Iraq Winning Pr War - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-02-2003, 06:09 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:24 AM
Iraq Winning Pr War

Well, I have to admit it. It was a mistake to go to the United Nations. President Bush should have moved ahead with just the permission from Congress. Colin Powell has led us into a quagmire with the UN. From the beginning I was with Colin Powell. I have done some reflecting over the past month and as I have been arguing passionately that we need a resolution from the United Nations, I have watched us lose more ground.

The President is losing the PR War BADLY. Saddam is playing a game of cat and mouse with the Administration and the UN. The problem is that the UN wants to play, the world wants to play. While the United States does not want to play, it is now stuck with the situation which may very well lead to the demise of Nato and the UN.

Here are some quotes from today's press conference in Iraq:


[Q]"As you can see, there is proactive cooperation from the Iraqi side," Saddam Hussein's scientific adviser, Lt. Gen. Amer al-Saadi, said at a news conference. [/Q]

Right....This is proactive. These are the missles you denied having all these months and years. It makes me think, wow, I wonder what they are hiding since they were so willing to give these up, these missles that they were not supposed to have. Interesting that you disclose them and agree to destroy them when the resolution is being debated that would authorize force from the UN.



[Q]"Practically all the areas of concern to UNMOVIC and the subjects of remaining disarmament questions have been addressed," he said. "We hope that it will be to the satisfaction of UNMOVIC."[/Q]

Please....where are the chemical and biological agents you possessed in 1998? Where is the place where they were destroyed? Wow, so by what you are saying, it appears that the inspectors job in Iraq is almost done???????

[Q]But he cautioned that if the United States indicated it will go to war anyway, Iraq might stop destroying the missiles.

"If it turns out at an early stage during this month that America is not going to a legal way, then why should we continue?" al-Saadi asked. [/Q]

Because you agreed to the terms of the Cease-Fire Agreement in Resolution 687. How about there for starters??? These are the words of a country that respects its agreements? These are the sounds of a country that respects the UN Security Council? Give me a break. However, the news tomorrow will be that the US presence in the Middle East is a threat to peace. Want to bet that by the end of the week, they are calling for the withdrawall of the US Forces in the Region?

[Q]
Inspectors returned Sunday to al-Aziziya, an abandoned helicopter airfield 95 kilometers southeast of Baghdad where Iraq says it destroyed R-400 bombs filled with biological weapons in 1991.

Al-Saadi said 157 of the R-400 bombs contained anthrax, aflotoxin and botulin toxin. He added Iraq has been excavating them and so far has uncovered eight bombs intact.

On Sunday, U.N. weapons inspectors took samples of the material in the bombs to confirm their composition. Al-Saadi said Iraq had destroyed 1.5 tons of VX and was trying to prove that to inspectors. [/Q]

Finally, we know where the biological weapons are......But wait a minute.....We are supposed to believe this? 1991...you destroyed them in 1991 you say? Well, you had from 1991-1998 to show the inspectors this area. Why didn't you show it to us then? This seems so strange that you could have saved the world all this time wondering. Hmmmm.... I just do not buy it.

Tomorrow's HEADLINES: Iraq discloses where he missing agents are. Inspections work.



[Q]Iraq has agreed to destroy all unassembled pieces, software, launchers, fuel and equipment used to make the Al Samoud 2 in "a few days or a very short few weeks," according to Demetrius Perricos, the deputy of chief weapons inspector Hans Blix.

Al-Saadi indicated it is not easy for Iraq to do that. He said Iraq won't let anyone see photographs or video images of the missile destruction despite the potential impact on world opinion because it would be too bitter for the Iraqi people to watch.

"It is too harsh. It is unacceptable," he said. "That's why we have released no pictures."[/Q]

OMG...OMG....I cannot stop laughing at this. Please, someone make it stop already. the Iraqi people cannot handle seeing the pictures of missles destroyed? He makes it sound like they would be looking at one of their homes destroyed. Give me a frigging break.


[Q]Al-Saadi also appealed to Americans' pocketbooks. "UNMOVIC costs $80 million a year. A war would cost upwards of $80 billion plus bloodshed on both sides," he said. He pointed out that UNMOVIC is financed by Iraq's oil-for-food program and asked which of two possibilities made more sense: "Disarmament peaceful at no cost to the American taxpayer. A war $80 billion to achieve disarmament."[/Q]

I am writing my check for my piece fo the $380 per person that I read recently it would cost to go to war. I hope the president hires a PR firm, because, we are getting our asses kicked by Saddam and his spin Doctors.


PEACE

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.p...ang=e&dir=news
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 06:15 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:24 AM
A smarter politician would already be fighting the war in Iraq. These guys are *not* PR aces, to put it mildly.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 06:42 PM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 03:24 AM
War or no war, Bush is a piss poor "diplomat" (loosely termed), who is basically universally disliked, and was disliked prior to 9/11 for his casual disregard of global matters. Regardless of polls, he is a terrible politician, who has managed to divide everybody, and unite nobody (except perhaps his ass and Tony Blair's lips).

You can look at it two ways - maybe Iraq is winning the PR war, but personally, I think it's more of a case of Bush (+ Rumsfeld) LOSING their PR campaigns, because on a global scale, they are utterly unlikeable men.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 07:15 PM   #4
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 01:24 AM
I totlally agree with antirm. Its not a case of Iraq winning the PR war its US who cant fight one. They really arent doing the things they need to. Blair had that debate with common citizens in London, which i thought he did well on. Maybe Bush should accept the debate, it might be his only hope.
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 07:16 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
War or no war, Bush is a piss poor "diplomat" (loosely termed), who is basically universally disliked, and was disliked prior to 9/11 for his casual disregard of global matters. Regardless of polls, he is a terrible politician, who has managed to divide everybody, and unite nobody (except perhaps his ass and Tony Blair's lips).

You can look at it two ways - maybe Iraq is winning the PR war, but personally, I think it's more of a case of Bush (+ Rumsfeld) LOSING their PR campaigns, because on a global scale, they are utterly unlikeable men.

Absolutely. To hell with the polls. They only tell you so much. Bush and Rumsfeld are both lousy politicians with no talent for diplomacy. That's why they don't want to do it.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 07:21 PM   #6
Creator of the Blue Crack
 
Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,008
Local Time: 12:24 AM
Re: Iraq Winning Pr War

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
...... it is now stuck with the situation which may very well lead to the demise of Nato and the UN.

Ever think that's the point?

The UN and NATO would have to be replaced.... like a govt would... sorta... of course... things arent always replaced with something of equal 'value'.

Let's just say... that 'someone' or a group wanted to increase global power/control.... wouldnt the first thing they do be trying to undermine any current leading/working world coalitions/powers that unite nations?

Everything is always easier to destroy from the inside.
__________________
I created this place. I hyped a band.
Now I own an ad agency. We hype brands.
All roads for me lead back to U2. Ain't it grand.
FB me. IG me. Tweet me.
Elvis is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 08:28 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Re: Iraq Winning Pr War

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dreadsox
Well, I have to admit it. The President is losing the PR War BADLY.
PEACE
[/URL]


Matt-
I agree w you.
I still say Bush will not go in w/o the will of the UN behind him.
He is not a warmonger.

DB9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 08:34 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:24 AM
He should have acted without another resolution. By not, and seeking another resolution, he is legitimizing the arguments I was making in other threads that another resolution is necessary.

Elvis, I am puzzled....are you saying that....GW Bush is trying to eliminate the UN and Nato? Interesting, it almost fits in with the religions paranoia over one world governement.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 09:13 PM   #9
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 997
Local Time: 08:24 AM

The UN has really been an ineffectual agent, in peacekeeping and preventing national tensions...then, add to that the destabilizing force of several new countries (many eastern bloc) coming into NATO, and there is really no surprise the issue of how to act now is confused and confrontational, rather than an organized push for consensus and best, nonviolent and expedient response.

Thinking back to the India/Pakistan crisis, I wonder why there is no one, objective nation who can broker a NEGOTIATED settlement??
__________________
DebbieSG is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 09:25 PM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 10:24 AM
Re: Re: Iraq Winning Pr War

Quote:
Originally posted by Elvis


The UN and NATO would have to be replaced.... like a govt would... sorta... of course... things arent always replaced with something of equal 'value'.

Let's just say... that 'someone' or a group wanted to increase global power/control.... wouldnt the first thing they do be trying to undermine any current leading/working world coalitions/powers that unite nations?

Everything is always easier to destroy from the inside.
The UN with all its organizations cant be replaced. I think you mean the Sec Council, not the UN. To say that the UN is not effective enough is just to jump a bandwagon, in my opinion. Take a look at their budget. Take a look at the decision making processes. If anyone thinks its ineffective that all the countries decide (they dont in the UN, there are several groups of states who are very influential and some who arent at all, but thats another story), well what is the alternative? That one country decides for all the world? Politics is not a fast and flexible new economy business. The UN was created after WW II for certain reasons, keep that in mind.

The NATO will be replaced anyway sooner or later. Europe is not very strong or fast at putting up its own Army, though. And on the other hand, I think that former eastern countries stabilize the NATO in the long run, too.

To increase military global power/ control would possibly mean to undermine the broad decision process of the UN Sec Council, I agree.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 03-02-2003, 10:14 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 03:24 AM
The fact that Saddam is winning the PR war underscores the fact that Bush is a PR buffoon. Did we think that a man that cannot emit a sentence without inventing words would actually be good diplomatically?

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-03-2003, 06:27 AM   #12
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 03:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
The fact that Saddam is winning the PR war underscores the fact that Bush is a PR buffoon. Did we think that a man that cannot emit a sentence without inventing words would actually be good diplomatically?

Melon


When Bushie was imposed as our leader I hoped he'd get through his first and only term without anything major atrocities, but it appears that he's going to make one happen whether we want it or not.

Let's look at how this whole situation is sizing up. We have support from the smallest, most insignificant European nations, excluding Britain, Mexico (cough), and who else? China, Russia, Germany, France, and probably Canada (although I'm not sure where they stand). This tells me, and SHOULD tell YOU that a war is not supported by the PEOPLE.

Remember that the US government is supposed to represent the PEOPLE, not the RICH people. There's a difference and I see a war as a catalyst to support the rich in America, rather the freedoms of poor as ape shit Iraqis and the poor as dog shit Americans.

The PR battle is being won by Iraq because the US cannot support their case. If they could support their agenda don't you think they would have presented the hardcore proof, oh...say a year ago? A year at least, right? This failure to present adequate reason has ruined the American agenda and unless we get attacked by Saddam (which wouldn't happen even if he didn't disarm those Al Sulaud missles) there's is no fathomable reason to kill innocent, teenage Iraqi children.....

Unless of course you consider oil more important than human lives?

Do you?

I'm afraid of what your answer may be.


__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 03-03-2003, 07:12 AM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
The PR battle is being won by Iraq because the US cannot support their case. If they could support their agenda don't you think they would have presented the hardcore proof, oh...say a year ago? A year at least, right? This failure to present adequate reason has ruined the American agenda and unless we get attacked by Saddam (which wouldn't happen even if he didn't disarm those Al Sulaud missles) there's is no fathomable reason to kill innocent, teenage Iraqi children.....

Unless of course you consider oil more important than human lives?

Do you?

I'm afraid of what your answer may be.


I have done more than enough reading independant of any information the current administration has presented to believe 100% that the removal of Saddam Hussein is important to the safety and security of the entire middle east reagion. Based on everything I have read, this administration, has done quite possibly, the worst job of making its case to the people and the world. But I did not start this thread to deabate these issues.

My point is that the propaganda machines, of people opposed to war, and the Iraqi game of cat and mouse, are kicking the ass of this administration. Further evidence that they are winning the PR is your question. I am pretty sure that everyone who posts here, even those supportive of war to remove Saddam, would say they are not for killing innocent children.

It is obvious you believe that the War is about oil. I would submit to you, and I can quote the numbers as I have in other threads, that the "PEACE" is also about the oil. There is enough of a monetary gain from Iraq going into our "alies" countries to make a case that they are blinded by it. I wish this president would get in front of the country and the world and present this information. 60 Minutes did someo of it last night.

There are so many things this Administration could present, but does not.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-03-2003, 09:51 AM   #14
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 09:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


I have done more than enough reading independant of any information the current administration has presented to believe 100% that the removal of Saddam Hussein is important to the safety and security of the entire middle east reagion. Based on everything I have read, this administration, has done quite possibly, the worst job of making its case to the people and the world.
I agree

I still think most of the problems could have been prevented if Europe had managed to present one view (either in favour of or against war) to the rest of the world
the EU failed misserably

Europe helped Sadam to win the pr war
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is online now  
Old 03-03-2003, 01:03 PM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:24 AM
The point is that Bush hasn't articulated the case against Saddam. Perhaps there is adequate reason for a war. But he hasn't done what he should to sell the idea to the American people. I wonder what someone like John McCain could have done if he were president. I imagine things would be pretty different.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com