America's Relationship with the World (moral, hell, moral, verse)

[Mr Spinkles]

The question that now needs answering is did Saddam protect and aid terrorists, some of whom were members of Al-Qa'eda? If he did, I think Bush had every right to tell us so.

[Fra.Morelia]

Okay, here I go,

America can do nothing right. If we let people massacre each other then other powers will look at us and sob 'why don't you dooooo something?!' If we do something before THEY ask us to ( another bunch of meddling outsiders... UN anyone?) then we are not minding our own business. Basically they want us to wait until something threatens THEIR interests before we send OUR troops to fight and die. In any UN action we supply the vast majority of the troops regardless of whether we have any interests. As for protecting our own interests.... are we really gonna trust Europe to look out for our interests? I would sooner lobotomize myself with an icepick, bottle of rubbing alcohol, and a ball peen hammer.
Are we to big for our britches? Yea. Will we over extend ourselves? Yea. Are we doing what every other meddling no good country with power does? Yea. The amusing thing is all of the jack legs telling us to fix our back yard first.... whilst they go about and meddle. Ah, the sickly sweet stench of hypocrisy. How I love it.

[painted wolf]

That question was answered by the 9/11 commission... No, there is no relyable evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda were linked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3812351.stm

Unless the government is witholding vital information from the commission.

wa:do

[Mr Spinkles]

painted wolf-- This is what the 9/11 commission said:

We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States

Bush did not say Iraq and Al-Qa'eda cooperated on attacks against the United States, he said

Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida

The question is not whether or not the Iraq government was involved in 9/11, the question is did Saddam aid terrorists including members of Al-Qa'eda?

[civilcynic]

[QUOTE The question is not whether or not the Iraq government was involved in 9/11, the question is did Saddam aid terrorists including members of Al-Qa'eda?[/quote]

Can you show me the definitive evidence that shows that Saddam was aiding Al-quaeda and that these actions have a direct forebearance on the attacks on America?

If the real question is determining what countries were harboring, aiding and/or abetting terrorists, then I am afraid that the Saddam connection should have been the weakest link. How about Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon..just to name a few?
Why didn't we topple Momar Khadafi and invade his country after the Lockerbie Scotland incident?

If we were going after a country because of their connections with terrorist groups, there are plenty of countries far more involved in terrorism that were direct threats to our country than Saddam was. Why did President Bush always bring up Iraq and the Saddam subject everytime he spoke about the US Terrorist attacks. Why not bring up the Saudi Arabia connections which were more directly linked from the very beginning than Iraq was?

Lastly, speaking of those countries who consort with terrorists, isn't it
interesting that we condemn nations who deal with terrorist groups but our own country has on-going governmental communication with Chechen rebels?

[Melody]

Originally Posted by Allan

What percentage of the population would be living from pay packet to pay packet in the USA?

Within the last year I heard or read somewhere that 80% (conservatively) of American citizens are one paycheck away from being homeless. This means that if they miss one paycheck they can never got got up again. Yes that is partly due to the fact that so many people insist on living above their means but there is a growing gap between the haves and the have nots.

Many companies are downsizing which translates to getting rid of many of their full time people who cost them in benefits and hiring part-time replacements who are not eligible for benefits. Sorry but I can't direct you to the actual report although you might try searching through NPR's special reports as this was one of them.

[Melody]

Originally Posted by Mr_Spinkles

I'm not sure as to your specific question...however, according to the U.S. census of 2002, about 12.1% of Americans live in poverty (according to money income excluding capital gains) see http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/p...r&dtable5.html

I think these figures are off considerably. I'm not sure how they came up with their figures, but I know if you go out and count every homeless person in a shelter, every street person who doesn't bother even with the shelters, every person on welfare, every person classifed as working poor (minimum wage earners fit this category) and every person unable to even find a job and who have now fallen off the unemployment rolls because they ran out of benefits, I think you'll find it's a helluva lot higher than 12.1%

[Melody]

Originally Posted by civilcynic

isn't it
interesting that we condemn nations who deal with terrorist groups but our own country has on-going governmental communication with Chechen rebels?

What about Israel? We have pretty strong ties with this country and yet by all definition they are terrorists who prey on their neighbors. Look at the initial land that was given to them after World War II. They were given land that already belonged to someone else! Oh...ooops...wait...I forgot. They're just Pakistanis anyway and they don't count.

Since that time they've been gradually encroaching...and not even subtly...on their neighbors with some pretty horrific military tactics. The Israelis aren't considered terrorists but when the Pakistanis fight back to protect *their* land, they are called terrorists.

Someone earlier said something about hypocrisy....I agree wholeheartedly.

[civilcynic]

Yes, I forgot to mention Israel.....I agree, Melody

[anders]

I agree with your views on how the Palestinians are treated, Melody. I sure see them as freedom fighters, like the people in Iraq who also want to get rid of the occupying forces by all possible means.

The Pakistanis have problems of their own in the Kashmir conflict with India, but there is no oil in Kashmir, so we won't see any US interference there.