Jean-Michel Hiver wrote:
Let me guess... from iraq? Oh, don't think so... why invade it then? Because of WMDs? nope...
Already covered. So nice of you to snip it all.
Riiight... when it's the others, it's for some oil scam, but when it's the USA, it's out of good heart. How could I not think about it?
Like I said, where's the pipeline in Afghanistan? Remember Afghanistan was supposed to be for oil as well. In fact pretty much every military action by the US is for oil interests yet, oddly enough, no oil interests ever develop after the military action is over. There are some exceptions but they are exceedingly rare.
Oh no. It's pretty much doing that itself already. War on iraq has caused tens of thousand of civilian lives. That's one order of magnitude more than 9/11 attacks.
At whose hands? Are you now implying that Syria and Jordan are not culpable for sending in "insrugents"? :P
BTW, remind me again how many civilian lives were lost under Saddam?
> And of course it's also sent more than 1,000 of
its own men in their own graves. Of course, it's forbidden to broadcast images of the coffins - free speech, you understand...
Actually it is closer to 2000. But let's not forget that by this stage of the action there the US was supposed to have lost well over 30,000 troops. 10,000 alone were supposed to be lost just on the push into Bahgdad. Another 10,000 for Falusha. Everyone loves to throw out how many troops were lost but not compare it to the pesimistic projections.
And after a bazillion dollars and countless lives spent, the situation is just getting worse.
Really? According to whom? Let's see. Saddam, deposed. Country handed over to the provisional government, early. Free elections - still scheduled to go off *on time*. This is all good news that is glossed over for the latest copy selling "all is woe" headlines. For a better picture of what *else* is going on try doing a search for "iraq good news" in Google. Prime example of stuff that's glossed over:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005676
Maybe if you were in their shoes, had your innocents parents, children and siblings murdered by some foreign soldier, you would find it valid too?
I doubt it. Of course in many cases the above example doesn't fit, now does it. Certainly doesn't fit in Iraq where the "insurgents" largely aren't Iraqi in the first place.
Anyway, to go back to the original thread - what's wrong with the name "ubuntu"?
Nada, as was addressed quite a while ago. :P
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature