Love / Polish women are the most beautiful in the world! [1718]


Pot, kettle....Wysp is Polish....Rocky you're kidding, right?


....no need to get defensive, if you want to burn one go for it, but if you get burned for it one day, the law's the law. Not sure I want a doc working on me while he's stoned, either, for that matter....

John P.

Life / Cannabis / Weed in Poland... How much does marijuana cost per gram and how easy is to get it? [355]

There's a Doc in San Diego they are after right now, as a matter of fact, for being a rubber stamp for a 215 card business. Might even be Rocky's doc. Haven't kept up with it (moved away from SD about 6 months ago) maybe they caught him.

While the state of California won't come after anyone, it is, for better or worse, against Federal law, on those occasions the Feds come looking you are out of luck.

Personally, I don't think Marijuana is harmless (even though part of Mom's family used to grow it) but deregulation does tend to drive prices down, and drug dealers to other lines of work. After all, in the 1920's one could buy cocaine in his or her local drug store, cheap, and nobody was shooting each other over it. Coca Cola, for instance, was GREEN, and you guessed it, had cocaine in it (originally). No wonder it took off.... take away the money, and the criminal activity often subsides.

John P.

Love / Polish women are the most beautiful in the world! [1718]


True. Wouldn't want them blasted out of their minds on booze, either, however it is all too often that the line gets hazy, and then they start rationalizing, if I just drink/smoke/shoot/snort *just once* this morning, nobody will know the difference....

It happens. Look at the Docs and others who keep getting busted for dipping a little extra out of the pharmacy, or the anesthesiologists who think, well, if I just fondle ONE patient while she's out...then it becomes another, and another....next thing you know, they're running from the police. There was even a doc in San Diego who is on the wanted list, they think he ran to Canada.

Still, if your family always keeps it on times when they won't remotely have to use their skills as MD's, their battle with the law is up to them. Hope they have some sort of ORM in place, if you will. (I can't have a drop of alcohol, for instance, anywhere within 12 hours prior to briefing for a flight-and forget about anything illegal. They do random urinalysis and that's a huge career ender that follows even when you get out.

John P.

Life / Cannabis / Weed in Poland... How much does marijuana cost per gram and how easy is to get it? [355]


Slow down buddy. Never said you were. I said they were after the doc who was giving out the cards. Also, FWIW I'm just as American as you are and am Active Duty for the last 14 years. What have YOU done? As for being called a Pole-I'll take it as a compliment. I'd hate to think you thought I was like you at the moment....

The rest of your post is irrelevant. All the trappings of California law have nothing to do with federal law. If California authorities are around, and you have your "card" you're ok. If federal authorities catch you-even if they are only park rangers (yes, National Parks are federal jurisdiction) your little bag of "legal" marijuana just skipped right over misdemeanor and became a federal offense with mandatory prison time if convicted. While it's possible someone with a serious ailment would be given leniency, you, my friend, would not.

Oh, and if you insist on calling people Morons, at least learn to spell first. You grew up here, presumably, and don't have any excuse for not knowing the language. People would take you more seriously when you called them names....

John P.

Life / Cannabis / Weed in Poland... How much does marijuana cost per gram and how easy is to get it? [355]


You still have it...and the military doesn't do anything against it. We go where you, or the people you elect-send us. Remember that next time you go vote.

Also, do a little homework (outside of your accounting homework) on what laws have actually changed. There are politicians trying to scare you into voting out their opposition (and therefore, *THEM* IN...) by telling people all their rights are going away etc. etc. but if you corner them or look things up-your rights haven't changed a bit. They're arguing whether they can listen to Ahmed Mustafa on the phone in Afghanistan or not, once the lawyers find out he sometimes calls some guy in New Jersey. Enemy troops, even terrorists, have never had habeas corpus rights. You, as a citizen, always have, and still do.

Hope that calms things for you.
If you don't want to serve, don't. If you consider it (there ARE former potheads serving even today with waivers) I suggest instead of talking to a recruiter who is under tremendous pressure to get people to join (careers and even families are ruined over recruiting tours I've heard) call a base and get ahold of someone actually DOING the job you might consider if you join. They'll give you the no BS truth, whether they like it or not, the who spill. You can make a better decision that way even before think about talking to a recruiter. It's something I wish someone would have done for me when I joined. I'm fairly happy what I do now, but I could have STARTED in this job.

good luck.

John P.

Love / Polish women are the most beautiful in the world! [1718]

Unlike in the civilian world, for us they are without warning, and random. You find out you are taking the "test" and you are not allowed to leave or go anywhere until you take it. Not too many drugs in the military. It happens, but the people almost always eventually get caught. Best just to stay clean. Personally, it's never been my thing anyway, I've never gotten into the drug scene even if I've been around it.

John P.

Love / Polish women are the most beautiful in the world! [1718]


I've seen this in loved ones myself, hats off to you wrt this.
Good luck

John P.

Genealogy / The typical Polish look, or all Eastern Europeans [656]

I think there's a huge amount of misinformation going around, both about Americans as well as Europeans. That photo posted above is an example. It shows one woman who does not know how to buy clothes that fit, and displaying her underwear-and another who is obese, sitting at a picnic table. Nothing in the photo, other than someone's caption, tells one where these women are from. I have seen examples of both and not just in the US. Witek, have you ever been to the U.S.? I somehow doubt it. Or perhaps you went to the wrong part of the country. There are certain ethnicities which prize large women and it is no surprise that the women in those areas aim to please. Just my observation. Other than the signs, and larger less walking-friendly cities, you would likely not find the 2/3 overweight number you quoted. Someone once said 83.53% of all statistics are made up. Chances are in most major US cities, other than more ethnicities, you would be poorly disappointed looking for that imaginary overweight majority. There are some out there, but not like you seem to believe. Visit San Diego some day. Some of the hottest women anywhere in the world. Yes, I'm sure some of them are descended from Poland, as well as elsewhere-America *IS* a melting pot, after all....LA. Even near me, visit Virginia Beach.

While I am in the armed forces and there are height/weight/bodyfat% standards, seeing fit people elsewhere is not at all an exception. Honestly, I think Isthatu hit close to the mark. America's medical schools are too tied into the pharmaceutical companies, and they want DESPERATELY to sell you a prohibitively expensive drug which will treat (not cure) you from whatever condition they want you to think you have. The television is clogged with commercials claiming such "facts" as the 2/3 number you mention-when in fact they haven't really researched this. They just want you to buy their diet pills. So they keep dropping hints that you are "fat" or a "little overweight". Next thing you know, women (and men) watching these start thinking, well, I don't have ripped abs and 24" biceps, I must be a fat slob. So when they fill out surveys/online profiles, etc etc they say "a few extra pounds" or "a little overweight" because, even at 19, they *believe* that 5'5" and 100lb is "overweight".

As to some of the ones who really are, some do have hypothyroidism, but I agree with others especially wrt children, there is a lot of this culture of drugging the life out of them. Because, in most states in the U.S. they have made it a cultural faux pas to allow children to play outside. OMG someone might STEAL you. They make huge news stories about kidnapped children, and so Mom locks her kids inside with a video game, and wonders why they are getting fatter. They are antsy at school, because schools "punish" for poor academic performance by cancelling PE, and it's a vicious cycle.

Let them outside, and spend the time with them.
Others who have true genetic and medical issues, should be easier to help once the system isn't burdened with kids who actually have nothing wrong with them...

Sorry for the rant folks

John P.

Food / Lost family recipe for Chow-Chow (Polish style) [37]

Its sort of like a relish, lots of people made it where I grew up (I have no idea the origins of it...) but people would eat it on saltine crackers or every so often, a hot dog. I've not heard of anyone making it other than in pretty rural areas. Perhaps try a search for Appalachian recipes? I'm not sure the right spelling, either.

Good luck.

John P.

History / Can anyone from Poland tell me about Auschwitz and The Ghetto? [582]


While I can't link to your 2.5 hour commentary, please Sean, I thought better of you than this! Everyone was funding the Nazis...until almost the war started they seemed to be all the rage, Adolf Hitler himself was even made Time magazine "man of the year" while people denied the other things he was doing as "rumors"...Saying Prescott Bush or anybody else "funded the Nazis" when in reality everyone was rushing to fund this "new refreshing leader" in Germany...is a bit hasty...sounds familiar to me..


(emphasis added) Not sure which attacks you are referring to here? but again, sometimes "America" does not prevent attacks because people perceive there is no real threat. Not to mention, the rest of the world complains when America DOES do something...so honestly, why is it America's fault if someone is attacked, so long as Americans didn't do it? And if Americans DID do it, what makes you think we'd TRY to prevent it (hypothetically speaking, anyway)


Hmmm. Presumably you mean pre-WWII, in which case ALL money going into Germany (not just American) was "funding Auschwitz" if you will. I sincerely doubt there were many (if any) who were sending money earmarked for the "establishment and operation of a facility intended to exploit and or terminate political and religious undesirables to the German government". Rather, most probably swallowed the "Hitler is a great guy doing great things in Europe" bullcrap from the media (nothing changes here...) and were clamoring to send his government help. There were even sympathizers with the Germans etc at least until the war started, what with people in denial of what was occurring, and Hitler being made into a media darling much as has occurred with Hugo Chavez or Ahmadinejad today (the old "misunderstood but benevolent leader" routine). There was no "you tube" in those days to try convincing people, and fact is, many believed the Germans could do no wrong, and the ones who DID know something was amiss, did not want to be dragged into yet another world war. When the war did start, and friendships started to chill over U-boat targetting of US shipping as well as those already in conflict...passenger liners suspected of carrying arms to the British, for instance, being torpedoed. Regardless of whether it was true or not...did not endear Germany to the American people, who had just started to let go of WWI anger and mistrust.

John P.

History / Can anyone from Poland tell me about Auschwitz and The Ghetto? [582]


Ummm....you just agreed with me...
America was not at war with Germany and and commerce with Germany did not cease until after the U.S. declared war. Prior to that, from what I gather, a widely held belief in the U.S. was "not again" after WWI, and "if the Europeans wanted to slaughter each other, let them. We want no part of it." .....many of the other things were not much more than rumors. Which shouldn't surprise us...I heard mentioned on the news a few years ago that Christians and Jews in Iran were being required to put stitching indicative of their faith into their clothing...which to me, sounds uneasily familiar. I've not heard it mentioned again, amidst the praise for Ahmadinejad for "standing up to Bush" or whatever it is they like him for these days.

So saying "oooh the Nazis used ticket counters made by IBM!" is an awful lot like saying Osama Bin Ladin uses flourescent light bulbs made in Poland, or drives a BMW made in Germany. I seriously doubt that card punching machines are sold only after one signs a "no use in death camps" clause.


Sean, again, LOTS of money went into Germany from the US prior to the war (which, well, is not surprising...the US had not chosen sides prior to going into the war) so I'm not sure you can convince me that, as implicated, Prescott Bush specifically laid money out for a "camp for working Poles and Jews and others deemed undesirable, to death, and exterminating the rest who cannot work". Otherwise if you are just saying someone sent money to Germany...and well, there's no surprise there.

Just because the British were at war at this point, or Poland, or Russia...Americans wanted no part of it. Apparently even Hitler himself wanted to keep us out of it...but the Japanese ruined that whole idea for him, and dragged the U.S. into the war with what they thought would be a debilitating strike.


Operating a business in a state is quite a bit different than saying one finances a death camp, unless you want to make a REEAAALLLY long stretch. That would be like saying the sale of Coke in Saudi Arabia is somehow funding extremist Islam, or sale of Rolls Royce jet engines to airlines in Pakistan somehow fund their activities.

John P.

History / Can anyone from Poland tell me about Auschwitz and The Ghetto? [582]


funny that thing called "truth"...


While many lambast Americans for not knowing enough European history, perhaps the same could be said about Europeans and American history. The U.S. was taking an isolationist stance and the largely popular views were to remain neutral and out of the war. Unfortunately a few torpedo incidents by the Germans started to test this neutral mentality, then when the Japanese (in hind sight, foolishly) decided to bomb Pearl Harbor, alliances were already in place which made U.S. entry in the war inevitable. As for horrors under the Germans (camps, for instance) many simply refused to believe such a charismatic leader as Hitler would be having such evil things carried out. America was not alone in this, by the way.


I cannot watch the video you referred to, but unless he was investing specifically in death camps somehow (????) it is more likely that like many even today who try to make money, he saw Germany on the rise and as a potential investment that would make him or his interests a lot of money. Remember that after WWI an entire wheelbarrow of Deutschmarks would barely buy a loaf of bread...but Germany had started to turn around, and was actually starting to become a world power again. I doubt he invested in concentration camps at all, but wouldn't be surprised if he simply invested in a growing economy. I also doubt he was alone in this. If he DID specifically invest in camps (which many did not even believe existed, remember...there was no "You tube" then) then of course that was deplorable. I simply doubt it.


If the funds arrived well before the British were involved, then again, it is likely nobody was funding "camps". I would also point out that the US was not a superpower at this point. It had the potential to become one, but simply was not. That did not happen until after WWII, realistically. Prior to this it was primarily a regional power. Not to say there was no interest in shaping world order...but that isn't what I said, either. I simply said most wanted no part of the war in Europe and while some dreaded it like an oncoming train, the mindset was, again, if the Europeans want to kill each other, that's their business... it just turns out that isn't how things worked out. It's also why the U.S. did not join until 1941, well into the war for other countries.


I think they saw, but again, the mentality was, "not our fight". Remember, WWI was supposed to be "the war to end all wars". For crying out loud, when the US entered the war many of her implements were badly outdone by German implements, and probably she would have had even less if it were not for contracts making things for British forces...

The Thompson submachine gun, for instance...and later, Mustang fighters (which the US originally didn't want to go for) being redesignated the P-51 for US forces...had originally all been made for UK forces....by Americans. Americans? were flying biplanes at the beginning of the war. Some superpower. Our submarines were commanded by 21 year old "old men" and most often, did not come back...our tanks might as well have been cardboard boxes with a BB gun, compared to the German tanks of the time...

So yes. The U.S. really thought it would be able to sit the thing out. Political will was to do just that.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]

The President doesn't have control over interceptors, as they aren't considered strategic offensive weapons. He has the nuclear "football" now, and can launch nuclear weapons, if need be... but Patriots need no such authority to be launched. They can even be set on sort of an "automatic" mode, and kill anything coming through the expected tragectory of an enemy missile...

It's very effective, but unfortunately guidance computers, like other computers, are inherently stupid and cannot tell the difference between friend or foe quickly enough to matter; at the beginning of the latest war in Iraq, Patriots shot down somewhere between 19 and 23 missiles fired by Iraq into the base I was at over a period of a few weeks; unfortunately, they had to be taken off of automatic mode, apparently, as they also shot down one of our own F/A 18 Hornets and a British Tornado, when those happened to come back along the same path the missiles had taken.

Shame.
It wouldn't surprise me that the latest iterations have since resolved even this problem.

Doubt they are going to be as effective against an ICBM as the THAAD originally being offered, however.

Watch and wait, wait and watch.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]

There was a time when Poland didn't have special operations forces, because Russia didn't like it. Now she doesn't want interceptors, ostensibly, again, because Russia doesn't like it.

Might as well shut down Warsaw and move it to the Kremlin, that way people like you can go on complaining about the Americans, while being happy that Russia finally got what it wanted.

Honestly, nobody on here really knows if there were or weren't WMD's in Iraq, either (chemical weapons and biological weapons are included as WMDs incidentally). You know only what you've heard from other people, who themselves, often have no idea.

What we know-Iraq *used* to have them, (openly) and for years after 1991, failed to demonstrate what happened to them; amongst other UN sanctions they continued to flaunt. Regardless of pride or whatever reasons they may have had, Iraq was still thumbing its nose at the inspectors, and even blocking them from entry to some locations... then the spark occurred when over a short amount of time multiple primarily American civilian targets had been hit, with thousands of lives lost. We lost our sense of humor for such things-and Iraq was not only openly hostile to the US but hinted it had something up its sleeve. There's an endless amount of conspiracy theories you can find, so-and-so here or there that's still alive or some such...and you can wear as thick of a tinfoil hat as you like-but either Iraq had something, and it was removed/disabled before it could be used, or they didn't, and chose a very poor time to imply they did, perhaps thinking that like the previous administration, nothing would be done to them and their neighbors would continue to quake. America does have trouble fighting the paper tiger label, after all...for every President with a will to do something (and a congress who will let him) there are three who only pay lip service to actions, and then only when trying to get elected.

Saying one did not find anything under those conditions proves little or nothing besides that the government in question is hiding something, whatever that may be.

Second guess it all you want, it has never been shown that Iraq didn't have WMD's; only that they haven't been openly found. To me it is the equivalent of having the police search your house for contraband, but not allowing them to look in the garage.

When they say they found nothing...it really doesn't prove anything.

The oil story is completely off the mark, and is basically a canned answer at this point, as it seems to be tossed out every time America has an interest ANYWHERE. Yet we do not get the oil...we have to buy it like everyone else. Other countries...well, I guess you are just unwilling to criticize; because as they get control of ALL the oil (in Europe...) you're afraid to call a spade a spade, and are still distracted by Americans buying some of Iraq's oil.

Originally...it was all going to go to another country and THEY were going to decide how to divide it. Now Iraq gets to do this. Interesting now that Iran is digging up territory disputes from hundreds of years ago, to try claiming the oil is theirs because it passes through "their" waters. (It doesn't...but they try claiming the whole sea as "theirs" these days).

If anyone blows up Poland, it won't be the US.
The only thing that changes by not having US interceptors there, is that you'll have the self satisfaction of knowing, that when someone DOES blow you up(!?) you got the last laugh, because no nasty American missile shot down the incoming missiles. The satisfaction will last in fractions of a second, but hey...no American interceptors.

To me, not allowing interceptors (patriots included) is like playing hockey, and removing your goalie because it offends the opposing teams.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]

Hate to burst your bubble here...chemical weapons ARE WMD's. Saddam also had a nuclear program (Canada currently receiving the fuel left over from this) and had employed former bioweapons experts from elsewhere also. Not only this, but a large issue with the assessment of WMD's was that Saddam failed to show evidence for the destruction of ALL of the ones he used to have, just some of them.


look up "nonproliferation". The cat's already out of the bag, no need to let it walk around the block. As far as oil goes...the same people are buying it from Iraq as before, and Afghanistan doesn't have any. Odd, though, must be easy to point at us Americans; lot safer feeling than looking at the country right next door that controls nearly ALL the oil in Europe now... Funny how things just conveniently worked out to spark intervention in just about the only country to have a non-Russian pipeline, and a nice, juicy seaport. But hey...it wasn't Americans doing it, so must've been all on the up and up...


The UN is not a "European institution" but an institution founded by the victors of WWII. Iraq wouldn't have had to worry about these things if they had not invaded Kuwait in the first place. Incidentally, the bullet holes where Saddam's army lined up the Kuwaiti officers outside their barracks and machine gunned them...are still there.


You're kidding, right? stop hyperventilating and read what I said. And yes, support and funding for hijackers is still enough to blame Iraq at least partially for what happened. If you hire a hit man to kill your wife, YOU are going to jail for murder also, not just your trigger man.


Yet...you've yet to show that it wasn't associated. Even if it were not the brains, it was I believe at least partially responsible for funding. Iraq's public affairs website, even, prior to the war beginning, looked like it came from a Neo-Nazi group, blaming all sorts of things on the US and especially "Zionists" here or there. Yes, I went to the site. I believe it pays to study one's enemies...it not only helps in war, but later when that same enemy might be a friend.


Americans don't control the oil in Europe, we don't even control the oil in MOST places...but there IS a country that does control most of Europe's oil now and is striving to change that statement from "most" to "all".

That country, no matter how easy it is to point fingers at us Americans...is not the United States of America. I'm not spelling it out for you any more. It doesn't pay to fight with a pig, you get all dirty and the pig likes it.

I think if there was a drought in China you would somehow think us responsible, but that's just my impression.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]


Iraq is in the position to have pissed off a lot of people in 1991, and one of the conditions they were required to meet was to eliminate their WMDs (including reporting and inventory of where material went) and WMD programs. It was not a secret that they did neither.


Strange...had you read my post you would have understand why this was relevant. Iraq was thumbing its nose at restrictions placed on it during the first war...which started with Saddam's invasion of Kuwait over what he supposed were oil wells drilled on a slant or some such.


Never had anyone from your home town commit a crime? Just because a group of terrorists are from a certain country is not enough to call that country a state supporter. Saddam openly gave to various terror groups, and the Taliban even more so. The Saudi government does not, regardless of the fact some of the hijackers were Saudi. That is the primary difference. No country is immune to having religious zealots or even run-of-the-mill whack-jobs. It doesn't mean that country is actively supporting the efforts of these.


What are you talking about here, it seems you haven't read anything I've written...


I think you are a blow-hard. If this premise were true, we'd have killed Saddam back in 1991 and let the Kuwaitis play football with his head, or perhaps when the Saudis and others nationalized oil infrastructure built and operated by US and on land bought by US and UK companies...instead of making a deal with the Saudis (they deal in US Dollars only) we would have sailed a ship or two there and killed everyone. You and I both know we could have done it, and there wouldn't be squat anyone could do about it. We did not.

So your argument is faulty.


Watch the news buddy. Canadian troops are fighting right along side ours, and you have no idea how many civilians have or have not killed or by whom. I was simply pointing out that it is quite easy to point at the people across an ocean from you as being the cause of the world's problems, blame them for controlling all the oil, meanwhile someone in your own back yard is actually DOING the things you THINK Americans are. Which is foolhardy. I don't blame Russia or Russians...they are doing what they SHOULD be doing, which is to look after their own interests. Rather, I blame people like you, who lose everything because they are watching the neighbor's house while their own is on fire.


Iraq, while being a sovereign nation, as you say...was only allowed to remain so if it agreed to various restrictions placed on it at the end of the first war in 1991, one of which was reporting, another was unfettered access being given to weapons inspectors, and also a no-fly zone. It did not honor any of these, and short of Saddam's saying so we had no evidence he had, as he said, destroyed his stockpiles, stopped his development program, or for that matter did not possess WMDs. Inspectors did declare many locations to be free of WMDs, true, but almost up to zero-hour there were also places which Saddam restricted the inspectors from visiting. Combine this with a stance openly in support of the 9-11 attacks, as well as information pointing to Iraqi money flowing to support the hijackers and it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

There was justification for war from the first time Saddam shot at an aircraft in the no-fly zone, and the first time he barred inspectors from a site they wished to visit;

Just because he got away with it for 12 years didn't mean he would continue to do so, and apparently he made the misjudgment of thinking he would. Just my opinion, anyway.


So where is it? WE sure aren't getting it for free...if that was your theory, it is misguided.


Now while you made some interesting points about China, you're wrong here...first of all, Iraq is not destroyed, second, the only US participation in Saddam's death was to provide him a defense attorney the rest was up to Iraq...third of all its infrastructure is better than it was before the war, fourth, the US nor any other member of the coalition took over its major resource (Iraq still has that...we pay for it just like everybody else, although most US oil comes from elsewhere) and lastly, while I'm concerned as the next person about the loss of freedoms currently being threatened by our government, we do not have people who speak up against the government disappearing, or secret police so feared that when they march in public they always keep their faces hidden as did Saddam's Fedayeen secret police. America has its problems, but you're a bit off here. I'd say the UK is closer than we are (cameras everywhere, etc) but still a whole different ball game compared to what the Iraqis had to worry about under Saddam.


Prior to the war, there were photos shown on the news of Iraqi intelligence agents meeting with hijackers in Switzerland; not only this there used to be methods of tracking the banking activities of these same, which later became useless due to an article publishing the techniques used...so linking the two is only low if you refuse to believe there was ever a connection or the possibility of it. Perhaps America is indeed so evil that it will conquer a nation living under a Tyrant, force it to install a democratically elected government, and then steal its oil by paying them for it....or perhaps we sometimes actually have reasons other than those you seem most amenable to.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]


And yet...it isn't me who believes the (unfounded in fact) status quo, but you. If there is large scale manipulation happening...well, the status quo and most of the voters agree with you. Now who's the "moron"? Enjoy that next spoon full of pablum.


??? of course oil companies sell oil, who did you expect would sell it, refrigerator manufacturers?

Iraq, like other governments, owns its own oil. If it sells it to companies for resale, that is their decision, not yours or mine. Hence their recent efforts at OPEC to reduce the supply, to allow them more income.

Iraq is also famous for its dates, but somehow I doubt they produce nearly enough to support their economy compared to the oil.


Wasn't me. Saddam lost in 1991, the UN made restrictions on him, he agreed to them. He was allowed not only to live, but remain in power, so long as he followed those restrictions. He did not. His choice.


And yet, you are NOT an Iraqi, nor are your views (or mine) necessarily theirs.
UN sanctions left Saddam able to take care of his people, just not so much his war machine.
Like so many dictators in precarious positions of power, his path was unfortunately predictable...the money wasn't spent on people but on Saddam and his sons' ever increasing power, while creating a secret police that grew in ruthlessness in direct proportion to the unhappiness of his people. Your implication of a more Utopian Iraq under Saddam, with everything just peachy under him...is wrong.


This is a shallow minded argument. You can do better. Finding nothing when inspectors are not allowed to look....proves nothing, other than that inspectors, contrary to the restrictions Saddam agreed to, were not being granted unfettered access. As for during and after the war...who knows what may be found in the future, but artillery rounds found full of Sarin gas, have already been discovered (5 years ago....) and do qualify.

Not finding a nuclear weapon is not indicative of no WMDs, but short of a nuclear weapon going off, it will receive little coverage unless it is found as a result of efforts by the party favored by a majority of the media, especially during election years. We are still finding things buried and stockpiled left over from the Iran-Iraq war, including MiG fighters (much larger than a WMD).

Oil? please...there are several here who think everything ever done by America is about oil (or perhaps Israel...or bankers...where's my tinfoil hat) ...who pulled your string?

If oil was the reason for going to Iraq, we would have saved ourselves the trouble of the first war, let alone the last one...and simply leveraged Saddam to sell to us at a cut rate (much as Russia was attempting to do prior to the invasion behind the scenes...Putin had a lot of money in Saddam and lost a lot when he fell). We did not do so. Iraq is paidfull price for its oil, although the US is not their primary customer as I understand. Most US oil comes from much closer than the Middle East.


I am a mindless drone eh? And yet I put my own name to my posts. You sir...hide behind the name of a long dead philosopher who you do not represent in the least.

I do my own thinking.
You obviously, do not, and come across as shocked that anyone would disagree with what you, from your armchair, have deemed to be the absolute truth.

You make accusations about me, without backing up them or even your own statements.
I, presumably unlike yourself, have at least a basic grasp on the US and on our military. I have been to Iraq for long periods of time and have been shoulder to shoulder with Iraqi soldiers as well as civilians.

Where does your knowledge come from? a commentator or two who agree with you politically? politicians going through an election?
Some of your information may be correct...but it is at least as suspect as anything I've written.
Mine? I doubt I will ever convince you, but then again, your opinion is far more important than facts are, isn't it.


@bimber...I wish I were a CIA agent. They make a LOT more than I do; and interestingly...the establishment is saying the crap YOU believe.

I simply feel the establishment has swallowed a bunch of BS because of its desire to win elections at all cost, and much of what people believe...is based on biased political commentary, while they skim over without seeing the few morsels that are fact.


Your words, not mine. I do believe they tossed in cash when the hat was passed, however. Just as Columbus did not sail in 1492 at his own expense, neither did the hijackers do all of their work with their own money.


I see you still haven't bothered reading, but rather input what YOU think I (or for that matter, anyone else who agrees with me on some basis) believe.

Mocking me does not address my (actual) points. Nevermind I've never even implied any of the things in this statement.


Nor have I implied this one...although I do believe he either had one or two or was actively trying to get them.


Not even this one...although I did take you and your source to task for making up numbers and inventing imaginary military tactics...
The source claiming millions of civilians killed....the one you and others have referenced in the past...apparently never actually verified the majority of the casualties they claim, claiming it was too "dangerous" to actually visit the sites of these alleged civilian slayings.

Pardon me for thinking this was shoddy work on the part of the reporter, especially considering at that time the US was paying large sums of money to those who indeed had suffered and could demonstrate this.

The numbers claimed were inflated to a level that would have been difficult to believe even under WWII style total war, let alone current "you're going to go to jail for murder if the guy you shoot wasn't the one shooting at you" tactics.

Forgive me for my insensibilities here, but where I grew up, that sort of story is called a "Lie".


Some do, however I suspect some also resent the fact we could have helped them take their country from Saddam in 1991, and when the chips fell, left them hanging because the politicos in the UN wanted to give Saddam another chance, and Pres. Bush (Sr) obliged them. Saddam mowed his people down like grass while the promised help in their revolt...never came, called off the very DAY the fight was to start.

So it is bittersweet to some, especially those who risked and lost the first time...that they would have to wait 12 years with their grief.


Again a feeble attempt at mockery by attributing to me things which I have not claimed.
Yet you can claim all sorts of conspiracies, and feel secure that those are completely sane.
Perhaps Al Qaeda are everywhere...but not as strong as they once were.
Oh sure, many pay lip service...but the ones who'll put their lives on the line, real planners? not so much. Perhaps they're in Iran (or perhaps your basement?) being trained. After all, if you can claim I must be a CIA operative...(simply for disagreeing with your constant attacks on America or her troops or her citizens....where I grew up that was called "patriot" not CIA but hey...) then I could just as easily claim based on your statements that you were working for Al Qaeda.

See? It is the same. Hopefully you (and bimber) now see the ridiculousness of these statements.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]


No. Which is why they are being hunted and or killed as we speak, although I have a feeling you are (predictably) going to try to blame everyone but the terrorists or their direct supporters...


There were no UN resolutions against the US...and for that matter, while the UN wanted to wait (and apparently the G.S. was involved in a related scandal) the mandate for war was written into the very resolutions drafted at the end of open hostilities in 1991. Not to say the US or any nation needs UN permission to go to war. We all created the UN after WWII...however did anyone survive without the UN prior to that, one wonders. The UN is a club. Its only power is the will of its independent member nations to support various ideas and mandates it arrives at. It has the strength of iron in some ways, but soft clay in others, if you will...not predictable.


Not that you have the sense to read them anyway. Go back to your comic books. The lot of questions you put in this last paragraph demonstrate you lack the motivation to look things up for yourself. Hollywood tracking bank accounts (huh?) Bin Laden's family in US, twin towers....wow. You could keep Reynolds wrap in business for YEARS. Don't bother reading my posts any more. I prefer to argue with people who come up with valid arguments to discuss, not off the wall conspiracies or unfounded blanket statements.


Ahh...so the new definition of anything challenging your canned belief with logic is "gibberish of nonsense". Good to know should that information be required.


Way to prove your higher learning. You went on the attack against my country with generalizations that are categorically false (e.g. you whether or not intentionally are spreading lies)

...I merely defended it; if you cannot take the heat in return, do not dish it out, especially if you are not prepared to defend your positions with more than insults. There are many here who disagree with me quite a bit but are capable of holding a discussion in a civilized manner, which makes the exchange of ideas enjoyable. Learn from them.

John P.

News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland [405]

Wow.
this thread is still going? I left, went to Iraq (again) came back, and generally ignored this forum for months....and it's still going.

Except for one or two days, Iraq was quiet where I was located.
Iran...is now claiming to be a nuclear power. Can't say I (and others) didn't tell you so.
Their missiles can apparently now reach Poland. "Experts" claimed they didn't think it would be possible for quite a few years. It would be foolhardy to think they haven't already made the connection themselves and at least begun work on just how to mount said WMD into said missile...

Poland is not getting interceptors, now. Russia (and her ally Iran) is most happy with this.
One wonders why Poland sought independence from the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Influence, if it has to ask Russia for permission to do anything?

Patriots were not the interceptors being offered, but THAAD-which are capable of destroying ICBM's at much much greater ranges and at safer distances than Patriots; Patriots, I believe, were a later deal meant to appease Russia.

Contrary to some posts, and propaganda from Russian as well as misinformed sources...nuclear weapons were NEVER on the table.

It is apparent some posters here (thankfully not all) let their dislike in general of Americans taint their understanding of reality, and wildly follow any conspiracy which allows them to continue their anti-US views.

disagreement with these raving lunatics is simply an invite to their attentions, and to have them claim "brainwashing" and all sort of other things...never mind they never seem to back up their own theories.

This thread is tiring. Poland, sorry. Hope you don't need the interceptors.

They've never *really* been all that much about the U.S....contrary to what blowhards on here will tell you, we already have protection in the US; the same sort Russia convinced you not to have.

Russia has, after all, always been a friend not only of the US, but of Poland....

John P.