Weapons of Mass Discussion is a forum that challenges the liberal media and defends the honor and integrity of America.
Choose your weapon...
"INTERNATIONAL EDITION" of WEAPONS of MASS DISCUSSION
N. Korea to declare it has nukes
North Korea startled a six-nation conference in China on East Asian security by announcing its intentions to formally declare its possession of nuclear weapons and to carry out a nuclear test, an administration official said Thursday. - This story by SHAWN McCARTHY of the Globe and Mail
Matt's Chat: For me this is not about hating liberals and placing blame. For me, this is an issue of the Bush administration choosing, what in their mind was, the lesser of two evils. Bushites had a choice: Iraq or North Korea. We chose Iraq. I believe it was smarter for us to go after Iraq because we weren't positive what the status of Saddam's programs actually were. With North Korea, they didn't hide it from us. I look at this as a failure of diplomacy and an even bigger failure of common sense. Diplomacy does not work with fanatics. People who feel they have nothing to lose will say whatever they need to say to buy enough time to do what they feel they must do. I am not surprised by this announcement. It has been a longtime coming. Now, what are we going to do about it?
Mark's Remarks: Well, thank Bill Clinton for more proliferation. That moron welcomed the damn North Koreans and gave them everything they wanted. Gave them our technology, our know-how, to "foster better relations." All he has fostered is another enemy with destructive power. The Chinese acting appalled, heck, they probably gave some material to the North Koreans. This is a situation we need to severely monitor, and I can feel that North Korea may be next on the ol' Axis of Evil hitlist. See, folks, this is what liberal foreign policy gets you. "Sure, Kim Jong Il, come on over and take this knowhow, get some of our money, and we'll be friends, right? We'll give you everything you want, just say you dont hate us?" That is what this is about. Instead of doing what is right for our country, liberals have given over vast secrets of tech to our enemies, especially in the last administration. I still fail to see why Bill Clinton is not facing treason charges.
Baghdad Bombing is UN's 9/11
"While we always have to look at how we have to increase security measures, there’s a sort of line in the sand that we don’t want to cross. We don’t want to become a “fortress U.N.,” because at that point our usefulness to the people we’re seeking to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan is lost. " - Mark Malloch-Brown, UN in an interview posted by on MSNBC's website.
Matt's Chat: I'm one of those who calls a tragedy a tragedy and doesn't seek to "rank" them. The bombing on the UN HQ in Iraq is a tragedy. For anyone to compare this tragedy (dozens of victims) to 9/11 (thousands of victims) though, has to be crazy. Beyond the idea of referring to 9/11 as a "wake up call," I see absolutely no comparison between the two events. It's probably best that I let that be that...
Mark's Remarks: To me, this is an insult to those who died on 9/11. This attack on the UN is nowhere near as severe or as meaningful as what happened that day. It is stupid of the UN to think they would be immune to attacks simply because they proudly send out the message: we hate America, too! This is what happens when you tie in with thieves and terrorists and dictators, like the UN has. You can trust no one.
Oh, then the guy talks about all the aid the UN has been giving, and how it is the Biggest provider of assistance to the Iraqi people. Give me a break. What about all the food Americans have been giving?
The best security measures for the UN to take is to formally side with America and fight terrorism, instead of coddling dictators and synchopants who care nothing for human lives. The UN is nothing more than an ostrich with its head buried in the sands, and now, they are only seeking to bury it deeper. They are taking the unfortunate loss of life to say, we need more power in the region! Yeah, you have done so well with securing your own buildings, haven't you, Koffi? The UN needs to shut up and let the US do our jobs. They need to grow up and realize terrorists are going to hit anyone they want, not just Americans. That blue flag is no security blanket, and it means less and less the more wishy-washy the UN gets.
Canada Outlaws Smiling (?)
To get a valid passport, Canadians must now send in two photos with "neutral expressions." That means a closed-mouth, straight-ahead gaze into the camera. - This story is by SHAWN McCARTHY of the Globe and Mail
Matt's Chat: Silly Canadians...Trix are for kids. From the land that brought us hockey and lumberjacking, we get an idea that I'm sure liberals will want to enforce in the United States.
Mark's Remarks: Hello boys and girls....can you say, overkill? Give me a break.....This is more ridiculous than searching a 2 year old before getting on a plane. Of course it is silly, it is from our crazy cousins in Canada! No smiling. This is totally outrageous. What is the difference between a smile and frown or steady neutral gaze. I agree with the other guidelines, but those are common sense. This whole smiling thing is ridiculous. If a guard is confused by a smile, that person should not be doing security. Simply ludicrous!
France Cancels Christmas (?)
France, a country where leisure time is sacrosanct, is mulling a radical plan for financing health care after a heat wave estimated to have killed thousands: Make people work on a national holiday. - This story is by John Leicester of the Associated Press
Matt's Chat: French kissing, French toast, and French fries (although some will make a case for the French tickler) that is it! No more French ideas for liberals in this country to latch on to... This makes me wonder if the "no smiling" thing came from French Canada.
Mark's Remarks: Another idiotic idea from the French. They seemed more upset about working on minor holidays than Christmas. Maybe, if the French would spend more time on infrastructure instead of showing the world their collective asses with their arrogant posturing, the whole health care thing would be better off. Maybe if they weren't neo-socialist lovers of wine and cheese who have the dreaded socialized medicine, that would fix their problems. Socialized medicine, nay, even socialism, has proven to be nothing but a quagmire. It is a system that does not work. All you create are fiefdom bureaucracies concerned with their own existence so much that they leave behind the care of the people. The French are good at this sort of thing. Rather than look hard at their system and re-examine what is going on, let's blame holidays. Lets cancel Christmas. But, lets punish the unwashed citizenry, that will fix everything. That is why liberals are the worst elitists. Who ends up having to pay? The very people the liberals claim to love and support: the citizenry. France should surrender to the tide of failure and simply recreate a new system, or better yet, ask us in America who to properly create a better socioeconomic system. Of course, the French will never do that, because they are the center of the Universe, just ask them. Well, for being the greatest, they certainly don't know how to run their country. Maybe they should take notes, like Montesquieu did 200 years ago, when people like he and Rousseau cited us unwashed and uncultured Americans as the hearth of Freedom and Prosperity.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
Bowling For Truth: CAPTAIN KIRK IS WAY COOLER THAN HAN SOLO!!!
At a safe distance from his homeland, veteran Hollywood actor Harrison Ford launched a broadside at US policy on Iraq, his country's gun laws - and the film industry for producing "video games" for teenagers.
"I'm very disturbed about the direction American foreign policy is going," said Ford, with US post-war casualties having exceeded those during the actual conflict.
This story from the Age linked to the Drudge report...
I used to respect Mr. Ford. He seemed to be a man of honor and integrity. He valued family and took roles that portrayed Americans as heroes. Now, since his midlife psychoses, we see the true Mr. Ford: sex-driven, family destroying, and America hating. He is nothing more than the typical self-loathing liberal. He discusses how we should find the real reason why terrorists blow up buildings and kill and maim. The reason is that they care little for human life, not that they are disenfrancised and angry. Mr. Ford's musings lead me to lose my respect for him. Coupled with dating a woman half his age, leaving his children behind for an anorexic, and generally looking like an idiot with that earring. Grow up, Mr. Ford! We expected better from you. At least Shatner knows to keep his mouth shut....
At a safe distance from his homeland, veteran Hollywood actor Harrison Ford launched a broadside at US policy on Iraq, his country's gun laws - and the film industry for producing "video games" for teenagers.
"I'm very disturbed about the direction American foreign policy is going," said Ford, with US post-war casualties having exceeded those during the actual conflict.
This story from the Age linked to the Drudge report...
I used to respect Mr. Ford. He seemed to be a man of honor and integrity. He valued family and took roles that portrayed Americans as heroes. Now, since his midlife psychoses, we see the true Mr. Ford: sex-driven, family destroying, and America hating. He is nothing more than the typical self-loathing liberal. He discusses how we should find the real reason why terrorists blow up buildings and kill and maim. The reason is that they care little for human life, not that they are disenfrancised and angry. Mr. Ford's musings lead me to lose my respect for him. Coupled with dating a woman half his age, leaving his children behind for an anorexic, and generally looking like an idiot with that earring. Grow up, Mr. Ford! We expected better from you. At least Shatner knows to keep his mouth shut....
The M Files: George Bush of Baghdad
It's a fair bet this Baghdad baby won't run into anybody else in Iraq with the same name. His parents named their six-week-old son George Bush, to show their appreciation for U.S. efforts to get Saddam Hussein out of power. This story is by the Associated Press.
I have actually been waiting for this story. And I know that the mainstream media will pass on it. This is the story that needs to be told. Iraqis are not engaged in a mass revolt against any American occupation. They are in fact GRATEFUL that we have finally taken the neccessary action to end a horrible regime that was known for committing crimes against humanity and his own people.
The majority of those few miserable people who are attacking the liberators of Iraq are not Iraqis. They are foreign terrorists bent on destablizing a neccessary period of reform. These are the same people that would use Saddam's weapons of mass destruction if they were capable of securing them.
Whether we find weapons of mass destruction or not is irrelevent. We did what was best for Iraq, the Middle East region and the world. We have a responsibility to lead and to use our power with careful consideration for the betterment of mankind. We did what was RIGHT.
It's a fair bet this Baghdad baby won't run into anybody else in Iraq with the same name. His parents named their six-week-old son George Bush, to show their appreciation for U.S. efforts to get Saddam Hussein out of power. This story is by the Associated Press.
I have actually been waiting for this story. And I know that the mainstream media will pass on it. This is the story that needs to be told. Iraqis are not engaged in a mass revolt against any American occupation. They are in fact GRATEFUL that we have finally taken the neccessary action to end a horrible regime that was known for committing crimes against humanity and his own people.
The majority of those few miserable people who are attacking the liberators of Iraq are not Iraqis. They are foreign terrorists bent on destablizing a neccessary period of reform. These are the same people that would use Saddam's weapons of mass destruction if they were capable of securing them.
Whether we find weapons of mass destruction or not is irrelevent. We did what was best for Iraq, the Middle East region and the world. We have a responsibility to lead and to use our power with careful consideration for the betterment of mankind. We did what was RIGHT.
Weapons of Mass Discussion is a forum that challenges the liberal media and defends the honor and integrity of America.
Choose your weapon...
US CONSIDERS A UN FORCE FOR IRAQ
A top State Department official says Washington is exploring the idea of a multinational force in Iraq that would be led by U.N. officers serving under an American commander. This story is by VOANews
Mark's Remarks: I am not a big fan of the UN, but as long as it is an American commanding officer, I do not see the harm of a multi-national force. I am sure the French will be upset, but hey, remember D-Day, fellas? It was an American commander who led forces to free your liberal cheese and wine country, and never forget that!!!! While your army was goosestepping or cowering in fear with white flags for everyone, American commanders took back your country for you. However, I believe the multinationals should be used as support, not as front-line. American soldiers proved we, more than any other army, know what we are doing and can get the job done. I would hate to see another Yugoslavia or something happen, with our boys under UN control. If the UN balks at having an American Commander, I say tell them Thanks but No Thanks, go back to kowtowing to terrorists; because we will find out and there will be hell to pay. Have some cheese and wine and watch REAL liberators at work.
Matt's Chat: I have be strongly against involving the UN in Iraq. But at some point, Iraq is going to have to rejoin the rest of the world and that includes the UN. It wouldn't hurt for the UN to deploy some sort of protection for themselves at least. It will be the Americans fault no matter what happens anyway...at least to the media. There is nothing wrong in reinforcing our troops with additional, fresh men and women of our armed forces. I would rather see that than UN involvement at this time. We need to finish what we started. Or we'll never hear the end of it.
Iraq is battlefield for war vs. terror
Among the more comical moments of a grim week was the sight of the president of the Security Council expressing his condemnation of the terrorist attack on the UN. He was the representative of Syria. Syria is a terrorist state. Syrians have flooded across the border into Iraq to take up arms with their beleaguered Baathist brethren. This article is by MARK STEYN of the Chicago Sun-Times.
Mark's Remarks: I love it. The UN is nothing more than a free hiding place for many terror states. The idiocy of their choices for leadership boggle the mind. They put Cuba in charge of human rights. Cuba! A totalitarian communist state. Lovely. I think if the UN really wants to help they should Censure themselves and especially France and stay the hell out of our way. The UN is an anachronism. The fact that they only condemn an act of terrorism when it strikes their own roost shows their callousness. They did not condemn when terrorists were killing Americans. What the UN needs to do is clean its own house up and join the US in weeding out terror. The UN should depose nations that support terror, like Syria. It is a shame that we allow such hypocrisy of a Syrian decrying acts of terror that his own nation probably helped support. That is why the UN is nothing more than a joke. They have never had a successful mission without US involvement. Now, they want to jump in where we have done something on our own and claim credit. Just like the French who claim they did more to liberate their country than Eisenhower. If it was not for America, the French would be speaking German.
Matt's Chat: I am extremely gratified to see this article! A few days ago on my personal blog, I expressed my views on the UN's condemnation and the strong irony contained therein. For me, it comes back to the simple question of where and when the UN supported us and our efforts. Now they are just itching to get in to Iraq and reclaim what they lost...a purpose for existence.
Choose your weapon...
US CONSIDERS A UN FORCE FOR IRAQ
A top State Department official says Washington is exploring the idea of a multinational force in Iraq that would be led by U.N. officers serving under an American commander. This story is by VOANews
Mark's Remarks: I am not a big fan of the UN, but as long as it is an American commanding officer, I do not see the harm of a multi-national force. I am sure the French will be upset, but hey, remember D-Day, fellas? It was an American commander who led forces to free your liberal cheese and wine country, and never forget that!!!! While your army was goosestepping or cowering in fear with white flags for everyone, American commanders took back your country for you. However, I believe the multinationals should be used as support, not as front-line. American soldiers proved we, more than any other army, know what we are doing and can get the job done. I would hate to see another Yugoslavia or something happen, with our boys under UN control. If the UN balks at having an American Commander, I say tell them Thanks but No Thanks, go back to kowtowing to terrorists; because we will find out and there will be hell to pay. Have some cheese and wine and watch REAL liberators at work.
Matt's Chat: I have be strongly against involving the UN in Iraq. But at some point, Iraq is going to have to rejoin the rest of the world and that includes the UN. It wouldn't hurt for the UN to deploy some sort of protection for themselves at least. It will be the Americans fault no matter what happens anyway...at least to the media. There is nothing wrong in reinforcing our troops with additional, fresh men and women of our armed forces. I would rather see that than UN involvement at this time. We need to finish what we started. Or we'll never hear the end of it.
Iraq is battlefield for war vs. terror
Among the more comical moments of a grim week was the sight of the president of the Security Council expressing his condemnation of the terrorist attack on the UN. He was the representative of Syria. Syria is a terrorist state. Syrians have flooded across the border into Iraq to take up arms with their beleaguered Baathist brethren. This article is by MARK STEYN of the Chicago Sun-Times.
Mark's Remarks: I love it. The UN is nothing more than a free hiding place for many terror states. The idiocy of their choices for leadership boggle the mind. They put Cuba in charge of human rights. Cuba! A totalitarian communist state. Lovely. I think if the UN really wants to help they should Censure themselves and especially France and stay the hell out of our way. The UN is an anachronism. The fact that they only condemn an act of terrorism when it strikes their own roost shows their callousness. They did not condemn when terrorists were killing Americans. What the UN needs to do is clean its own house up and join the US in weeding out terror. The UN should depose nations that support terror, like Syria. It is a shame that we allow such hypocrisy of a Syrian decrying acts of terror that his own nation probably helped support. That is why the UN is nothing more than a joke. They have never had a successful mission without US involvement. Now, they want to jump in where we have done something on our own and claim credit. Just like the French who claim they did more to liberate their country than Eisenhower. If it was not for America, the French would be speaking German.
Matt's Chat: I am extremely gratified to see this article! A few days ago on my personal blog, I expressed my views on the UN's condemnation and the strong irony contained therein. For me, it comes back to the simple question of where and when the UN supported us and our efforts. Now they are just itching to get in to Iraq and reclaim what they lost...a purpose for existence.
Wednesday, August 27, 2003
Weapons of Mass Discussion is a forum that challenges the liberal media and defends the honor and integrity of America.
Choose your weapon...
US "PEACE" DEATHS IN IRAQ SURPASS "WAR" DEATHS
The deaths brought to 64 the number of U.S. soldiers killed in action, according to the latest Pentagon figures, since Bush declared major combat over on May 1. - This story By Andrew Marshall of Reuters.
Mark's Remarks: This whole thing of saying more killed at end of hostilities than during war is nothing more than an attempt by the left to make Bush sound like a moron. It does not matter that the casualties are tens of thousands less than the democrats thought there would be, because they do not want us to remember how they hoped and prayed Iraq would be another Vietnam. I grieve for all our fallen heroes, but if we immediately pull out, ala Bill Clinton in Somalia, then we are not doing these fallen heroes justice, and are spitting in their faces. Much the same way Clinton did to the fallen from the Blackhawk Down crew. Remember that body dragged through the streets? We never got justice for that. Let's not let that happen to our fallen heroes in Iraq. Stay until the job is done.
Matt's Chat: Why is this news? I grieve for all of our fallen heroes. Don't get me wrong, this is still tragic. But what difference does it make if these guys died during "peace" or "war?" They have paid the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our nation and I'll not see that politicized. And THAT is what the article is really about.
None of Bush's options in Iraq looks good (?)
For President Bush, suddenly every option in Iraq looks bad. To simply stay the course locks him onto a trajectory that virtually guarantees steady US casualties and rising violence against international and Iraqi targets. This story is by Ronald Brownstein of the LA Times.
Mark's Remarks: Of course, the liberal times is going to say that no option looks good. If we want no sacrifices, of course this is the case. However, if we back down now, the world will think of us again as the wimps only interested in ourselves that we were portrayed as under the Clinton Regime. The ONLY option is to continue the fight until we have Iraq set up as an ally in the Middle East. The papers do not tell you that only in the isolated area around Tikrit are we mainly seeing violence. NO, they would have us believe it is rampant all over. Simply not true. Keep up the good fight.
Matt's Chat: There were a few good points cleverly disguised in this article to make me wonder where this one was going. In the end, the President will continue to do what is right for the country, for Iraq, and the world. And THAT is all that matters.
RETHINKING NASA
NASA: Do we really need this agency? If so, for what? Those questions lurk between the lines of a tough report on the Columbia space shuttle disaster. This story by Investor's Business Daily.
Mark's Remarks: Whoever asks what do we need nasa for should never use a plastic cup! They should never get an MRI or chemotherapy. Without the space program, these and other developments might never have happened. The author of this article, to be blunt, has no clue. We need NASA. Maybe some modifications, but we need it. We, as a society, need a frontier and a big question to answer. The society that quits striving for discovery not only stagnates, but dies. We need to continue the space program. Now, I will grant that we need some changes in administration and structure, but to say shelve the agency is not only ludicrous, it is plain stupid.
Matt's Chat: Let me answer the question business boy, YES...HELL YES. We need NASA more than ever before. The manned space program is a "peaceful" way for the United States to display its power and might. Even liberals should have no problem figuring that out. I believe that the space program should set a new goal for a new era. China is playing "hare and the tortoise" with us...let's get back in the game.
U.S. Opens Hearing on Alleged Iraqi Abuse
The U.S. military opened a hearing Wednesday into allegations that four U.S. Army reservists abused Iraqi prisoners of war at a camp in this southern port city. - This story is by Tarek Al-Issawi of the Associated Press.
Mark's Remarks: Unlike Iraqi courts under Saddam, or even the L.A. Jury during the OJ case, I am sure justice will be served. If the soldiers did indeed abuse Iraqi POWs, then they should have to pay a consequence. We have to maintain, not only for ourselves, but for the Iraqi people, the highest standards. If we ignore abuses, they will equate us with the rapes and murders under Saddam; and they will turn on us. Now, watch your papers, because I am sure the Liberal Press is going to turn this into a My Lai massacre thing or they are going to attempt to denigrate our soldiers. If this occurs in your papers, write the editors and tell them to go to Hell.
Matt's Chat: The United States military has to live up to, and surpass, the highest standards of conduct. As a component of our "superpower," our military must always show the world what we are capable of both in war and in peace. It is imperative that our military conduct themselves with honor and integrity at ALL TIMES and in all situations. Abuse of prisoners is not acceptable. If it happened, I would expect that the soldiers who committed such an act to be apporiately punished in accordance with military law.
Choose your weapon...
US "PEACE" DEATHS IN IRAQ SURPASS "WAR" DEATHS
The deaths brought to 64 the number of U.S. soldiers killed in action, according to the latest Pentagon figures, since Bush declared major combat over on May 1. - This story By Andrew Marshall of Reuters.
Mark's Remarks: This whole thing of saying more killed at end of hostilities than during war is nothing more than an attempt by the left to make Bush sound like a moron. It does not matter that the casualties are tens of thousands less than the democrats thought there would be, because they do not want us to remember how they hoped and prayed Iraq would be another Vietnam. I grieve for all our fallen heroes, but if we immediately pull out, ala Bill Clinton in Somalia, then we are not doing these fallen heroes justice, and are spitting in their faces. Much the same way Clinton did to the fallen from the Blackhawk Down crew. Remember that body dragged through the streets? We never got justice for that. Let's not let that happen to our fallen heroes in Iraq. Stay until the job is done.
Matt's Chat: Why is this news? I grieve for all of our fallen heroes. Don't get me wrong, this is still tragic. But what difference does it make if these guys died during "peace" or "war?" They have paid the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our nation and I'll not see that politicized. And THAT is what the article is really about.
None of Bush's options in Iraq looks good (?)
For President Bush, suddenly every option in Iraq looks bad. To simply stay the course locks him onto a trajectory that virtually guarantees steady US casualties and rising violence against international and Iraqi targets. This story is by Ronald Brownstein of the LA Times.
Mark's Remarks: Of course, the liberal times is going to say that no option looks good. If we want no sacrifices, of course this is the case. However, if we back down now, the world will think of us again as the wimps only interested in ourselves that we were portrayed as under the Clinton Regime. The ONLY option is to continue the fight until we have Iraq set up as an ally in the Middle East. The papers do not tell you that only in the isolated area around Tikrit are we mainly seeing violence. NO, they would have us believe it is rampant all over. Simply not true. Keep up the good fight.
Matt's Chat: There were a few good points cleverly disguised in this article to make me wonder where this one was going. In the end, the President will continue to do what is right for the country, for Iraq, and the world. And THAT is all that matters.
RETHINKING NASA
NASA: Do we really need this agency? If so, for what? Those questions lurk between the lines of a tough report on the Columbia space shuttle disaster. This story by Investor's Business Daily.
Mark's Remarks: Whoever asks what do we need nasa for should never use a plastic cup! They should never get an MRI or chemotherapy. Without the space program, these and other developments might never have happened. The author of this article, to be blunt, has no clue. We need NASA. Maybe some modifications, but we need it. We, as a society, need a frontier and a big question to answer. The society that quits striving for discovery not only stagnates, but dies. We need to continue the space program. Now, I will grant that we need some changes in administration and structure, but to say shelve the agency is not only ludicrous, it is plain stupid.
Matt's Chat: Let me answer the question business boy, YES...HELL YES. We need NASA more than ever before. The manned space program is a "peaceful" way for the United States to display its power and might. Even liberals should have no problem figuring that out. I believe that the space program should set a new goal for a new era. China is playing "hare and the tortoise" with us...let's get back in the game.
U.S. Opens Hearing on Alleged Iraqi Abuse
The U.S. military opened a hearing Wednesday into allegations that four U.S. Army reservists abused Iraqi prisoners of war at a camp in this southern port city. - This story is by Tarek Al-Issawi of the Associated Press.
Mark's Remarks: Unlike Iraqi courts under Saddam, or even the L.A. Jury during the OJ case, I am sure justice will be served. If the soldiers did indeed abuse Iraqi POWs, then they should have to pay a consequence. We have to maintain, not only for ourselves, but for the Iraqi people, the highest standards. If we ignore abuses, they will equate us with the rapes and murders under Saddam; and they will turn on us. Now, watch your papers, because I am sure the Liberal Press is going to turn this into a My Lai massacre thing or they are going to attempt to denigrate our soldiers. If this occurs in your papers, write the editors and tell them to go to Hell.
Matt's Chat: The United States military has to live up to, and surpass, the highest standards of conduct. As a component of our "superpower," our military must always show the world what we are capable of both in war and in peace. It is imperative that our military conduct themselves with honor and integrity at ALL TIMES and in all situations. Abuse of prisoners is not acceptable. If it happened, I would expect that the soldiers who committed such an act to be apporiately punished in accordance with military law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)