War with Iraq

[Negative]

Originally posted by Tiger Shark
Firstly, the most assistance given to Iraq in it's quest for WMD, (a term that I hate because the chemical and biological weapons destroy nothing - they only kill), was by France, Germany and Russia hence their threatened veto's - they really don't want the world to know the level of their assistance. That is not to say that at some time or another the US and Britain did not help out, , but they have at least come clean about it.

It's already public knowledge that France provided Iraq with a nuclear reactor in the '70s (the Osiraq, a research reactor), and almost 30 pounds of Uranium-235. In 1980, the reactor was bombed by Iran, causing little damage. The French also equipped it with a system that would make sure none of the Uranium would be removed from the reactor.
In 1981, the reactor was fully destroyed by Israeli jets, claiming they were acting in self-defense (although experts agreed that even if Saddam would want to abuse the reactor, it'd still take him at least 5 to 10 years).
Russia has always refused to help Iraq with nuclear power.
Supplying them with biological and chemical weapons we're indeed all guilty of. Stating that the most support came from France, Germany and Russia is something I wouldn't dare to state. Same goes for stating that the US and Britain have come clean about it.

Secondly, the UN imposed the sanctions - so you are all to blame for the deaths in Iraq - Quit pointing the blame for that solely at the USA..... YOU ALL DID IT....

Agreed. Sanctions like the ones against Iraq are unhuman imo.

Thirdly, for those who don't believe that the US should be policing the world then they should probably also stop giving the world billions of dollars in aid every year much of which is diverted to things other than which it was intended. But those of you who dislike the US probably won't want them to do that do you? You like the money don't you!!!!!

The US spend 0.1 % of their GDP on aid (with a GDP of about $ 10.000 billion, the 'billions of dollars' you talk about, is actually only about $ 10 billion, which is about as much as they spend on foreign military). Relatively spoken, that's peanuts. The EU forces all its members to spend at least 1%, ten times as much.
In actual dollars spent, the US are nr. 2 (behind Japan).
In actual dollars, the EU-15 spend about $ 80 billion a year on aid, 8 times as much...

(Pfew, took me a while to figure out how much one billion actually is... seems like British mean something else by it than Americans... don't worry though, my math is correct).

ratified UN 1441 in November 2002 and within that resolution _you_ gave Saddam 30 days to comply and authorized the use of force in the case of non-compliance.

Resolution 1441:

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to Resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area.

Resolutions 660 to 663 are about the Iraq-Kuwait conflict. If I'm correct, Iraq isn't annexing Kuwait anymore. You say 'authorized the use of force', where the resolution says 'use all necessary means'. Force isn't necessary right now. There you have the reasoning of France, Germany, Belgium, Russia, and 80 more percent of all countries.

Please, in the future, don't make resolutions that you don't have the backbone to support fully - or were you worried then that the US would cut off the aid they give to you all if you didn't ratify that resolution meanwhile secretly hoping that Saddam would cave under "world" pressure?...... See..... Even you can't trust him to be logical and rational.

Please, in the future, don't make up resolutions. And they US don't 'give aid to us all', thank you. We ratified Resolution 1441, and we're still acting according to it (all necessary means, remember...).

The US and Britain, Bulgaria and Spain are not evil....period. They simply have the backbone that clearly the rest of you don't. The beauty of these countries, my friends, is that we have our own protesters - they freely and without fear of reprisal criticize, abuse and denigrate their leadership..... There are too many of you who do not have that freedom, you want it, but you can't have it...... Because your governments are evil, (any Iraqis, Lybians, Iranians, Chinese, Koreans etc. out there reading this?... Tell me I am wrong where you are concerned......)

No one said you are evil...
Blair and Aznar... backbone? They both had the choice: either going with the US, or going with their own people. They chose to go with the US, because they are afraid to stand up against the US if you ask me. They fear their own people less than they fear Bush. Choosing the lesser fear has nothing to do with backbone.
And please stop thinking there's only the US and the third world. Maybe you should take a look at some of European countries' economy (Flanders is the wealthiest region in the world, for example), their social security systems, their real freedom of speech, their culture,...
There are over 300 million Europeans who have more freedom than you will ever know, Tiger Shark.

[HTRegz]

As I have stated before, DO NOT blame America, WE DID NOT vote for Bush, well at least not all of us, he's not our president! They are STILL counting the electoral votes by hand at this very moment. How can america take the responsibility of a man who WE DID NOT ELECT? secondly, we are not waging war on the whole country, just one person

you say not to blame american but then you say "we" are not waging war on a country, just on one person.. if you are using we, then the rest of the world is free to blame all of you. .if it's him that's waging the war on one person instead of a country, all democracies have ways to remove dictorial leaders from government, he obviously has enough support if he's still there... Also the fact that it's waging war on a person instead of a country doesn't help you out.. it makes things worse.. Now you are killing many innocent people if you go to war strictly because of a vendetta against one person, instead of a reason to go to war against a country (then again is there ever really a reason to go to war?)

[EDIT]

Hey cool. this was my 175 post.. now i'm a member..... *laughs at all you jr. members* Hehe j/k.. anyways yippee for me.

[/EDIT]

[darknhfa]

[gloworange]this is not it[/gloworange]
look us invaded afganistan because they cauldnot find who destroyed the twin towers.

what they want is that stuff like this never happens

so they are trying to invade those countries that doesnot agree with us or had bad relationships with us identifying them as terrorists or saying u have terrorists in your countries or linking them somehow wit the terrorists

the concept of chemical and biological weapons is a boooooooooooooooooooooooo

they used to exist but uve gota also remember us destroyed them a long time ago in the 90s and killed those scientists.
ists is true and they are written as history in iraq's history pages

[glowpurple]so i know that jorge bush has gone mad but it doesnot mean that innocent people has to suffer.[/glowpurple]
Thank you

[Sick Dwarf]

49. Q: Is the US attacking Iraq anyway, no matter what the UN or Nato says or does?
A: Yes

50. Q: Is that something for americans to be proud off, considering the strugle for world unification?
A: You figure that out...

[Negative]

Originally posted by Und3ertak3r
Sun, or any one who can answer.
I recieve emails with this sort of information regulary. Because it is without credable reference most of this is thrown in to the WPB.. I am very sceptical of a great deal of the information coming out from all sides.. As was said and will always be said.. the first Casuality of war is the truth...

1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have?
A: 6%

A little off... The US having 6% of the world's population, would mean there are only 4,676,041,483 people in this world. There's over 6 billion people, meaning the US (with 280 million) only have 4.6 % of the world's population.

2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have?
A: 50%

Hmmm... the US have a GDP of about $ 10.184 trillion.
Germany $ 2.184 trillion, Japan $ 3.45 trillion, France $ 1.54 trillion, Russia $ 1.2 trillion, the UK $ 1.47 trillion. That's $ 9.9844 trillion for those 5 countries only already. Add 15 European countries with about $ 250 each, and the figure for the rest off the world exceeds that of the US. More like 40%, I'd say.
(All figures from the CIA).

3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
A: Saudi Arabia

Make that 'largest KNOWN oil reserves', and we have a deal.

4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves?
A: Iraq

Same remark as above.

5 - 16 are all correct, 17 obviously was a typo.

18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S. tanks with ploughs mounted on the front?
A: 6,000

Very sensational, but I doubt it is true.

19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War?
A: 40 tons

Hmmm... Uranium-235 is a by-product of a nuclear chain. Not sure what this Q/A is implying, but there are about 560,000 metric tons of U-235 in the US alone right now...

20 is correct (assuming the UN's information is correct, of course).
21: depends on who the claim comes from, and at what time...
22 and 23 are gambling questions...
24: Pentagon indeed has said so.
25: just some statistical info implemented on the 24th Q/A, I assume.
27 and 28 are correct.
26 and 29 are interesting: Resolution 661 dates from 1990, meaning this Q/A is pretty recent.

And so on and so on... Yes, I have too much time on my hands.

[darknhfa]

u dont have to kill innocents to create unity do u???
it just makes things worse

Do u think us left those uraniums for iraq to make bombs!

i dont think so
may be theoritically but not for real.
may be for us to have a good reason to come back and invade iraq

[Conf1rm3d_K1ll]

Originally posted here by SarinMage
we have no right to goto war, its all for moeny and personal reasons, the bush family wants to controll the middle east, thats all there is to it

Perhaps a little simplistic?

[Worm Wood]

*sigh* here we go again, first off, the sanctions shouldnt have killed anyone. let me see, what is saddam allowed to buy? mostly, its just food and medicine. hmmm let see, if the pretty much ONLY thing he is allowed to buy is food, and people are starving......its not the UN impposed sanctions, its SADDAM.
also, how many of those statistics came from north an south iraq where saddam isnt in full control. i mean just because he kills them using the very same NBCs he dosnet have and destroyed, wreaked several thousands geneticly, so that even though they didnt die, there children have birth defects if they are born at all, and they are living off whatever they can scrape by with and through togather, w/o ANY support from their govt. but its all the us and their evil imperialistic goals....though the last time we annexxed a country against their will escapes me, perhaps one of you could provide a link?
and g.w. bush is th elegal president, and their was no difference in how he was elected compared to other preisdents...excpet the supreme court having to explain gore how the election system has worked for the past 200 years. bush DID not steal the election, he mearly one by electorial vote, the SAME WAY EVERY OTHER PRESIDENT has. the populer vote is their to make u feel better. it dont mean jack, weather thast good or bad is another thread, but thats the way its always been, so quit bitching about it.

*edit*
we left the D.U.( the uranium) there because its what our shells are made out of, also, its what our tank armor is made out of. we didnt just drop uranium on them.

[KorpDeath]

You know what? I'm not touching this with a ten-foot cow prod. No way, no how.


Have fun, and kids.... please keep it clean.

P.S. Down with the New World Order!

[Info_Au]

I do not agree to my Prime Minister following blindly Bush and not listening to the people of Australia.If 3 countries go to war without U.N backing those countries will be starting W.W.3.

Howard will be voted out at the next election.
Blair is looking like going First....lol
Bush will be out like his Father.....Without completing peace in the middle east.


~Quick ....look over there>>>>>........Is it Ossama???
One war that is not ended yet.....and still not a safe country to send refugees back to yet.

So is WAR the right answer??? No way!!

Leaders of the world need to listen.