Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 70

Thread: War has started

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    193
    woooooh, I am done reading.
    Four words
    I support my President

  2. #32
    Priapistic Monk KorpDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,628
    No the reason to go in and remove SoDamn Insane from power is for the entire world. The entire world voted to disarm him and these are the "serious consequences" we promised. Now we gave an ultimatum, he had a choice.....now all of sudden all those naysayers and whiners are backing, who??? All but the French, Germans, and Russians. The ones with the most to lose....look, I don't care if you ever agree with me. I've got a life to get back to, but you really aren't "in the know" when you slam the U.S. Just pray we are wrong....
    Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
    - Samuel Johnson

  3. #33
    Hell, I look at this speech of Saddam Hussein, and I feel sorry for the guy, I can't help it, he's old, how much stress could he possibly take? The fear he must feel, is something that makes me feel a great deal of pity for him, so please, don't tell me I don't feel this or that, because you people really just don't know.
    This tread has made many interesting and good points for both sides and proves how different we really are.

    This quote above, I am sorry but the man should live in fear. What kind of person uses other human beings as shields? Has rape rooms and public beheadings daily? I'm sorry but the man is no saint. Its one thing to pity someone for what they are but what they do can never be excused. Am I saying that it's the U.S.'s job to go take him out? Hell no! Its the worlds responsiblity! How can we let the people of Iraq live like that? Would any of you? Is it alright if your wife(or self) is dragged out of your house and bruitily raped and there is no consequence because the government did it?

    So lets say we liberate them and they say "Get the hell out!" I say fine, leave. But what if they are gratetful?Relieved? If these kinds of things are going on in other countries is it not the obligation of the world to do something? I am not just talking about Iraq but ALL countries?

    I would say that I have to commend the U.S. even if most think that the motives are bad are we still not doing a good thing for its people? Most of the interviews I have seen are men and women that want freedom.

    I am not picking on this quote its just what got me going....

    And no I cant say anything about the timing of this war, I am as baffled as most and what others have said about training Bin Laden and arming them, well thats interesting as well aint it.

    I am AMERICAN and I am not saying that this is the best thing in the world, war is never good but if something good comes out of it what then? If Iraq did attack another country first would the world not say "Where is the U.S.?" Seems to me that this happens alot.

    I just dont think that atrocities that happen in other countries should be ignored.

    And to those that dont approve of Americans, its not like we voted for war. We just partake in the decisions of our government....nothing more.....

    I am not a liberal and I do support our troops....

  4. #34
    AntiOnline Newbie
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    178
    Originally posted by HTRegz
    Specter6:

    The statement I was refering to was your claim that the US liberated Kuwait. How can you call it liberation when they are reinstating a dictator.

    If you had payed any attention to what I had said and to what had happened you would realize that Kuwait was invaded by Iraq. The whole premise of Desert Shield/Storm was to liberate Kuwait from Iraq.

    The government of Kuwait has always been peaceful. We had no need to depose their current gov't, that's not why we were there. Why not stick to the facts instead of entering into arguments blindly and resorting to personal attacks?

    I appreciate your right to your opinion, but if you are going to accuse me of stating half-truths prove it.

    And to all you bleeding hearts out there, if the Iraqi army continues to surrender they way they are beginning to, the agrression will stop.

  5. #35
    Kwiep
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    924
    "Fighting for peace is like ****ing for virginity" - anonymous

    To all: "I'm a pacifist. Let's kill them bastards.":
    I want to paste all **** I said already here but it's pointless, you will hear it but you won't listen. I'm more dangerous then Sadaam, because I do have chemical weapons. It's a weak minded and primitive way of thinking to "just nuke the whole place off the map.. and then start over calling it america beta version 2". You can say whatever you want to me, you are not 'just' removing weapons. You are going to kill whatever you do. You kill, not someone else and it isn't someone else's fault. You. No proof, no sufficient reason, not the right way, not the right time, not the right circumstances.

    http://www.antionline.com/showthread...499#post612172

    To all: "I'm a pacifist. Fighting is pointless. Enough said.":
    Many of you exist to. Peace to all.
    Double Dutch

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,785
    i wish you had said you were a pacifist at the start neel. that really is a whole different story and i can respect that. i hope you ethical convictions are never tested.
    Bukhari:V3B48N826 “The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’”

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,424
    Originally posted by Kapperdog
    Hey guys, I hate to tell you but...nobody's going to die in this war unless the Marines crash another chopper.
    You must be a visionair

    Originally posted by Kapperdog
    By the way, since my business is bidding government contracts and most of yours is not, you probably didn't see the 82 billion dollar contract the American Gov just awarded to rebuild the last place we bombed........let's see, it was Afghanistan last time.
    The US government already awarded contracts to 6 different companies to help rebuild Iraq before the war had even started...
    The man who will be responsible to oversee rebuilding of the post-war Iraq is Jay Garner (head of the Office and Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance). Untill a few weeks ago, Garner was an executive at L-3. I wonder what the Iraqi's will think about someone who has been responsible for developing targeting systems for missiles (systems that will be used in this war) as the leader of a team to rebuild Iraq...

    Originally posted by Kapperdog
    And in about 6 months look for the one to rebuild Iraq.
    Look above: 6 companies already have a contract.

    Originally posted by Specter6
    The bleeding hearts out there will whine and cry that there has not been enough proof, that they do not understand why people must die. Well, there has been proof. Inspectors found missiles that had been fitted to deliver chemical and/or biological payloads. And people must die now to save more lives in the future.
    Blix and his team never found proof of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. Period.
    They found some missiles that could be used to deliver chemical payloads. As stated by one of the weapons inspectors: "No one has 100% proof that the other party has chemical or biological weapons. The US claim they destroyed their own stocks. We have NOT found chemical agents during our weapons inspections. Iraq itself claims to have destroyed them all. We can't be sure of it though. It's like having intimate contact with someone: you'll never be sure he isn't HIV-infected. That latent threat can be compare to chemical and biological weapons. However minimal the chance is, you always keep it into account.'

    Now, something about the chemical/biological weapons that Saddam might posses:
    - Blix asked Iraq for an explanation for the 'loss' of some missing VX-gas.
    - Blix asked Iraq for an explanation for the 'loss' of two tons of a substance that could be used to fabricate biological weapons such as anthrax, as well as 550 artillery-grenades filled with mustard-gas.
    Iraq handed Blix a report about the VX, but there was no time to verify it (doh).

    About the missiles that could be used to deliver those payloads:
    Washington's biggest fear is Iraq firing an Al-Hussein or Al-Abbas-missile (variants of the Russian Scud) with a chemical payload on Israel (Israel already stated that it would return such an attack. America stated that it would do everything to prevent Israel from getting involved, as that would probably lead to WW III. What's more, in the case of an Iraqi attack with chemical weapons on American soldiers, the US will retaliate... with NUCLEAR weapons for crying out loud.)
    According to the CIA and MI5, Iraq has somewhere between 6 and 24 Al-Hussein- (range: 600 km) and Al-Abbas- (range: 800km) missiles.
    Iraq used to have 819 scuds. According to Unscom, Iraq has proven that it has used 817 of them already (in Iran and the Gulf War). Al-Hussein and Al-Abbas missiles though are so stupid they couldn't even hit the Eifel Tower if they would be fired right next to it.

    And something on missiles with a biological payload... Anthrax, to name just one, is a living organism. Put it in a scud, and the detonation temperature would 'disinfect' the virus (read as: destroy it). It could be done, sure... by the US, maybe some European countries with vast knowledge of both biology and missiles... Biological warfare is too complex for Iraq.

    Originally posted by Specter6
    Leaving Hussein in power will ensure that Iraq will not be a prosperous nation and that its people will continue to suffer under a dictator who has an unbelievably horrific record of abuse towards his own people.
    I completely agree. France, Germany, Russia, Belgium... we ALL agree that Saddam is a dictator, don't be mistaken.




  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,785
    looks like your not alone \/IP3R:

    +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

    76% of americans polled by CNN/USA Today/Gallup on Thursday night approve of the United States' decision to go to war with Iraq

    http://gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030321.asp

    +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
    Bukhari:V3B48N826 “The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’”

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    154
    I wish to apologize to the people who received negatives from a kiddie. Somebody, must be new, gave away negatives to a load of posts, fairly pathetic attempt though, since it was just one point. Still, I meant for everybody to be safe from the AP game.
    With that out of the way, let's talk Saddam. Negative, quite right, they never found any conclusive proof of "weapons of mass destruction".
    The only reason to protect Kuwait during the gulf war was to protect an oil producing country, and keep it free from another, which the US wasn't chummy with. The US does NOT care about liberating, and/or helping embattled peoples.
    Robert Mugabe has had white land owners murdered, US never complained.
    Kim Jong Il, (Is that spelled correctly? Doesn't look like it) has had many of his people tortured in his capital city, in fact, many of the buildings in the capital are there for nothing, they are not occupied, just there to make Pyongyang look nicer, more metropolitan. Again, the US never said anything.
    Let's face facts, this war isn't about liberating the people of Iraq, it isn't about enforcing a UN declaration.
    And, like negative said, there is international law set out by the UN, that sets the conditions for a war, US basically ignored those conditions and decided to persue it's war regardless.

  10. #40
    you have it backwards, the inspectors wernt there to find evidence of WMDs, they where there to find evidence that Iraq Destroyed the WMD Everyone knows they have. the inspectors found nothing. be default, if they had them, and now they are gone, they must have gone some where. us claims saddam has moved them. iraq claims they were all destroyed and then they "lost" all the evidence that they ever existed.
    and legality is in the eye of the beholder. it is delibratly worded vaugly so nations have some wiggle room. and he contract is awarded on basis who is the best qualified to do it, several companies from ALL OVER THE WORLD proably submitted a bid. and ummm who said we never said anything about N.K. i hear bad things about him all the time, and also i think isnt NK currently embargoed by america? and the only reason we were shiping him oil and food is as part as a bribe to make him behave himself.

    3 words for you.
    means
    motive
    opurtunity.

    iraq has all three against them so we struck.
    china, and NK dont.
    Iran has all but a motive. if they give us one, and the normal diplomatic pressure dosent work, they are likly to be invaded also.
    u also must relize that there IS a process. NK and iraq are apples and oranges, u cant compare the two. there is no such thing as cut and paste diplomacy. all countreis are unique, no one policy can govern them all.
    Build a man a fire and he will be warm for a night.
    Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •