baggio202

im gonna answer here caue i couldnt find the other thread on herges is pittsburgh high for cutting this guy loose??.,..unless he is injured herges is a quality pitcher...dont be surprised if minnesota grabs him..i wish we would

is it any different then buying gi joes for a kid at christmas??...its no big deal..if you dont want a war theme for kid then dont buy it...maybe ill head to walgreens tommorrow and ee if they have any left

its not up to the american media to educate the american people..its up to the people themselves...the media only follows the people's lead...if people didnt waste their time watching "survivor" or "who wants to marry a millionaire" then the networks wouldnt put it on... i would look at the education system as to why 20% of high school kids cant identify canada on a map...

wow..thats alot to digest as far as a botcott goes....doesnt the effectiveness of a boycott have alot to do with trade deficiet between the two countries involved?????....like france for example....we import alot more french products then they import american..so if both countries bopycotted each other and bought goods from their own country intead of each others wouldnt that improve our economy while hurting theirs???

I hear they can't send Olvio down because their afraid the French will veto the move. i know HSC would veto it What a coincidence.... When I think of HSC, I think "French". ohhh boy , youre lucky she's on vacation

wonder if we should start colon opening day to break up the lefties???

the sox have purchased the contracts of brian daubach and steve loiaza from charlotte..they both are officially on the sox

whatever it takes to get danny 100% healthy...if that means shutting him down for an extended period then so be it...if we can fix this with timer over surgery we would be idiotic to push it..of course that jhasnt stopped the sox in the past. p.s. to danny...get your own doctor!!!

i got a feeling when mark buehrle retires josh paul will still be on our roster

Baggs, the war is still illegal. I found this on National Public Radio: by PETER FREUNDLICH: All right, let me see if I understand the logic of this correctly. We are going to ignore the United Nations in order to make clear to Saddam Hussein that the United Nations cannot be ignored. We're going to wage war to preserve the UN's ability to avert war. The paramount principle is that the UN's word must be taken seriously, and if we have to subvert its word to guarantee that it is, then by gum, we will. Peace is too important not to take up arms to defend. Am I getting this right? Further, if the only way to bring democracy to Iraq is to vitiate the democracy of the Security Council, then we are honor-bound to do that too, because democracy, as we define it, is too important to be stopped by a little thing like democracy as they define it. Also, in dealing with a man who brooks no dissension at home, we cannot afford dissension among ourselves. We must speak with one voice against Saddam Hussein's failure to allow opposing voices to be heard. We are sending our gathered might to the Persian Gulf to make the point that might does not make right, as Saddam Hussein seems to think it does. And we are twisting the arms of the opposition until it agrees to let us oust a regime that twists the arms of the opposition. We cannot leave in power a dictator who ignores his own people. And if our people, and people elsewhere in the world, fail to understand that, then we have no choice but to ignore them. Listen. Don't misunderstand. I think it is a good thing that the members of the Bush administration seem to have been reading Lewis Carroll. I only wish someone had pointed out that "Alice in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass" are meditations on paradox and puzzle and illogic and on the strangeness of things, not templates for foreign policy. It is amusing for the Mad Hatter to say something like, `We must make war on him because he is a threat to peace,' but not amusing for someone who actually commands an army to say that. As a collector of laughable arguments, I'd be enjoying all this were it not for the fact that I know--we all know--that lives are going to be lost in what amounts to a freak, circular reasoning accident. you keep saying the war is illegal...what court has found this an illegal and named the united states war criminals???....that is your opinion..it is not fact.. my opinion is the war is legal and is being prosecuting under UN resolution 677,678 ,and 1441...that is not fact either...maybe someday the US will stand trial in the world court..but i doubt there is anywhere near enough evidence... also this guys whole arguement is based on the UN being a democratic organization....the UN is anything but democratic...5 countries basically have the ability to play a dictator anytime they want with veto power...that veto power really ruines the credibility of the UN...when one country can stop the wishes of the whole world , which pretty much was the case in kosovo , that is definately not a democracy...you have brought some articles here that make a pretty good case for your beliefs..this one is not one of them the UN has failed miserably in rwanda , in kosovo , and now in iraq...it works pretty good on humanitarian aide and on nation building...but it takes action to defend the rights of an oppressed people....the UN has proved more than once it cant handle that task...

I hear they can't send Olvio down because their afraid the French will veto the move. i know HSC would veto it

and your new white sox starting SS....josh paul mr. versatility makes the team...god help us all

three catchers???....stupid...just send olivo down un til alomar goes on the DL if they are worried that much about losing paul...its not like miguel is tearing the cover off the ball

this probably has to do with the 40 man roster...neither loiaza or daubach wa on it..if our 40 man roster is full they will have to cut someone to keep daubach and loiaza...so they might just be doing this until they decide who they are going to cut loose...if loiaza and daubach satrt the season in charlotte...im gonna start rooting for the devil rays

I just used it as a justification that we can't claim a higher moral ground in the issue as a claim for going to war. We knew he was killing his own citizens with it, yet we sold it to him anyways. Now we're coming across saying that we are the "champions of the Iraqi people" when we provided Saddam with all the weapons he needed to do whatever the f*** he pleased to his own people and we never condemned it at all. Also, from 1991-1998, both Ritter and Rocke said that they got over 95% of the weapons from Iraq. So, there are a very slim amount in the country, if any. And any weapons he does have are useless goo by now because they have short shelf lives. none of those people are in office anymore... and yes we can claim a higher moral ground...just look at the war...we do everything within our power to aviod collateral damage..to the point where it probably has cost us extra casualites...we follow the geneva convention when it come to rules of war now iraq , who also signed the geneva convention...has shoot prisoner's in the head , interrogated them on live tv...dressed up in US uniforms to kill surrending ioraqi troops,..hide out in hospitals ,schools and mosques...use women and children as human shields i think we can pretty safely claim the higher moral ground

so that article might come from a conservative christian group with another agenda...so what??...like there is no group on the left with agendas.. all this article says is that people on the hollywood left like to call the president stupid , idiotic , a moron and then it goes on to show the president's level of education along with his cabinet and advisors and compares them to the people that like to lable him as such... unless they are misrepresenting facts in respect to the people's education levels then i see nothing wrong with this article..the rest of it is opinion...everyone has one and the right to voice it.. i agree that people should not place their religion above others..but this article is about how stupid the hollywierd left really is

The reference to South Africa was to South Africa. Apartheid fell with the most minimal violence imaginable and from DeKlerk to Nelson Mandela there was peaceful transfer of the presidency, a new constitution, the Peace and Reconciliation commission, Mandala has served and SA accomplished peaceful transition to his successor. I guess the hahahahahahhahahahhahha is one you for not knowing the history of the specific referance made. Put the doobies down and do a little school work and learning, my friend. too bad that peaceful tranfer of power was the highlight of mandela's presidency...i know there will be growing pains when a group of people go from being oppresed to free like that..but it sure like that country , both economically and as fars as violence goes took a turn south though i must admit i dont feel io have studied that enough to have an educated opinion..just a few things ive read and heard about

there are intelligence reports linking al qaeda to getting document forgery training and training i nthe use of bio /chem weapons in iraq since atleast'97...the report says although there was nothing formal between saddam and bin ladden , saddam let them train but didnt get involved in their missions..

Well, CK, Saddam wouldn't be armed with weapons if we hadn't sold them all to him in the first place, now would he? Who is to say that 1) the plant has made chem weapons, 2) that Blix and Co. (if given adequate time and not pressured by the West Texas moron) would have found more weapons (I personally believe they could have if given time...if there are weapons there) etc. The Bush regime case for war was inadequate and they sent people off to die anyway. Sickening...absolutely sickening. you keep bringing this up that the USA was the one to arm saddam like its a defense for your position that we shouldnt go to war ...but since we did arm the stupid bastard isnt that even more of a reason for us to disarm him???

Thanks for the insult, 420. I know I must be doing something right when all you have is insults for your arguments. It seems by assuming war is the only answer, you're the one that claims to know all. March 7: Hans Blix quoted as saying that they were finding stuff and they were fine. But Bush wasn't content with that. He needed to bomb the s*** out stuff. The UN inspectors should have been given more time. It's that simple. Or how about the Bush regime telling the truth and not using plagiarized info from 12 years ago? There were various resolutions floating around the UN that were non-military and a vast majority of them called for the inspectors to be given adequate time. How's that for a reason? hanx blix also said after his 83 page report of unfinished tasks in iraq that he doubts they would have ever finished

Violates: Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, Hague Convention on land warfare, Hague Convention on air warfare, the Treaty of Westphalia, US Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956), the International Declaration on Human Rights, the Genocide Convention, the 4 Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol I thereof, the Kellogg Brand Pact, and the Nuremburg Judgement, Charter and Principles. But don't take my word for it. That's from former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and former World Court lawyer Francis A. Boyle. un resolutions 677, 678 ,1441 says its legal

no soldier, sailor , airman , marine , or coast gaurd want to go to war...no one wants to kill anyone..but those that are there understand they have to be..that somebody has to put an end to the terror of saddam...ask that british soldier that they show on that film clip where 3 or 4 little iraqi children run up to him as he gives them candy and they are waving at him as they run away if he wants to be there.....what do you think he would say???...go ask any of those soldiers if they want to go home... the government does not lie to them or trick them when they enlist..it is made perfectly clear to everyone that raises their right hand that by doing that they acknowledging that they very well could be called upon to give their life for this country ...they do it of their own free will.. what they are doing is their job...as professionally as any fighting force in history ever has...they know they might have to take a life of another..they know that they may very well not see the end of this campaign..they know they might die because we are trying to fight within the rules of war while our opponents fight like murderers ,rapists and thugs... its what makes them heros you say you support the troops??...have you done anything to really support them??...donate blood??..send a check to the organization that uses it to buy groceries for families who have husbands or wives in the gulf???..something like that???..you sure are supporting the anti-war movement enough..isnt it time to actually prove you support the troops too??..that goes for people on both sides...actually supporting the troops is something we all should be doing with more than just words or signs..

it was reported on whatever news networks i was watching that night...cant say which one for sure cause i was channel surfing all of them..sorry..maybe in their archieves???

A lot of food and other items like that were also banned from being imported into the country under UN Sanctions. That's why groups like Voices in the Wilderness have to smuggle it past US Customs and then smuggle it past the Iraqi government as well. The UN Sanctions also did a great job of emaciating the Iraqi people and f***ing them over as well. hey im no fan of the UN..this situation should have been handled 12 years ago

CK, there is a new book out called "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy". I have read a little bit of it, and it is a very weird read about the 2000 election. The author used FOIA and FL Sunshine Laws and got his hands on a lot of the voter rolls from the state of Florida. There are some weird anomalies in the rolls of people that were made ineligable because they were felons. There were LOTS of people taken off for "crime committed in 2005", "crime committed in 2012", etc. etc. etc. Most of these people were African American and traditionally, the trend is that African Americans usually vote Democrat. So, Bush is really a fictitious President. It's not so much the electoral college as it is that Bush and Co. (Katherine Harris was also a campaign director for Bush too...at the same time she was a Florida Elections official) f***ed with the voter rolls. But, hey, I am just a college student with too much free time to read books haha. But if you want a good book by an intelligent conservative (not like Rush, Mike Savage, etc.) check out "What's so great about America" by Dinesh D'Souza. It's a really good read from a conservative perspective that shows what is great about America. did you forget about bagfulls of votes that mysteriously turned up in new mexico that all were for al gore???...or in wisc where people were caught on camera giving ciggerettes to homeless people if they would go in and vote for gore...democratic poll workers went in the booths with these people to ensure they voted democrat...or also in wisc people caught on tape giving registered democrats 4or 5 ballots...or in missouri where polls were kept open for up to two hours after the state closed in areas that were 90% democrat??..or how about detroit where over 95% of the voters turned out..which is a statistical impossibility because of the number of people that die before they are removed from the voter list??? there was cheating on both sides , as there is in every elsection ,and that election was so close that no one could ever figure out who really won when all the illegal votes and moves were removed...its over...time to move on