Lets all hide in our homes

[jadetree]

Kelly Osbourne Nixes England<BR>Updated 11:29 PST Thu, Feb 13 2003<P>LONDON (AP) _ Rock scion Kelly Osbourne pulled out of a British awards show Thursday because of fears terrorists might attack London, her British publicist said.<BR> Osbourne, pink-haired daughter of heavy metal legend Ozzy Osbourne, had been scheduled to perform at the NME awards later Thursday, but became concerned after seeing images of tanks and soldiers patrolling near London's Heathrow Airport, said spokeswoman Naz Ahmed.<BR> Britain has deployed hundreds of soldiers at Heathrow, Europe's busiest airport, and beefed up security at airports and other sites this week after police warned that al-Qaida might try attacking London during this week's Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha.<BR> "Kelly's parents were in New York on Sept. 11 when the Twin Towers came down so you can imagine how they feel," Ahmed said.<BR> "The decision wasn't taken lightly and Kelly has thought long and hard about it.<BR> "She is upset that she can't come to Britain because she was really looking forward to it.<BR> "But as well as herself and her parents, she also has a whole crew and band to think of and she has decided not to take the risk."<BR> Osbourne's Feb. 19 at London's Electric Ballroom has been postponed. <P>

[markie]

thank god she is safe.....<P>actually I wouldnt want to fly into the UK today. Half of Gatwick is closed. they found a live hand grenage in a Venezualans luggage. They are closing the main road to Stansted and they arrested men at the perimeter of heathrow......<P><BR>Fun!

[jadetree]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by markie:<BR><B>thank god she is safe.....<P>actually I wouldnt want to fly into the UK today. Half of Gatwick is closed. they found a live hand grenage in a Venezualans luggage. They are closing the main road to Stansted and they arrested men at the perimeter of heathrow......<P><BR>Fun!</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yes I have been following the aiport news.<P>A friend of mine just left for the airport to catch a flight to Heathrow, he was a little nervous.<P>My mom flew from Gatwick yesterday and reported no delays.

[markie]

I still am undecided as to whether there is a real threat, or they are just pumping up the populus in preparation for war.<P>there are a quarter of a million troops getting bored in the middle east.....

[jadetree]

Well I think there is some real threat.  But that reall isnt what scares me.  I just don't know how to process the fact that at any moment somehting could happen and everyone will freak out, it is a little surreal.<P>And it still pisses me off that nothing is being done about alternatives to a war which will only make things worse.  I still have yet to hear a good explanation as to why we are about to go to war and how the war on terror became a war on Iraq.<p>[This message has been edited by jadetree (edited 02-13-2003).]

[ggw]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jadetree:<BR><B>And I still pisses me off that nothing is being done about alternatives to a war which will only make things worse.  I still have yet to hear a good explanation as to why we are about to go to war and how the war on terror became a war on Iraq.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>It's pretty simple. In late 2000, when it became obvious that Bush was going to be the man, Clinton's national security team called Bush's team and briefed them on the state of the world.  They were told that there were three main threats to US security - 1) Osama bin Laden 2) Iraq 3) North Korea.  Well the first one bit us in the ass.  Now we are being proactive with the others.<P>What do you see as the alternatives to war?

[jadetree]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> It's pretty simple. In late 2000, when it became obvious that Bush was going to be the man, Clinton's national security team called Bush's team and briefed them on the state of the world.  They were told that there were three main threats to US security - 1) Osama bin Laden 2) Iraq 3) North Korea.  Well the first one bit us in the ass.  Now we are being proactive with the others.<P>What do you see as the alternatives to war?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>There have to be alternatives, I dont have them, but I dont see war working, just because war is an option does not mean it is the right one.  What will we get out of war?  So we overthrow Saddam, that will spark a million other threats.  This country can't keep pissing off everyone and expect to get away with it forever.

[markie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> <BR>What do you see as the alternatives to war?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Why not do nothing. Why not lift sanctions against Iraq, promote peace.<P>Get the world on "your side" with a carrot not a stick.<P>The link between Al <B>Q</B>uaeda and Ira<B>Q</B> is a complete red herring.

[ggw]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jadetree:<BR><B> There have to be alternatives, I dont have them, but I dont see war working, just because war is an option does not mean it is the right one.  What will we get out of war?  So we overthrow Saddam, that will spark a million other threats.  This country can't keep pissing off everyone and expect to get away with it forever.  </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>You've spent too much time playing that little computer game you posted a link to.<P>Ten years of UN sanctions against Iraq didn't work.<P>We tried diplomacy with North Korea.  We gave them food, oil, and technical assistance on developing peaceful nuclear technology.  In exchange, North Korea abandoned the weapons program it was working on and agreed to regular inspections.  That didn't work either.  They passed the inspections by working on a separate weapons program.<P>North Korea can be dealt with through diplomacy (I believe), but it shows the failure of diplomacy, even when it seems to be working. Iraq's a lost cause.  Do you really want Hussein with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons?  I don't.<P>As for the terror connection, it's just lame.  After the last bin Laden tape came out, Powell was on NPR saying that it conclusively shows a "partnership" between Iraq and Al-Qaeda -- just because bin Laden told his followers to resist an American invasion of Iraq.  By that criteria I guess France is in "partnership" with Al-Qaeda also.  Perhaps we should invade France? Hmmmmm........never mind........I guess we couldn't get away with it.<P>But I think Hussein's weapon program is enough reason to take him out.  He's had ten years to comply and has shown no effort or results.

[jadetree]

Well that video game, while exaggerated is not that unbelievable, but no, it is not the source of my feelings on this issue.<P>Your explanations about why we are going to war still don't explain the timing. <P>I just get the sense that the administration is decided on war and won't let anything deter them from having their war.  I think that is an awful way to handle their power, and I have never wished for a different President more than I do now.  But even better than that would be a more enlightened American public who is not so fond of the term "Nuke 'em".<P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> You've spent too much time playing that little computer game you posted a link to.<P>Ten years of UN sanctions against Iraq didn't work.<P>We tried diplomacy with North Korea.  We gave them food, oil, and technical assistance on developing peaceful nuclear technology.  In exchange, North Korea abandoned the weapons program it was working on and agreed to regular inspections.  That didn't work either.  They passed the inspections by working on a separate weapons program.<P>North Korea can be dealt with through diplomacy (I believe), but it shows the failure of diplomacy, even when it seems to be working. Iraq's a lost cause.  Do you really want Hussein with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons?  I don't.<P>As for the terror connection, it's just lame.  After the last bin Laden tape came out, Powell was on NPR saying that it conclusively shows a "partnership" between Iraq and Al-Qaeda -- just because bin Laden told his followers to resist an American invasion of Iraq.  By that criteria I guess France is in "partnership" with Al-Qaeda also.  Perhaps we should invade France? Hmmmmm........never mind........I guess we couldn't get away with it.<P>But I think Hussein's weapon program is enough reason to take him out.  He's had ten years to comply and has shown no effort or results.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>

[Fico]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ggw:<BR><B> Perhaps we should invade France? Hmmmmm........never mind........I guess we couldn't get away with it.<P>.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>The French are too busy being pompous... French war plans consist of 2 options: surrender or betray...<P>And Napoleon twists in his grave...<P>

[Fico]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jadetree:<BR><B><BR>I have never wished for a different President more than I do now<BR> </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>And this are the words of John Ashcroft's former pet servant.... I don't hold it against you, it was probably the indie thing to do back then...<P>

[ggw]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jadetree:<BR><B>Well that video game, while exaggerated is not that unbelievable, but no, it is not the source of my feelings on this issue.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>The video game points out the dangers of nuclear weapons in the hands of unstable nations such as Pakistan.  Aren't those weapons also dangerous in the hands of an unstable dictator who has never failed to use every weapon in his arsenal, against both his neighbors and his own people?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>Your explanations about why we are going to war still don't explain the timing.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The point of the three threats anecdote is that inaction can have a cost, as it did with bin Laden.  Or are you suggesting we should have tried diplomacy with him.<P>We didn't take bin Laden as an immediate threat and we paid a price for that.  Do we want to take that chance with Hussein?<P>How long do we keep playing diplomacy with Iraq?  What's the end-game?  What's the timeline?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Veranda">quote:</font><HR><B>I just get the sense that the administration is decided on war and won't let anything deter them from having their war.  I think that is an awful way to handle their power, and I have never wished for a different President more than I do now.  But even better than that would be a more enlightened American public who is not so fond of the term "Nuke 'em".<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Enlighten us.  What should we do?

[Sir HC]

Ten years of sactions did work.  He doesn't have nukes, does he?  He has done some little crap as surrepticiously as he can, nothing major.  He has started no wars in a decade, isn't that pretty damn good, and contrary to the "middle east culture"?  <P>GGW, give me good reasons why we should go to war against Saddam, everyone I ask gives the same BS:<P>1.  He is an evil, evil man.  To this I say so what, there are many men who are more evil than him that we have not attacked.<P>2.  He might get weapons on mass destruction.  So, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and possibly Iran all have these, so what.  He is currently pretty much under wraps, hell it is now known that we have been incessantly spying on the country and if we saw something really heinous we probably would have gone in or just bombed it already.<P>3.  Links to Osama.  They have tried this one for about a year, and Saddam either has more teflon in his suit than Ronald Reagan or there is nothing here.<P>4.  He will give these weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.  And then we would blow the hell out of his country.  He may be an evil dictator, but he is not stupid.  Has he done this in the past?  No verifiable links have been shown, other than his giving of money to Palistinian "martyrs" families after the fact.<P>These are the b.s. excuses I have heard so far, so what why should we go to war?  All I have heard that makes sense is that Iraq converted to the Euro as their standard for oil sales and this is not what we want.  All the rest is smoke and mirrors.

[markie]

I feel it ironic that the only country to use nuclear weapons in war is the US. I still fail to see why it is more justified for the US to have weapons of mass destruction as opposed to country X. <P>Did Saddam really gas his own people or was that an attack from Iran? I would say that it is inconclusive.<P>Osama was a real threat he had already attacked the US. But you got an isolationist Pres in power who decided to ignore that threat. the consiracy theorist beleiving he did that on purpose so that he could than be hawkish on a worldwide basis.<P><BR>And diplomacy was working with Korea until the US withdrew financial support.<P>GGW, you are not on form today.