to proceed between Sadr and the interim Iraqi government.

Well, not DEALING with the problem (again) --

....As the major spoke, a junior officer plotted reports of fresh incidents on an oversized plasma video screen. Pizzitola sent rueful word to a patrol that had spotted a machine gun nest that it could not fire on it until it fired on them.

How STUPID is THIS -- once these negotiations fial (and they will, this is a tactic that will just allow the insurgency to regroup) this EXACT machine gun will be used to try to KILL US troops! Because of COURSE, Sadr will be allowed to KEEP his malitia!!

...Another computer symbol marked a group of 200 or 300 Iraqis proceeding south down the main road into Najaf to support Sadr's forces. "Peaceful, no weapons," Pizzitola emphasized to a patrol that might run into them. A half hour later, however, junior officers scrambled to pass on a report that guns were being distributed among the marchers.

DUH!!!?Huh!! We ALLOWED a group of Iraqi men to just WALK into the site where the insurgents are because they were not ARMED?Huh!!! Wouldn’t the correct term for these men be "REINFORCEMENTS"!!!!??? And then we are SURPRISED when, lo and behold, they are given GUNS!!!! THIS IS INSANE!!!

If I had a son or daughter about to be shipped over there - I would tell them to go to Canada!! This is Vietnam all OVER again. You put the forces OVER there but then the POLITICIANS don’t allow them to do the JOB.

Look. we HAVE to begin dealing with this issue NOW BEFORE one of these fanatical groups gets a hold of a "dirty bomb" or some other type of WMD. It is ONLY a matter of time.

This is like Nazism in the early stages. Hitler was VERY clear from the get-go on what he wanted to accomplish - so are these fanatics.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2004, 11:55:02 AM by Tom+ú » Logged
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2004, 09:47:10 AM »

BTW, They are thinking of reinstating the draft, with both men & women 16 to 26 years old eligible... I mean, I only have 3 years until I’d be ineligible, but my 16 year old brother will have to live with the fear for the next 10 years... uggg... gag me.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2004, 09:48:06 AM by ania » Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Augustine
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 565

pray for me, please


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2004, 09:55:50 AM »

Tom,

While I agree that the events you're detailing demonstrate a great deal of absurdity (common sense would indicate those men were re-enforcements), the problem is that the United States abides by some pretty strict rules of engagement, which often give more "benefit of the doubt" than a healthy skepticism would ever allow.

Though there is a lot about the "war on terror" I find obnoxious and deceitful, the "rules of engagement" which the United States Armed Forces observe, imho, are an admirable indicator of just how (relatively speaking, mind you) benevolent a super/imperial (?) power the United States is.

As for the draft issue, I find this troubling (though I myself am not a citizen of the United States.)   However, this has a lot to do with my misgivings about this whole enterprise that America is currently involved in, and that any draft would be used in the service of it.

Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2004, 09:56:03 AM »

IMHO, I dont think there will be a draft. It would be political suicide for Bush to even entertain these thoughts.  When Kerry gets in he will bring the Iraqi war to a conclusion win or lose.  I dont think if Kerry gets in he will want to meddle in the affairs militarily as Bush has done.  I dont know if this is a good thing long term or not.

JoeS  Roll Eyes
Logged
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2004, 10:10:08 AM »

You never know...  There has been talk about it for a while now, though they say the only branch of the military that is lagging in recruitment is the army (hence extended tours, recalls, etc), everything else has enough people.
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2004, 11:53:37 AM »

Quote
BTW, They are thinking of reinstating the draft, with both men & women 16 to 26 years old eligible

This is an internet myth started by the left for the current election season.  The US has never drafted 16 year olds (though some kids lied and doctored their papers so they could serve in WWI and WWII; in that case, the kid volunteered and wasn't drafted), and there is no reason to enact any kind of draft today.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2004, 12:24:05 PM »

...it might have been 18, but I'm pretty sure 16 was said, & it's not an internet myth, considering it is being talked about on FOX & NBC & ABC & CBS news as recently as the begining of this week, as well as talk radio such as Sean Hennedy & Rush.  I don't really go into internet myths, but I do listen to & watch the news every day.
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,432



« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2004, 02:09:40 AM »

Based on reviewing some newspaper articles on-line, the draft thing seems to come down to two basic sources:

(a) a pair of bills in congress sponsored by Democrats which are doomed to disappear into committee, and

(b) a lot of wild remors on the internet.

Everything else appears to stem from media reporting on these two things, amplified by misreporting of everyday occurences (e.g., filling SS board positions).
Logged
Etienne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150

OC.net


« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2004, 09:44:22 AM »

Who got us all into this mess? And why? We know we were mislead and we know certain so-called 'neo-conservatives' long had armed intervention in Iraq as a high priority goal.

Who ends up in the firing line, well first and foremost Iraqi men, women and children who have never had any say in any of this. Their casualty figures are unknown and outstrip any other participants. Who else? Young men and women from the coalition powers. Often young men and women from low income families. I guess, and it is a guess there are not many if any from the families of those conviction politicians, the neo-conservatives. No their battles are fought in the corridors and back-rooms of power.

In both the US and UK reserve forces personnel are unhappy and I suspect it will be much harder to recruit volunteer reserve forces in the future. If you cannot get enough volunteers and you are stuck then you compel. US history clearly shows when this happens that the poor will bear an unfair burden and the children of the rich and powerful will be provided with exemptions.

My answer, regardless of age or infirmity, send the twits who thought this up to Najaf and let them sweat it out. If they, in reality had to do it once, it would never happen again, believe me............
Logged

It is afterwards that events are best understood
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2004, 11:23:10 AM »

If I had a son or daughter about to be shipped over there - I would tell them to go to Canada!!

Huh...yeah, as a 24 year-old, this is where I'm glad I speak Spanish...I could live a long time down in Mexico....

If you cannot get enough volunteers and you are stuck then you compel. US history clearly shows when this happens that the poor will bear an unfair burden and the children of the rich and powerful will be provided with exemptions.

My answer, regardless of age or infirmity, send the twits who thought this up to Najaf and let them sweat it out. If they, in reality had to do it once, it would never happen again, believe me............

A good point, Etienne, and one that needs to be made more often...not that I'm blindly endorsing Michael Moore's movie (I think it's a mix of good questions and bad reporting), but one of the funniest parts was when he went to DC and went around to Congressmen and women who voted for the war in Iraq and, enlistment papers in hand, asked them if they would please sign their kids up to go to war, since they supported it so much.  Needless to say, that didn't happen.  From senators to Bill O'Reiley, the folks who stand in support of this Vietnam II (you're right, Tom) are content to let the sons and daughters of the poor fight this war.  Been like this since the beginning of time, but it doesn't make it any less infuriating.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #10 on: August 14, 2004, 12:05:15 PM »

NAJAF, Iraq (CNN) -- Efforts to broker a peace agreement with rebel forces loyal to Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in the embattled city of Najaf have failed, an Iraqi government official said Saturday.

Who would have thought that THIS would happen!!!???  Wink

A statement issued by Mouwaffaq al-Rubaie, Iraq's national security adviser, suggested that fighting soon would resume in the south-central city.

See my statement in the initial post referring to a certain MACHINE GUN that will now be put to use to kill coalition troops.  Angry

The news came as thousands of people headed to Najaf on Saturday to show their support for al-Sadr, whose militia has engaged U.S. and Iraqi forces in several cities across the country.

Al-Sadr supporters were trekking toward the Imam Ali Shrine in the center of Najaf, where they hope to protect the mosque, among the most sacred sites in the world to Shiites.


Ahhh..... MORE pilgrims (in reality reinforcements) that will be let in under the guise of "worshiping" at the shrine.   Tongue

Najaf Gov. Adnan al-Zurufi said the Iraqis are welcome to visit the shrine but no one will be allowed to bring a weapon.

Did this BOZO not pay any attention to what happened LAST WEEK???!! (see the original post for the referance)  Roll Eyes

In his speech, al-Sadr sounded like he was in no mood to extend an olive branch.

But..., but.... ISLAM is a religion of PEACE!  :-

TOAST THEM!!!!
Logged
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #11 on: August 14, 2004, 05:48:01 PM »

Keble:
Quote
(a) a pair of bills in congress sponsored by Democrats which are doomed to disappear into committee, and

I believe it was Charlie Rangel, Democrat Congressman from New York, who's pushing for the draft.  Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has already stated they're not bringing back the draft because it isn't needed.

(It should be noted that it was Nixon who put an end to this form of human slavery.)

Etienne:
Quote
In both the US and UK reserve forces personnel are unhappy and I suspect it will be much harder to recruit volunteer reserve forces in the future.

They willingly sign themselves up to fight wherever their commanders send them.  If that makes them unhappy, they shouldn't have signed up in the first place.  Take a poll of most adults and you'll find they are unhappy in any job.

Quote
If you cannot get enough volunteers and you are stuck then you compel. US history clearly shows when this happens that the poor will bear an unfair burden and the children of the rich and powerful will be provided with exemptions.

Actually, studies came out earlier this year disproving this.  The burden is shared overwhelmingly by middle income Americans, not the poor.  This is because of the military's education and skill requirements (i.e. high school graduate who can read and write like a high school graduate).  If you implement a draft to "sock it to the rich", you'll be pulling in a higher percentage of poor as well.

Pedro:
Quote
Huh...yeah, as a 24 year-old, this is where I'm glad I speak Spanish...I could live a long time down in Mexico....

I see a thriving business idea here.  You could start smuggling Americans across the border :-))))))  Wouldn't that be a hoot!

Quote
but one of the funniest parts was when he went to DC and went around to Congressmen and women who voted for the war in Iraq and, enlistment papers in hand, asked them if they would please sign their kids up to go to war, since they supported it so much.  Needless to say, that didn't happen.

As parents, we don't really send our children to war.  When they've reached the age of consent, they're free to choose their own paths.  So I don't think the guilt factor is really there.

I'd like to see a petition sent around to those who want to rescind the tax cuts for the wealthy; it would give them the option to send their tax refunds back to DC, solely to pay for more homeland security.  How many of those Senators would give the money back?  As a matter of fact, I believe in Massachussetts they've put such an option on tax forms (sending back money gained from Bush's tax cut).  According to his tax statements, Kerry kept his money.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #12 on: August 14, 2004, 08:02:59 PM »

1) About 10,000 demonstrators from as far away as Baghdad arrived in Najaf on Saturday to show their solidarity with the militants and act as human shields to protect the city and the holy Imam Ali shrine, where fighters from al-Sadr's Mahdi Army have taken refuge since the fighting started Aug. 5.

2)Soon after the talks broke down, a massive Army and Marine force of tanks, Humvees and armored vehicles lined up inside a U.S. military base in Najaf for an assault on the militants, which Allawi reportedly called off.

"We were sitting here waiting for authorization to go clear the militia. We never got that authorization," said Marine Maj. David Holahan. "We'll continue operations as the prime minister ... sees fit."


We should just pull out of this country now -- we have lost it. When the Iraqi "government" (that's a JOKE) allows a THUG to control it -- it has lost all capability to govern.

Logged
sinjinsmythe
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 737



« Reply #13 on: August 15, 2004, 02:38:12 AM »

Just for clarification, the age of the draft is all males 18-26, this can be verified on the selective service website.  

I think the draft debate will appear in early 2005.  No one presidential candidate is mentioning it because it would political suicide.  But after the elections, I believe this issue will get more steam and there may well be a draft.  The Army is having a hard time getting re-enlistments...many want to get out as they are burned out from being constantly deployed.  Where will the troops come from? Guess where.  I do not dismiss these rumors of a draft easily...it is easy to do when one is not draft and does not have any male children from 18-26.  There has been talk about expanding it to include women since we are now in the liberated era, whoever I don't think Americans will stand for it.  They would much rather send their sons to kill and die than their daughters.

I do not think Kerry is any better than Bush when it comes to foreign affairs.  From his speeches he has not said that he would leave Iraq.   I believe that Kerry will get us into more useless conflicts just like Bush will, depending on whoever is elected.  There is no real difference on foreign policy between the two major parties.....there is no antiwar voice...there was one in Howard Dean but now he has sold his soul to the political devil.
Logged

Life is just one disappointment after another.
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2004, 10:02:54 AM »

Well, if it does get reinstated, I'm taking my brother on an extended vacation, preferably somewhere warm.
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
spartacus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286


OC.net


« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2004, 11:31:22 AM »

...it might have been 18, but I'm pretty sure 16 was said, & it's not an internet myth, considering it is being talked about on FOX & NBC & ABC & CBS news as recently as the begining of this week, as well as talk radio such as Sean Hennedy & Rush.  I don't really go into internet myths, but I do listen to & watch the news every day.

Ania, Notsince the Civil War has the US drafted 16 year olds. Most 16 year olds are not  mentally or psychologiaclly capable of being an effective soldier.

No Draft will come about. The Democrats want to institute a draft to strengthen the anti-war movement.

The US Army right now could re-call 200,000+ prior-service people if they really needed people. The Army is the only service havingtrouble recruiting people, in large part it no longer trains its soldiers adequately to survive on the Battlefield. As a veteran of the US Army from '85-'92 who comes from a afamily where every able-bodied male has served in the Army since the BlackHawk War, I would not allow any of my children to join the Army since they institued this "no-stress" basic training.

Look at thge casulaties....one quickly learns that most US soldiers who are getting killed are not infantry but support troops. There are classified reports within the Army that state most US Army soldiers do not shoot back even when fired upon. The Infantry however is pretty much left alone and not targetted by the terrorists because they know the infantry can and does shoot back -- usually with great accuracy.

The Marine Corps has not lessened its training to prepare Marines for surviving the Battlefield. I would direct people interested in serving the Army away from the Army and into one of the other services.

I am just one of tens of thousands of Army vets who feel this way. The all-volunteer force relies a lot on family tradition for recruitment....and the old soldiers --- if they must see their children serve -- want them to have the best possible training to survive -- the Army does not do that anymore and that is one reason why it can not fill its quota.

If the Army would go back to what Basic Training used to be before the politically correct Clinton administration promoted generals took over -- we would eventually see a rise in recruitment.
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2004, 10:22:44 AM »

I think that the idea of having a volunteer army works better in peacetime than in wartime, ironically.  When a war happens, the folks who are the families of the volunteers think it is not fair that they are disproportionately impacted by a war that they may not support (while others, who may support the war, have no personal stake in it and don't feel its repurcussions in any way, really).  I realize that the counterpoint to this is that this is what being a volunteer soldier is about, but politically the reality is that many people are uneasy with the idea that the vast majority of Americans who supported the war made and are making no sacrifices at all relating to it.  I think it's that aspect of the issue that gives the draft some populist-type support ... my guess is not enough to actually get passed (at the margin, people think its worse for everyone to be forced into a war they don't like rather than just those who have volunteered).

B
Logged

B
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #17 on: August 17, 2004, 08:46:48 PM »

//ania


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You never know...  There has been talk about it for a while now, though they say the only branch of the military that is lagging in recruitment is the army (hence extended tours, recalls, etc), everything else has enough people. //

Yes, it is talk and thats what it will remain, just talk.   Bush is closing bases in Europe and South Korea and this will supplement the troops now needed to rotate those who are over extended in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Please dont worry about the draft.  IT WONT HAPPEN IN THIS TERM.  

JoeS   Cool
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #18 on: August 25, 2004, 09:30:37 AM »

For the Sake of a Shrine
Tuesday, August 24, 2004

By Neil Cavuto

I just want to see if I've got this straight: We're being very careful in Najaf not to damage a shrine being used by gunmen trying to kill us?

Last time I checked, shrines were for praying, meditating and maybe even mulling. But not once, to my knowledge, for murdering.


For months now, the revered Imam Ali Shrine has become a fortress: a Koran-bless Alamo. Only the Alamo wasn't a church. Just like this place is no longer a shrine.

It stopped being a shrine when they replaced the prayer books with A-K 47s and swapped hymns for the whirr of rocket propelled grenades.

It stopped being a shrine when they stopped praying, and started killing.

Yes, it's a grand, old structure. And we've done our best not to harm it. But the guys in there are harming us and their fellow Iraqis.

Under the cover of a dome meant to promote peace, they promote bloodshed. We condone it. Would that they be so considerate.

Are we the only ones who value these shrines? Or are they the only ones who know we are the only ones who do?

We are so careful not to offend. So much so, that we allow some of our guys to die for the sake of a holy shrine now used for the most unholy of purposes.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather save a Marine than a piece of marble. But that's just me.

It's one thing to honor a building whose purpose was all good. It's quite another to lose sight of the bastards inside it whose purpose is clearly all evil.

---------

"Man, I love the smell of Napalm in the morning!"

Just an idea....
« Last Edit: August 25, 2004, 09:31:58 AM by Tom+ú » Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2004, 10:23:14 AM »

Lessons learned from the American Civil War ----- Excerpt from an Op-Ed in the Washington Post:

---

Not long ago, preparing for a history workshop, I found myself rereading U.S. Grant's "Personal Memoirs," widely regarded as among the finest such recollections ever penned by a professional soldier. Reviewing his account of his army's operations in Tennessee and Mississippi, I was struck by the change they gradually wrought in Grant's attitude and that of his troops.

General and soldiers alike were products of the mid-19th century, with a view of war shaped by the formalistic conflicts of the recent past. Grant himself at the outset of the war expected it to end with a few decisive battles. The issues in dispute having been tried on the battlefield, the loser would accept the verdict and make peace.

In the West, however, the war didn't go that way. Instead, enflamed by widespread popular resistance in the areas occupied by Federal troops, it took on a character few on either side had foreseen. It became what it had to be if the rebellion was to be defeated: a war against Southern society, not just its soldiers.

Not all leaders on either side recognized and accepted the change. Grant did. "He had no liking at all for the cruel weight which modern warfare puts on the civilian," wrote one of his biographers, "but he could order the weight applied without the slightest hesitation when it seemed to him to be necessary." Fortunately, in Abraham Lincoln, he had a president who not only shared his commitment to victory but also accepted the moral cost of achieving it.


Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2004, 10:40:33 AM »

Quote
Fortunately, in Abraham Lincoln, he had a president who not only shared his commitment to victory but also accepted the moral cost of achieving it.


IOW, Lincoln and Grant were monsters. Lincoln certainly was.
Logged

TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2004, 11:30:51 AM »

IOW, Lincoln and Grant were monsters.

You need monsters to win wars.

Now, go iron your skirt  Grin (kidding!)
« Last Edit: August 25, 2004, 11:31:18 AM by Tom+ú » Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2004, 12:37:24 PM »

Is there any proof that gunmen are firing from the Imam Ali mosque, in Najaf, on Iraqi Government or American forces?

The insurgents or lawless gunmen were reported as using the densely populated 'old' quarter adjacent as firing points and shelter from coalition forces who would incurr heavy casualties and the increasing risk of damage to the mosque, according to some reports. Both Iraqi and the Coalition would be reluctant to act in a way that might alienate non-involved Iraqi Shias and further fueling the conflict, surely.

A problem not satisfactorily addressed is the troubling role of Iran in all of this. Jack Straw's (UK foreign secretary) long term policy of engagement with the Iranian government appears to have massively failed. Presumably because the theocratic dictatorship probably regards diplomatic engagement as a indicator of weakness.
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
J
(another Justin)
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144

OC.net


« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2004, 03:07:16 PM »

I'm in the Army, and I'm pretty sure that US policy is that a religious structure ceases to be just that once it becomes a bunker or a base.  This war is going further into hell every day because people who don't know the first thing about it are calling the shots.
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2004, 03:30:31 PM »

It's being run by the politicians -- just like Korea, Vietnam, and the Gullf War. Every war since WWII has been nothing but political maneuvers.

You either decide to win a war TOTALLY and REMOVE the PROBLEM COMPLETELY - or just don't bother!
« Last Edit: August 25, 2004, 03:32:27 PM by Tom+ú » Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #25 on: August 25, 2004, 06:23:33 PM »

Neither J or TomS have answered the question, is there any evidence that the Imam Ali mosque is being used as a firing point by these repugnant insurgents? Or are they using placements within the shadow of the mosque? Yes, apply your military principle if you establish that mosque is being misused but the consequences will not be some Iraqi Government forces and American casualties, it will be a turning by those Shia who are not currently involved on the Coalition and others who will feed on the ensuing chaos. If Muqtada al Sadr is being tactically clever then the greatest power on earth needs to be cleverer still.

Presently I feel I am coming  across two phenomena; first fudge the facts and the second something that might be 'apoplectic christianity'. The second is medically very dangerous as it may lead to a CVA!

Don't get me wrong folks I ain't keen on Muqtada al Sadr and his so-called milita, or any of the other clods with a murderous intent to use the abundant weapons on Coalition forces or poor Iraqis who just want a normal life.

Of course, if some ****** in the coalition had not decided to summarily dismiss the Iraqi forces following taking Iraq many of these weapons and munitions might have been safely under lock and key from the off.

Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #26 on: August 25, 2004, 10:03:18 PM »

I'd like to know why we're not gassing the mosque, and then sending in the Iraqis to mop up.  No brick broken, no political gain for the Islamic fascists.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2004, 10:04:09 PM by Strelets » Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2004, 10:30:16 PM »

Neither J or TomS have answered the question, is there any evidence that the Imam Ali mosque is being used as a firing point by these repugnant insurgents? Or are they using placements within the shadow of the mosque?

They are definitely using it to store weapons and to congregate. There was a news reporter who went into it sometime last week and filmed some of it.
Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #28 on: August 26, 2004, 06:41:48 AM »

Yes, conscript all those neo-con politicians and put them in the front line.

For myself I am disgusted that the blood trail left by those guys is phenomenal. But I get the feeling that the only casualties that matter to 'apopletic christians' are American ones? America had a choice whether to be there or not. In any number of places the locals don't.

Imagine a gang are active across the US and they are murderous and more, killing some here, moving on and killing more there. The FBI are subsequently called in and in addressing the gang begin to clock more and more so-called 'collateral' damage until the numbers eclipse those inflicted by the gang. Even though the FBI might be taking casualties there would be uproar. Why? because the 'collateral' damage are Americans and American property.

You guys are just 4% of the world's population, you consume some 25% of its resources. You proclaim you went in to Iraq to unseat a monster. So currently feed one in Uzbekhistan. He boils dissidents alive. But that's okay folks 'cos he's our monster in the fight against terrorism.

When terrorists were giving the Brits and peacable folk hell, their hands were tied again and again by ......... Americans. When Israel goes in an exceeds anything the Brits did America keeps silent and more than silent, it funds Israeli excess and it defends it from accountability.

And my point. I hate seeing young American men and women hurt and killed, and their families bereaved. I hate it. But your administration got all of us into this mess. If it needed to be done, and that could be debated, it could and should have been done more honestly and better. Some fool for example just dismissed what Iraqi infrastructure survived 'shock and awe'. Why? Did they have a comprehensive alternative and resources to replace ready? No.

But my biggest point. Is an American life worth more than that of a non-American? Just as an Israeli life seems to be worth far more than a non-Israeli life. Because if that is the case this view is incompatible with Christian teaching. I say none of this in a spirit of what is all too common these days, something we might call anti-Americanism. Because that too is incompatible with Christianity and I believe at a purely secular level is nonsensical and unjust.
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2004, 08:50:40 AM »

You guys are just 4% of the world's population, you consume some 25% of its resources....

Is it OUR fault that the rest of the world are a buch of losers? Watch it pal -- your pathetic country may be next! (Braa-haaa-haaa)  Grin

But my biggest point. Is an American life worth more than that of a non-American?

If that non-American life is wanting to kill Americans - you're damn right it is!
« Last Edit: August 26, 2004, 08:52:11 AM by Tom+ú » Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #30 on: August 26, 2004, 03:39:34 PM »

On a serious note the good news is Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani appears to have secured a cease-fire. I pray that it is what it appears to be and that many lives may be saved as a consequence.

Of course, as a diversion reasonable men can throw brick-bats at each other. At least it is a non-lethal form of boys and their toys

 Roll Eyes
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
J
(another Justin)
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144

OC.net


« Reply #31 on: August 26, 2004, 04:03:25 PM »

Is it OUR fault that the rest of the world are a buch of losers? Watch it pal -- your pathetic country may be next! (Braa-haaa-haaa)

Please explain to me how that comment promotes the values of our country, Tom...
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2004, 04:12:47 PM »

Is it OUR fault that the rest of the world are a buch of losers? Watch it pal -- your pathetic country may be next! (Braa-haaa-haaa)

Please explain to me how that comment promotes the values of our country, Tom...

What? I thought Empire were our values?
Logged
spartacus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286


OC.net


« Reply #33 on: August 26, 2004, 05:53:39 PM »

US history clearly shows when this happens that the poor will bear an unfair burden and the children of the rich and powerful will be provided with exemptions.

Not entirely true...Viet Nam and the Civil War were two wars that prove this point, but all the other wars do not.

In WWII all social economic classes served.

In Korea it was usually the WWII vets who were "recalled" first.

in WWI there were no exemptions...in fact manyyoung educated men left college and promising careers togo kill the kaiser

During the SPanish American War, there was no need of a draft....they had more volunteers than what was needed, including some very wealthy and famous notables.

DO not lump the Viet Nam draft experince in with all "US history" it was in fact quite different from all the other wars in that regard.
Logged
spartacus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286


OC.net


« Reply #34 on: August 26, 2004, 06:05:42 PM »


But my biggest point. Is an American life worth more than that of a non-American?

No....But is an Iraqi life worth less than a Western life?

How many hundreds of thousands more Iraqis would have had to have been tortured and killed by Saddam before the rest of the world would have joined the US, Britain, Poland, ROmania and other coalition forces?

The simple fact remains:

Germany and France were doing business Saddam and did not want to upset their deals. Russia was in no position to help and it too was doing business with Saddam...while at the same time providing the US with intelligence on Saddam -- intelligence that directly affected our decision to invade...and it was a US decision. The invasion was voted on and approved by the US elected represtantives twice. A defacto declaration of war to continue the hostilities first begun in the Gulf War...after Saddam failed to abide by that agreement...and ignored more than 14 Un resolutions during 12 years.

SOmebody had to do what needed doing...we looked around and very few were willing to help. But so many are willing to criticize!
Logged
Nacho
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #35 on: August 26, 2004, 06:57:34 PM »

Quote
How many hundreds of thousands more Iraqis would have had to have been tortured and killed by Saddam before the rest of the world would have joined the US, Britain, Poland, ROmania and other coalition forces?

The simple fact remains:

Germany and France were doing business Saddam and did not want to upset their deals. Russia was in no position to help and it too was doing business with Saddam...while at the same time providing the US with intelligence on Saddam -- intelligence that directly affected our decision to invade...and it was a US decision. The invasion was voted on and approved by the US elected represtantives twice. A defacto declaration of war to continue the hostilities first begun in the Gulf War...after Saddam failed to abide by that agreement...and ignored more than 14 Un resolutions during 12 years.

SOmebody had to do what needed doing...we looked around and very few were willing to help. But so many are willing to criticize!

Spartacus, you are making too much sense!!!! The truth obvious too some of us compared to most basing judgements off emotions.

The truth of the matter is the war never ended in Iraq, thier was a cease fire in place with the condition that Sadam would cooperate. We stationed thousands of military personal on the Kuwait border since gulf war 1 for this reason. He broke numerous resolutions that reinstating the fact he was in violation of the cease fire agreement. Our broad coalition of many nations had the right to go into Iraq because of these broken resolutions.

The kool aid drinkers will continue to beleive the "big lie" that we went into Iraq pre -emptively which is the furthest thing from the truth & a distortion of the facts. This lie is of course purpetuated by the mainstream media & those on the left looking for political points at the expense of our Country & honoring U.N. resolutions.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #36 on: August 26, 2004, 06:59:21 PM »

I really do not want to get into a contest about the relative merits of this or that country, nor what someone  else referred to as a 'knockabout' session. My critizism is one of the US foreign policy and not the implementors of the that policy, the soldier in the field.

Spartacus asks a question which merits reflection. If saving those lives were the principle why no intervention in a number of other places including central Africa? So others sat on their hands, which of the leading western powers has not and which one has not equipped, and done business with this or that horrendous regimes. Even friend Rumsfeld has previously done business with Saddam Hussein and he was no angel then. So how long has humanitarian concerns been a major plank of US foreign policy? Or anyone elses? I and a number of others outside the US have been reading for years, yes, years neo-conservative propoganda which has ear-marked Iraq. Humanitarian reasons were not as I recall particular a strong reason. It seemed more to do with 'American interests". Uzbekhistan has an appalling record and I state again people boiled alive, but it doesn't stop the US being heavily involved there. The only person with a clear conscience there is the Brit ambassador, who alone seems to speak out, and is very, very unpopular with the US administration as a consequence. (I don't think his bosses love him too much either).

Yes, I am glad Saddam Hussein has been deposed but if the greatest power on earth cannot intervene and have a credible strategy for handling the period following the 'invasion' it beggars belief. That merits the description, pathetic. Somebody at the Department of Defense deserves the sack for that alone.

Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #37 on: August 26, 2004, 07:22:55 PM »

Yes, I am glad Saddam Hussein has been deposed but if the greatest power on earth cannot intervene and have a credible strategy for handling the period following the 'invasion' it beggars belief. That merits the description, pathetic. Somebody at the Department of Defense deserves the sack for that alone.
Actually much of the blame for the naive and unrealistic handling of the war's aftermath can be blamed on incompetence within the State Dept.  The military effectively did what they were supposed to, which is to kill people and break things in order to achieve an objective.  Much of the aftermath was a result of poor planning and guidance from bureaucrats in the State Dept. which had unrealistic assumptions about how to deal with Iraq.  The fact that militias were able to be formed under the noses of the US military was not due to the Defense Dept. as much as it was due to the occupation government of Paul Bremer which didn't want to "offend" the poor Shiites.
Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #38 on: August 27, 2004, 09:12:52 AM »

Thank you, Theodore, for your response. May I ask, for purposes of clarifying your point, who decided to disband the Iraqi army and the Iraqi administrative infrastructure? I ask because it seems to me these actions have a great deal to do with what then followed. Your attribution of responsibility to the State Department disappoints me in that Colin Powell, a former and respected soldier, heads up State.

(I am not asking to get into some sort of 'silly' brickbat throwing that sadly seems all too common in these forums).
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2004, 11:54:07 AM »

Yes, I am glad Saddam Hussein has been deposed but if the greatest power on earth cannot intervene and have a credible strategy for handling the period following the 'invasion' it beggars belief.

To create a thorough, nation-building strategy before going to war would not only beggar belief, it would probably be the first time in history such a strategy was created.  There was no nation-building plan before WWII, or any war we've engaged in.  It took almost a decade after defeating Germany before they had a viable and working government (at least in the western part).

Personally, I think it gets a bit silly playing armchair army strategist when the only thing you have to go on are second hand reports from biased media outlets.  First we were "bogged down" in Afghanistan, then after the Taliban regime collapsed we were moving "too fast."  Then we were bogged down in Iraq because of sandstorms which our military planners supposedly didn't take into account, then after Hussein fell they said we moved too fast again.  In both countries they were crying we didn't have enough boots on the ground, now they are wanting us to have a massive pullout of troops within six months.

The truth is that these town crier types are forming their opinions of the day solely on emotion and with little regard to reason and facts.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2004, 04:27:07 PM »

If saving those lives [in Iraq] were the principle why no intervention in a number of other places including central Africa?...So how long has humanitarian concerns been a major plank of US foreign policy? Or anyone elses? I and a number of others outside the US have been reading for years, yes, years neo-conservative propoganda which has ear-marked Iraq. Humanitarian reasons were not as I recall particular a strong reason. It seemed more to do with 'American interests". Uzbekhistan has an appalling record and I state again people boiled alive, but it doesn't stop the US being heavily involved there. The only person with a clear conscience there is the Brit ambassador, who alone seems to speak out, and is very, very unpopular with the US administration as a consequence. (I don't think his bosses love him too much either).

gphadraig, you're the one making too much sense.  It's interesting how we chide Saddam for ignoring UN resolutions for twelve years while we conveniently ignored his abuses of human rights for twenty-plus!  You hit the nail on the head with 'American interests,' as criminals like Kim Jong Il will go unnoticed by this administration because they're -- apparently! -- no immediate threat to our economy.

Strelets, your idea that "these town crier types are forming their opinions...with little regard to reason and facts" has me scratching my head: we supposedly went over there for weapons we had no proof of and the threat they (didn't really) pose to our nation, only to flip-flop and use this idea of Saddam's abusive ways...who is it, exactly, who has little regard for reason and facts?
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2004, 04:33:41 PM »

Stretlets,

I believe your assertion to be incorrect, having regard to both Nazi Germany and MacArthur's briliance in dealing with a defeated Japanese Empire. A major military consideration is always to ensure that one does not win the war and lose the peace, surely?

As to the other theatres of conflict you bring in, I haven't commented on them so will not take responsibility for any adverse comments relating to them. Are you perhaps too an armchair strategist? For myself I draw on my own military experience and that of a military family for a number of generations. So I don't need to draw solely on media reporting.

The British Army has a lovely rejoiner to military planners, P*ss poor planning leads to poor performance. I guess they just get hung up with running around borrowing the equipment to carry it out.

However, I will come back on your response. The conflicts we all face now are asymertrical ones. The war against terrorism recognises no front lines and our enemies were no uniform, indeed they respond to no single command and control structure. Therefore everyone is potentially a target and everyone a 'stakeholder'; so I respectfully suggest, Sir, that unless you are in orbit there are no armchair strategists (except those good folks the politicians who live in an insulated 'bubble' and set policies, strategies and resource levels while leaving poor 'grunts' and the rest of us to face the challenge head on - ask the folks who used the Madrid rail network).

Interestingly, regarding Najaf the bellicose armchair strategists did not have their way and an elderly sick man left his hospital bed in London, England, and went to Najaf and we now see a withdrawal by Mr Sadr and his Madhi militia. I hope that the intelligence guys have been studying those media pictures and will pick up of some these insurgents little by little. Denting their strength without handing them and those who manipulate from behind the scenes a propaganda coup.
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
spartacus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286


OC.net


« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2004, 04:47:34 PM »

I hope that the intelligence guys have been studying those media pictures and will pick up of some these insurgents little by little.

No doubt they will Cool
Logged
gphadraig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

OC.net


« Reply #43 on: August 27, 2004, 06:58:39 PM »

Thank you to those who have understood the points I have tried to make.

My thoughts are with the casualties, combatant and non-combatant, and their families who have suffered so much in all of this; and for those who continue to face danger.

This conflicts, like all conflicts, evokes strong feelings in many if not all of us. Regretfully, strong feelings are just that, they change nothing except possibly harden our hearts...........
Logged

Age is honourable and youth noble
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #44 on: August 27, 2004, 11:21:24 PM »

A quick note...  my comments should not be construed as unequivocal support for any political party or candidate.  I've been sandbagged by others from both sides of the political spectrum for supporting a range of Orthodox social values, whether they be the rights of the unborn, the end of the death penalty, or providing assistance to the poor and the weak in society.

It's interesting how we chide Saddam for ignoring UN resolutions for twelve years while we conveniently ignored his abuses of human rights for twenty-plus!  You hit the nail on the head with 'American interests,' as criminals like Kim Jong Il will go unnoticed by this administration because they're -- apparently! -- no immediate threat to our economy.

Regarding your first point... were there UN sanctions against Hussein before his invasion of Kuwait?  Isn't the central pillar in the argument against the Iraq war today that there was no UN support for it?  On your second point, the problem is that the N. Koreans now have nuclear weapons.  Again, is the UN, particularly France and Germany, pushing for a war resolution against N. Korea?  Why bring this up now, rather than six or seven years ago when military action would have prevented the current mess on the Korean peninsula?

Strelets, your idea that "these town crier types are forming their opinions...with little regard to reason and facts" has me scratching my head: we supposedly went over there for weapons we had no proof of and the threat they (didn't really) pose to our nation, only to flip-flop and use this idea of Saddam's abusive ways...who is it, exactly, who has little regard for reason and facts?

The known facts before the war, according to the UN, French-British-Russian-American intelligence services, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, John Edwards, and Tom Daschle, are that Iraq possessed the WMD's.  Facts don't change upon a change in political parties in the White House, at least they shouldn't.  The UN had a list of unaccounted chemicals and biological materials, a list verified by the Iraqi government after Gulf War I.  Now these items supposedly disappeared.  Where did they go?  Are you denying their existence?  Bear in mind Germany possessed an arsenal of large super-guns which were supposed to have been turned over by mandate of the Versailles Treaty after WWI.  To this day, they haven't been found.  What this proves is that if someone buries their weapons, chances of finding them are almost nil.

I believe your assertion to be incorrect, having regard to both Nazi Germany and MacArthur's briliance in dealing with a defeated Japanese Empire. A major military consideration is always to ensure that one does not win the war and lose the peace, surely?

If my assertion is incorrect, why don't you tell us what nation-building plan was put together before we went to war against Germany and Japan?  Until then, my assertion remains correct.

As to the other theatres of conflict you bring in, I haven't commented on them so will not take responsibility for any adverse comments relating to them.

I didn't bring in other theatres of conflict.

Are you perhaps too an armchair strategist? For myself I draw on my own military experience and that of a military family for a number of generations. So I don't need to draw solely on media reporting.

With all due respect, that's exactly what you draw on.  You can watch Wes Clark and a host of other retired generals on CNN give a critical analysis of the war, and you can watch another group of retired generals on Fox News giving the opposite views, and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans.  You and I are not getting real time intelligence feeds, nor are we currently members of the Joint Chiefs who really know what's going on, politically and militarily, on the ground.  Until these guys all retire and write the books about what really happened in the planning and what confidential info they were working from, playing armchair army strategist and complaining about inadequate troop levels or the speed of military successes or supposed lack of planning behind the scenes is at best frivolous guesswork.

The British Army has a lovely rejoiner to military planners, P*ss poor planning leads to poor performance. I guess they just get hung up with running around borrowing the equipment to carry it out.

Military planning and nation-building are two different activities.  I know of no previous war where a serious nation-building plan was concocted before the war began.  That's a distant second objective to the first objective - winning the military campaign.  No one can say objectively that both Iraq wars and the Afghan war were poorly planned military blunders.  It's a joke.  No previous wars were carried out with such speed and low loss of life as these conflicts.  The only reason we are subjected to the current hysteria is because we're in the middle of an election year.  This will all blow over afterwards.

However, I will come back on your response. The conflicts we all face now are asymertrical ones. The war against terrorism recognises no front lines and our enemies were no uniform, indeed they respond to no single command and control structure.

They are asymmetrical and symmetrical.  The terrorists are being funded and trained by client states, which can and should be dealt with through symmetrical means, which is what we did in Afghanistan and Iraq.  It's mighty dangerous to only look at the war on terrorism as a police problem against criminals, without taking into account the rogue state problem financing it.  It's even more dangerous to reject the use of police measures against the asymmetrical problems, as many civil libertarians advocate.

Therefore everyone is potentially a target and everyone a 'stakeholder'; so I respectfully suggest, Sir, that unless you are in orbit there are no armchair strategists (except those good folks the politicians who live in an insulated 'bubble' and set policies, strategies and resource levels while leaving poor 'grunts' and the rest of us to face the challenge head on - ask the folks who used the Madrid rail network).

Being the victim of a house fire doesn't qualify one as a fire inspector.  Having a car stolen doesn't make one an expert in law enforcement.  Furthermore, watching other people die on tv at the hands of terrorists doesn't make one a military expert.  If you really believe you know something more about the facts on the ground in Iraq than "insulated" politicians who receive real-time intelligence and military feeds, then I'd say you've got the blinkers on... big time.  The good folks on the ground were hired to risk their lives at the command of those insulated politicians, just as poor folks are asked everyday by us to risk their lives putting out our house fires and taking bullets to protect us from society's criminals.

These are all bogus arguments that essentially refute taking military action under any scenario, as someone is always going to be killed, and many of them poor and innocent.  Every one of these arguments is a excuse for the world to be living under Nazism or Communism today.

All the best.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2004, 11:27:43 PM by Strelets » Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.143 seconds with 72 queries.