'The War Is Not Over'

'The War Is Not Over'

There are 276644 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Sep 12, 2006, titled 'The War Is Not Over'. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

WASHINGTON - President Bush led the nation on Monday in marking the fifth anniversary of the Sept.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287004 Mar 18, 2013
Democracynow org wrote:
Reports: US 'Corporate Tax Dodgers' Keeping More Money Overseas
'Why should ordinary taxpayers have to sacrifice while highly profitable corporations are using accounting acrobatics and tax havens to avoid paying their fair share?'/ March 11, 2013 / http://tinyurl.com/bfolg79
At a time of record corporate profits, U.S. "corporate tax dodgers" are parking more of their profits offshore, taking advantage of tax loopholes to shield billions from U.S. taxes, according to new analyses in the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg.
The WSJ looked at 60 U.S. companies that parked a combined $166 billion offshore last year, allowing 40% of their annual profits to escape U.S. taxes. In Bloomberg's analysis of 83 companies, there was a $183 billion expansion over the past year in non-U.S. holdings, for a combined total across the 83 companies of $1.46 trillion in offshore profits.
The trend is clear: figures from both papers show an increase from last year in offshore profits — up 15% using WSJ figures and a 14.4% increase using Bloomberg's data.
The companies with the five biggest offshore holdings on both the WSJ and Bloomberg lists are General Electric, Pfizer, Microsoft, Merck and Johnson & Johnson.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/03/...
If Corporations Don’t Pay Taxes, Why Should You?
by Robert Scheer / March 12, 2013 / http://tinyurl.com/a7uyetc
Go offshore young man and avoid paying taxes. Plunder at will in those foreign lands, and if you get in trouble, Uncle Sam will come rushing to your assistance, diplomatically, financially and militarily, even if you have managed to avoid paying for those government services. Just pretend you’re a multinational corporation.
That’s the honest instruction for business success provided by 60 of the largest U.S. corporations that, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis,“parked a total of $166 billion offshore last year” shielding more than 40 percent of their profits from U.S. taxes. They all do it, including Microsoft, GE and pharmaceutical giant Abbott Laboratories. Many, like GE, are so good at it that they have avoided taxes altogether in some recent years.
But they all still expect Uncle Sam to come to their aid with military firepower in case the natives abroad get restless and nationalize their company’s assets. We still have a blockade against Cuba because Fidel Castro more than a half century ago dared seize an American-owned telephone company. During that same period, we have consistently intervened to maintain the lock of U.S. corporations on the world’s resources, continuing to the present task of making Iraq and Libya safe for our oil companies.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/03/12-0
Well, isn`t nice ?
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287005 Mar 18, 2013
UidiotRaceMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
The Pentagon budget: largest ever and growing
by Sara Flounders
The (US) military budget has grown so large that it now threatens to overwhelm and devour all social funding. Its sheer weight is squeezing out funding for every human need. U.S. cities are collapsing. The infrastructure of bridges, roads, dams, canals and tunnels is disintegrating. Twenty-five percent of U.S drinking water is considered “poor.” Unemployment is officially reaching 10 percent and in reality is double that. Black and Latino/a youth unemployment is more than 50 percent. Fourteen million children in the U.S. are living in households below the poverty level.
That is the land of freedom! What a nice country is that!
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287006 Mar 18, 2013
neiljiohu wrote:
If want to start a war, soldiers rushed to the battlefield, contributing to the war his own life, that will make a lot of people were injured, why want to go to war? Soldier is very hard, for the safety of national sacrifice their own youth, love, family. We have to do is try our best to create conditions for soldiers. US famous dating site: w w w. Uniformedmate. com is the first and best dating site for military singles and admirers in the world! We bring together single members of the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, Police Force, and Firefighters — as well as civilians, veterans. Over the years, we have achieved tremendous success in bringing military singles and admirers together.
Irony is the only answer!
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287007 Mar 18, 2013
Democracynow org wrote:
Dan Rather talks about the corrupt Corporate media
http://tinyurl.com/axcfm88
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =8ckeqIoZz9cXX
Noam Chomsky - The Myth of the Liberal Media
http://tinyurl.com/a8lxbyk
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Let Chomsky talk whatever he likes! Liberal Media don`t care in the least! Why should they?
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287008 Mar 18, 2013
rider wrote:
Back in Houston, the Taliban was learning how the “other half lives,” and according to The Telegraph,“stayed in a five-star hotel and were chauffeured in a company minibus.” The Taliban representatives “…were amazed by the luxurious homes of Texan oil barons. Invited to dinner at the palatial home of Martin Miller, a vice-president of Unocal, they marveled at his swimming pool, views of the golf course and six bathrooms.” Mr. Miller, said he hoped that UNOCAL had clinched the deal.
Dick Cheney was then CEO of Haliburton Corporation, a pipeline services vendor based in Texas. Gushed Cheney in 1998,“I can’t think of a time when we’ve had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian. It’s almost as if the opportunities have arisen overnight. The good Lord didn’t see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States. Occasionally we have to operate in places where, all things considered, one would not normally choose to go. But we go where the business is.” Would Cheney bargain with the harborers of U.S. troop killers if that’s where the business was?
The Telegraph reported that Unocal had promised to start building the pipeline and paying the Taliban immediately, with the added inducements and a donation of ?500,000 to the University of Nebraska for courses in Afghanistan to train 400 teachers, electricians, carpenters and pipefitters.
The Telegraph also reported,“The US government, which in the past has branded the Taliban’s policies against women and children “despicable”, appears anxious to please the fundamentalists to clinch the lucrative pipeline contract.” In a paper prepared by Neamatollah Nojumi, at the Tufts University Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Nojumi wrote in August 1997 that Madeline Albright sat in a “full-dress CIA briefing” on the Caspian region. CIA agents then accompanied “some well-trained petroleum engineers” to the region. Albright concluded that shaping the region’s policies was “one of the most exciting things that we can do.”
Ah yes, the good Lord
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287009 Mar 18, 2013
bibleSays wrote:
.
Revelation's FALSE PROPHET = Pope of Rome
http://youtu.be/Co9oADUSi08
.
The Pope of Rome what a clown! Of course he is multi rich billionair!
Henry

Bleicherode, Germany

#287010 Mar 18, 2013
Democracynow org wrote:
<quoted text>
Romans 3:23
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
This sounds real cracy Well it is just cracy religion!
Foxy is Foxy

Indianapolis, IN

#287011 Mar 18, 2013
Revelation's DEAD THREAD = the war is not over.

Put the coins in eyeball sockets of the war. RIP.

Foxy is Foxy

http://youtu.be/8kNwvIEQsg0

don't click on that!!!!!!!!!!
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287013 Mar 18, 2013
Syria fired three rockets into Lebanon today, as it threatened to do last week. The jet-fired rockets hit empty buildings in the border town of Arsaal, CNN reports. Syrian officials claim armed terrorists have infiltrated Syria from Lebanon, and the UN has voiced concern over the growing tension and cross-border fire. No injuries have been reported from today's rocket attacks.

Wait a minute...I am confusikated here...a muslim nation firing on a muslim nation. Once united allies against Israel and now enemies of one another...how does one keep up with who your friends are in the muddle east?
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287014 Mar 18, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
01 & 02. No need to apply "old oil", let us just move on.
03. As per Quran, Muslims "are allowed" to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them (otherwise it would be a "Non natural" law)…… but they should not exceed the harm and if they forgive it would be better (the last line is for people who have high degree of persistence and perseverance)
04. President Obama came to power promising "change" after GWB the Great had done extreme damage to USA both financially and economically.
But he was to "know " that President of USA is not 'as free and as powerful" as people think him to be. He is like a puppet who is being controlled by very powerful puppeteers.
So "nothing" changed in USA, US is still solidly behind Isreal, US army is in Iraq, US army is in Afghanistan, GITMO is there, US is ready to fight Yemen, Iran, Syria…
As if GWB the Great is still ruling USA, so people decided to "re-elect" him for another term.
And in 2016, we will get "another puppet" in White House to dance at the tune of those puppeteers!!(to keep people happy!!)
Comrade, what section of the Quran states that? "As per Quran, Muslims are allowed to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them"...where is that written? I try to keep up on all my various fictional readings and don't recall ever reading that one...please advise, thanks.
two2tango

Pottstown, PA

#287015 Mar 18, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Rogue Gallery!!– MUQ
10 years on, authors of Iraq invasion stand ‘discredited’
WASHINGTON: They were the men who were to remake the Middle East, but 10 years on, the alliance of politicians and neoconservative thinkers who launched the Iraq war are a discredited band.
1. GEORGE W. BUSH:
As US president and commander-in-chief of American forces, George W Bush bears ultimate responsibility for launching the war to topple Saddam Hussein, an act he perhaps hoped would secure his legacy.
Now 66, and apparently happy to pursue his artistic endeavors in a Texas retirement, the high point of his public life came after the 9/11 attacks when he stood at the ruins of the World Trade Center and defied America’s enemies.
The image of him as a resolute leader with a bullhorn might have lingered longer had he not, two months after the start of the 2003 Iraq war, appeared on the deck of an aircraft carrier under a “Mission Accomplished” banner.
The mission was far from accomplished and Iraq haunted the rest of his presidency, even after his 2004 re-election, bleeding America of men and wealth even as his justifications for the invasion fell apart.
While the Republican leader’s American conservative base largely turned its back on him because of his uncontrolled spending, Iraq ultimately became the main factor discrediting him before a world audience.
2. TONY BLAIR:
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted last month in an interview with the BBC about his support for Bush going into the Iraq war:“I’ve long since given up in trying to persuade people it was the right decision.”
Even more than that of his close US friend, the Labor leader’s entire legacy has been tarnished by a conflict that a majority of Britons opposed even when it was still claimed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
As the most successful left-wing elected politician in British history, always more popular abroad than at home, Blair had hoped for a rewarding post-office life as a consultant after stepping down in 2007.
He did earn lavish fees from international contacts, and some recognition for his work as a Middle East peace envoy, but public appearances in his homeland are often marred by noisy protest.
While he still insists committing British troops was the right call, the 59-year-old admitted last month that the situation today in a still-violent post-Saddam Iraq is “not nearly what it should be.”
03. DICK CHENEY:
While Blair seems pained that the public won’t accept his justifications for going to war, former US Vice President Dick Cheney shows no sign of having any doubts about the decision to fight.
“If you want to be loved, go be a movie star,” he snorts in a documentary movie due for release entitled “The World According to Dick Cheney” and based around a four-hour interview with the unrepentant 72-year-old hawk.
In Bush’s first term, Cheney wielded vast influence as the gatekeeper to information reaching the Oval Office, but saw his influence wane in the second term when even the president began to question his judgment.
But, according to the film, he still refuses to believe Saddam did not have active programs to develop weapons of mass destruction.
This is what happens when everyone is focused on Dick. And his companies like Haliburtion, Blackwater etc.
two2tango

Pottstown, PA

#287016 Mar 18, 2013
People forget about Tony Blair and the support/approval from England. But without a major US ally signing off the invasion and occupation in full this probably wouldn't have happend.

I'm disappointed but not surprised by the big island's ignorance of their own history loosing colonial rule over countries for centuries at this point.

A war for the characters on the big island gives the princes/royalty resume time ie military experience. Get's them into the belly of their "gold" supply-black oil that is.

But the big island has always been about maintaining the status quo ie royalty, monarchy and class system. The big island is also a big nanny state include surveillance cameras all over the place. To justify the nanny state they need a boogyman: a war to fight. You figure they would be tired and learned their lessons from the IRA era.
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#287018 Mar 18, 2013
The simple fact, which gun-a-holics like to ignore, is that none of the rights protected to “We the People in the Bill of Rights” are absolute. With regard to the Second Amendment, I highly doubt that anyone would argue that people should be able to own rocket-propelled grenades or shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, although those are "arms" that can be used by individual people, and could be used by a well-regulated militia. While we need legislation banning weapons of war from our city streets, it's increasingly apparent we need another bit of legislation, and the sooner the better. And that's one that would mandate that every t-bag member of Congress along with their gun-a-holics constituents sit down with a sixth grade civics teacher and learn how the Constitution works.
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#287019 Mar 18, 2013
two2tango wrote:
People forget about Tony Blair and the support/approval from England. But without a major US ally signing off the invasion and occupation in full this probably wouldn't have happend.
I'm disappointed but not surprised by the big island's ignorance of their own history loosing colonial rule over countries for centuries at this point.
A war for the characters on the big island gives the princes/royalty resume time ie military experience. Get's them into the belly of their "gold" supply-black oil that is.
But the big island has always been about maintaining the status quo ie royalty, monarchy and class system. The big island is also a big nanny state include surveillance cameras all over the place. To justify the nanny state they need a boogyman: a war to fight. You figure they would be tired and learned their lessons from the IRA era.
The Big Island was the Biggest Tyrant of its time....that has shrunk to the size of "poodle" to another Big Tyrant of the day.

Let us see when the current Big Tyrant goes down the historical drain.
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#287020 Mar 18, 2013
News you will not see or hear on CNN and FOX News

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

Obama: The Warrior King

BY MICAH ZENKO (Contd.)

Most analysts and journalists have focused on President Obama's expanded scope, intensity, and institutionalization of targeted killings against suspected terrorists and militants. However, perhaps the enduring legacy of the Obama administration will be its sustained, rigorous effort to shape and define-down the idea of war. Consider in March 2011, during the NATO-led intervention in Libya, when a reporter asked White House spokesperson Jay Carney, "What is this military action?...Is it a war?" He replied, "It is a time-limited, scope-limited military action, in concert with our international partners." When pressed for more details, Carney added:

I'm not going to get into the terminology. I think what it is certainly not is, as others have said, a large-scale military -- open-ended military action -- the kind of which might otherwise be described as a war. There's no ground troops, as the president said. There's no land invasion.

After the war in Libya ended with the extrajudicial killing of Muammar Qaddafi, Obama bragged that U.S. involvement "only cost us $1 billion as opposed to $1 trillion," and "not a single U.S. troop [was] on the ground...not a single U.S. troop was killed. That, I think, is a recipe for success in the future." Thus, the strategic objective of military intervention is to minimize the quantifiable costs, not to develop a plausible strategy that achieves some desired outcome.

Similarly, White House senior counterterrorism adviser John Brennan defended drone strikes in April 2012 by comparing them to "deploying large armies abroad" and "large, intrusive military deployments." Soon afterward, when Carney was asked if the Obama administration relied on the same "loose definition of the declaration of war that President Bush did" in its use of drone strikes, he noted: "Using some of these tools is preferable when you are concerned about civilian casualties than, say, launching a full-scale invasion by land." (Perhaps unconsciously, senior administration officials always antiseptically refer to drone strikes as "targeted strikes" by "tools of national power" and not targeted killings of people by drones

This is all part of a systematic effort to remind Americans about the strategic error of invading Iraq, and to create the impression that counterterrorism strategies must incorporate kinetic force. Given the false dichotomy between 170,000 troops in Iraq and drone strikes, who would oppose the latter? Moreover, this implies that military operations involving less than a full-scale invasion or ground troops (which conveniently omits U.S. special operators or private military contractors required) is not considered a "war."

This characterization also assumes that war can only occur when it reaches some predetermined threshold of immediate human or financial costs. The president's "recipe for success in the future" is for military operations that are low-cost and low-risk (in the short-term, as it turned out in Libya) for Americans.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#287022 Mar 19, 2013
AB wrote:
Comrade, what section of the Quran states that? "As per Quran, Muslims are allowed to retaliate in equal manner of what harm is done to them"...where is that written? I try to keep up on all my various fictional readings and don't recall ever reading that one...please advise, thanks.
Ans.

There are many passages in Quran where Allah allows Muslims to retaliate in equal measure….. but "advises them to forgive" as a better course, I will point out a few:

A The Recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah…(42:40)

B. Nor can goodness and evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better: then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were your friend and intimate.(But) No one will be granted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self restraint….(41:34-35)

C. "….there is law of equality, if then any one transgresses the Prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against them but (always) fear Allah…" (2:194)

There are many more verses in Quran to this effect.
VoteVets org

Brooklyn, NY

#287025 Mar 19, 2013
Iraq/Military-Industrial Complex/The Ruling Class
http://tinyurl.com/28ubsjy


Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

--------

What I Knew Before the Invasion
http://tinyurl.com/dtpyy November 20, 2005
By Senator Bob Graham
I, too, presumed the president was being truthful -- until a series of events undercut that confidence.

In February 2002, after a briefing on the status of the war in Afghanistan, the commanding officer, Gen. Tommy Franks, told me the war was being compromised as specialized personnel and equipment were being shifted from Afghanistan to prepare for the war in Iraq -- a war more than a year away. Even at this early date, the White House was signaling that the threat posed by Saddam Hussein was of such urgency that it had priority over the crushing of al Qaeda.

In the early fall of 2002, a joint House-Senate intelligence inquiry committee, which I co-chaired, was in the final stages of its investigation of what happened before Sept. 11. As the unclassified final report of the inquiry documented, several failures of intelligence contributed to the tragedy. But as of October 2002, 13 months later, the administration was resisting initiating any substantial action to understand, much less fix, those problems.

At a meeting of the Senate intelligence committee on Sept. 5, 2002, CIA Director George Tenet was asked what the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) provided as the rationale for a preemptive war in Iraq. An NIE is the product of the entire intelligence community, and its most comprehensive assessment. I was stunned when Tenet said that no NIE had been requested by the White House and none had been prepared. Invoking our rarely used senatorial authority, I directed the completion of an NIE.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287026 Mar 19, 2013
Spocko wrote:
The simple fact, which gun-a-holics like to ignore, is that none of the rights protected to “We the People in the Bill of Rights” are absolute. With regard to the Second Amendment, I highly doubt that anyone would argue that people should be able to own rocket-propelled grenades or shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, although those are "arms" that can be used by individual people, and could be used by a well-regulated militia. While we need legislation banning weapons of war from our city streets, it's increasingly apparent we need another bit of legislation, and the sooner the better. And that's one that would mandate that every t-bag member of Congress along with their gun-a-holics constituents sit down with a sixth grade civics teacher and learn how the Constitution works.
Feel better now, francis?

Good for you...now just breathe...

Any input on how we get guns out of the hands of those that aren't suppose to have any under today's mammouth mountain of legislation? Do you think more useless legislation will make that happen?
ABs

Aiken, SC

#287027 Mar 19, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
There are many passages in Quran where Allah allows Muslims to retaliate in equal measure….. but "advises them to forgive" as a better course, I will point out a few:
A The Recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah…(42:40)
B. Nor can goodness and evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better: then will he between whom and you was hatred become as it were your friend and intimate.(But) No one will be granted such goodness except those who exercise patience and self restraint….(41:34-35)
C. "….there is law of equality, if then any one transgresses the Prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against them but (always) fear Allah…" (2:194)
There are many more verses in Quran to this effect.
So then what is it you are implying? Are you saying that muslims have options blessed by allah and that the less a muslim does to retaliate the better off he or she is in the eyes of allah? I am not following yourpoint here, comrade. So if I as a muslim retailiates in equal measure to someone that has done me wrong and you as a muslim does not retaliate against someone who has done you wrong, do we both get to go to the same eternal after life place?
Spocko

Oakland, CA

#287028 Mar 19, 2013
ABs wrote:
<quoted text>
Feel better now, francis?
Good for you...now just breathe...
Any input on how we get guns out of the hands of those that aren't suppose to have any under today's mammouth mountain of legislation? Do you think more useless legislation will make that happen?
Mammoth Mountain
http://www.mammothmountain.com/

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Terrorism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Voting For Hillary Is Already Dead Meat Mon Actual Science 1
News Leave Gaza now, State Department warns U.S. cit... Aug 25 Stephany McDowell 1
This is war. Daesh vs. al Qaeda Aug 24 YusufMehmet 2
News Tensions mount between Ukraine, Russia Aug 23 RUSSKI GO HOME 2
News Ukraine claims Russia smuggled new defense equi... Aug 21 George 4
News AG Holder worries about revenge for bin Laden (May '11) Aug 17 Tea bag suicide c... 201
News Obama: Yemen unrest won't halt drones (Jan '15) Aug 16 Lottery traitors 11
More from around the web