-
I am amazed that some people can say the Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction
1> the former head of his Atomic research told us what he has made, at a heavy price for him and his family
2> he declared hunreds of thousands of tons, in 91, of bio weapons, did this just disappear
3> Recently authorized his field commanders to use bio weapons if we invade
This is not a war for oil we get more oil from Canada than we do from Iraq. Look it up!!! If we left the little bitch to his own he would control a good chunk of the worlds oil, then you would start seeing some high prices for gas
The Iraq national congress has been pleading with world to help them take their country back
I have a friend from Iraq, Samir, he doesn't have any thumbs, why doesn't he have them? because his dad was one of thousands who surrendered in the gulf war, his dad had the fine pleasure of watching his wife and children get raped and tortured. And people wounder why there are so many people at anti-American parades in Iraq, **** i'd be dancing with my banner to.
Do we just sit back and watch him destroy his people and nations around him. Answer this who hasn't Hussien attacked in the middle east Why do you think that the Saudis haven't ejected our troops from their land. iraq would be entering as we are leaving. if I were to claim that we should have found a peaseful resolution with Hitler, i would be called a racist. The Nazis did kill more people but where do you draw the line and say who is worse.
We as Americans are looked down upon everyday. We are the greatest nation on the earth. We buy far donate more humanitarian aid t the world. You could combine the rest of the worlds amount and we still give more. We are willing to dye for others freedom and not expect anything in return. Other than Finland no country has even attempted to pay back their war dedts to us, ww2,ww1. North Korea is threatening to destroy us, but yet we still give their people hundreds of tons of food. One third of North Koreas food supply is a gift from the United States. That really makes us look like a war monging nation. I was a United States Marine and I put my life on hold to defend my country and the world. Just a little note to the French, German and Russians. pardon the misspellinds!
Casey
-
Ow yes, there are treatys. I was questioning why those treatys exist. The US of A is probably the most powerfull nation on earth if it comes to nuclear power, why should they have the right to say other countries are not allowed to produce those weapons in the first place.
Quote:
Originally posted here by IchNiSan
Of course, I acknowledge that the US has violated various treaty's before, de facto, or de jure, but if you assume that because someone broke a treaty, they should not be credible when talking about enforcing another treaty is not a good idea, as there would be no treaty's on earth with any power.
There would be no United Nations, as the United Nations was formed by treaty, there would be no, etc. etc. etc.
To go on about the first piece. If we're going to get bothered if a treaty is still rightfull if it's enforced by a nation who doesn't keep their own treatys... I think that's a bit weird sentence, with aldue respect for your opinion etc. If, as a real stupid example, there would be a bunch of moonpeople who have much beter weapons then we have, and they say to us "noone may build the weapons we have and noone may have them" and they keep producing and developing their weapons altough they agreed not to... Maybe we shouldn't bother about that because what's the worth of a treaty if noone follows it. But those moonpeople already don't. If there's a UN or NATO or whatever organisation wich is based on treatys and some people agree with one treaty and decide to ignore it when they want to. In that case there isn't an agreement indeed. In that case there isn't a UN or NATO, only some bunch of treatys you can signup for if you want and cancel when it get's boring. Almost like a mailinglist. To me it seems the US of A is in this case just signing up other (weaker mostly) countries to all kind of pron and spamlists, and they point at the treaty they made: "It isn't allowed to have a spamfilter and it isn't allowed to signup other countrys to spamlists".
If people brake treatys, wether or not we bother about it, the treaty isn't a treaty anymore.
-
i really don't want to get into this discussion... ("too much politics can ruin your day")
but before you think about going back to war with this country... lets' take a look at what we did to them in the 1st Gulf War!
http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0212/pt01.html
The Above link is not for the faint hearted...
-
Quote:
Originally posted here by trailboss44
I am amazed that some people can say the Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction
1> the former head of his Atomic research told us what he has made, at a heavy price for him and his family
2> he declared hunreds of thousands of tons, in 91, of bio weapons, did this just disappear
3> Recently authorized his field commanders to use bio weapons if we invade
Still... You call this real evidence? I'm not saying Iraq doesn't have weapons, but I also say Iraq does have weapons. I don't have proof of any because the weapon inspection aren't finished.
Quote:
Originally posted here by trailboss44
This is not a war for oil we get more oil from Canada than we do from Iraq. Look it up!!! If we left the little bitch to his own he would control a good chunk of the worlds oil, then you would start seeing some high prices for gas
OF course the US doesn't get oil from Iraq, what do you expect. I'm not saying they would start a watr for oil, but if they conquer the country or place a new super pro american government there, they will get oil for probably very low prices.
Quote:
Originally posted here by trailboss44
The Iraq national congress has been pleading with world to help them take their country back
I have a friend from Iraq, Samir, he doesn't have any thumbs, why doesn't he have them? because his dad was one of thousands who surrendered in the gulf war, his dad had the fine pleasure of watching his wife and children get raped and tortured. And people wounder why there are so many people at anti-American parades in Iraq, **** i'd be dancing with my banner to.
Quote:
Originally posted here by trailboss44
Do we just sit back and watch him destroy his people and nations around him. Answer this who hasn't Hussien attacked in the middle east Why do you think that the Saudis haven't ejected our troops from their land. iraq would be entering as we are leaving. if I were to claim that we should have found a peaseful resolution with Hitler, i would be called a racist. The Nazis did kill more people but where do you draw the line and say who is worse.
Nothing to bitch about in there ;). j/k am not flaming you or anything, just writing down my opinion with the things you wrote. Sadaam is a madman and he should be removed from were he is now. The US of A did cause a lot of misere over there also because they broke their own treatys and supplied weapoins and other thing etc., you now the story. People should have a right to hate the US of A.
Quote:
Originally posted here by trailboss44
We as Americans are looked down upon everyday. We are the greatest nation on the earth. We buy far donate more humanitarian aid t the world. You could combine the rest of the worlds amount and we still give more. We are willing to dye for others freedom and not expect anything in return. Other than Finland no country has even attempted to pay back their war dedts to us, ww2,ww1. North Korea is threatening to destroy us, but yet we still give their people hundreds of tons of food. One third of North Koreas food supply is a gift from the United States. That really makes us look like a war monging nation. I was a United States Marine and I put my life on hold to defend my country and the world. Just a little note to the French, German and Russians. pardon the misspellinds!
Casey
The US of A definatly isn't the only one doing this. And those "facts" and "numbers" aren't correct. I'm not going to correct them all, because I think that's useless, and I don't have proof of all of them. I have some books here about most of those thing. I will pick one example because I just wrote a thing about that 10 minutes ago. Some people call paying of depts was one of the causes of worldwar 2. France had to pay money to the US of A, but they didn't have money. The french forced Germany to pay them. The germans had even less money, so the US of A decided to lend money to Germany, so they could build up and give money to the french so the french could give it to the US of A again. Because of the crisis in 1929, the Germans were hit to and that's one of the reasons Hitler could get power. <<< Very simplified story, I know.
The US of A does have alot of money, because they never were hit by a war on their own ground the last long time. I mean a war wich is like a man to man, tank to tank slaughtering on own teritorry wich last more then a few days. Not a terrorist attack or something similar.
If we're going to argue about who did what for who and when and the cost... America only interfered in the past on their own behalf. Europe build America. There share in humanity is because they're in the UN or the NATO or whatever and every country gives money. The US of A maybe gives the most, but that is because they have the most. They have the most for a part, because they had something when others hadn't because of a war in those others land. America has much money because of the dept everyone has to payback + the money they get for lending the money so many years ago. For some countries that extra is so much they can only keep up paying that extra, without even starting to pay of the debt itself. In a way the US of A make money because of wars.
p.s.
Now I look really anti american again. Well... I am anti american, but not as much as it seems in my posts. I also drink coca cola and stuff ;) AND THE INTERNET
-
i don't know how your doing the quote thing you'll just have to settle for this
"OF course the US doesn't get oil from Iraq, what do you expect." You really need to check this one out bfore you keep saying it.
What is the purpose of the Weapons inspectors? Check it out if you disagree but their job is to ensure that the weapons that Iraq had were indeed destroyed. I dare you to find in the UN charter that it is their job to find them.
"The US of A does have alot of money, because they never were hit by a war on their own ground the last long time. I mean a war wich is like a man to man, tank to tank slaughtering on own teritorry wich last more then a few days. Not a terrorist attack or something similar."
Iteresting statement if you didn't study economics. i buy no means want to insult you but i think reacting from the heart and not the head. A lot of what you are saying is simply not true you may feel that it is. Everything that i have stated in my posts can be referenced. I really don't want to site all my soucres, lazy" but if you look you will find out. This is what happens when jopurnalists put there own opinion into something. Somalia is the best example of the news making a cause of something for news purposes only.
have a great day
-
Iraq as a nation is a loose collection of tribes some that have been there since before civilization as we view it existed. Some if not most of these tribes have been terrorized by Saddam or his followers but that alone is not enough to justify war. Saddam has spread terror by giving the families of suicide bombers 25,000 USD to live on, this makes the suicide bombers more valuable dead than alive. Giving money to the families of suicide bombers is not enough to justify war. Saddam has ordered the execution of many Iraqis for opposing him, and that alone can not justify war. He has gassed Kurdish populations to test the effectivness of his poison gasses and again that alone is not enough to cause a war.
However the aggragate of all his actions is enough to cause a war, not to enslave or to kill Iraqi people, but to free them from the terror that Saddam has caused. I don't like war or even the thought of it. I and many of my friends served in Viet Nam, another unpopular war. As a matter of fact is was more unpopular among us than anyone else, we had more to lose. I don't want to send anyone to war, but sometimes a preemptive strike is necessary to prevent a more serious war.
-
well done neel it seems that only one country or more accurately only one man in the world is eager for a war against and that is bush.
he is using his position for his own cause.
-
I'm french and everybody know that France is against this war. Like 80-90% of the french population I'm against this war too for several reason :
1. After 10 years of embargo with all that mean, I don't think Saddam can make a war (the population don't have food or medicine).
2. The US administration (Bush and others) says that Saddam have bombs but for the moment there is no proof. It's strange because they have some satelite that can view 1inch square details and a bomb is much larger.
3. Only US and UK says that they have some proof. We have also some satelite and secret agent. If Mr Chirac show us proofs France like germany will take another speech.
I don't say that Saddam is a good guy, France know that's not true, but a war is not a civilized response.
What I hate is that some US newspapers says that France don't remember that if in the WW2, the america was not there, we won't speak french but german. The 2 situations are very different. When american help us in the WW2 we were in WAR, but for now we are NOT in war.
I hope Saddam will give what UN want
-
To be honest i dont care if there is a war, but i hate all these people going around saying lets not kill saddam, what has ever done to us, well maybe he didnt do anything to us but he killed thousands of people in Iraq, i think that America should just send in Delta force to kill saddam first and see what happens from there, rather than bombing the country into the ground
-
Ghostdog on your points
Point 1: After the US takes out saddam and his family and set up a democratic government, The US will send food and medicine to the iraqi people exactly like the US always has. Plus the US will have skilled, educated surgeons and doctors sent in to help with the wounds. Just like the US always has.
Point 2: Saddam has shown us his weapons, 2 missiles and vows to destroy them, but just as Tony Blair said he has shown no proof of his biological and chemical weapons, that we know he has. Saddam is a snake and will always have a "look whats in my left hand ignore my right" mentality.
Point 3: The whole world has proof now just look at your neighborhood friendly newspaper.
Also what about the Iraqi people? Don't you have any sympathy for them? Can you imagine living there? Living in that type of environment. The middle east is a nuclear reactor for ignorant hate mongers and they need to be saved before... well I don't even want to think about it. but I agree with AllenB I'm not for the war but this seems to be the only true alternative.
-
My two cents
Democracy is a wonderful thing, but it's not with out a price. No one wants to go to war and there's been alot of protest against the US and Iraq war. What these protesters and anti-war tree hugging hippies fail to realize is that if we don't go to war, our country is at danger. We shouldn't have to wait for another 9/11 to occur. The US and the UN has gave Iraq resolution, after resolution, after resolution.. The line has been crossed for the last time.
-
War with Iraq
I'm from Australia and can see the case for war on Iraq.
Mind you, nobody WANTS war, but some of us recognise that this man (Saddam) has caused the disfigurement and disabilities on his OWN people for a long time and must be stopped. I think that we have a duty, if not an obligation, to see this through.
Yes, I know, a lot of people will die in a war, innocent civillians at that, but when we (freedom fighters) have ridded Iraq of it's cancer, then the future will be better for Iraq.
Let me know what you think. I hear a lot of people saying "find other, more peaceful solutions!". To them I say, "Like what?"
Anyways, I would like to hear sugestions or comments from other members on this issue.
-
Well if there is a war this will not the same as in 1991. Saddam has no army (totaly annihilate in the past) but there is some fanatics and they will take the population as hostage (this is already done and some town have been mined). So the war will be in street with a lot of dead in both camp.
I think this problem (Saddam) is taken a bite late, what the US wants to do have to be done 10 years ago. The problem is not to stop Saddam, every body, even France, wants to push him away but how to do without (less than possible) death.
For the moment Saddam does all the UN ask (inspectors, visit of industry, ... ), even if he takes times to do the things. Now Saddam is ok to destroy his bombs so I think we are in a good direction. This takes times but if we can desarme a bomb like Saddam like this without blood, that's ok.
-
Hello all,
Well, before Bush actually starts I'll just post one last reply. I asked (in the beginning) to put the flaming to the antipoint system and people did that, thanks for that wether it was postivie or negative. Thanks for all the replies and motivations, rules, laws, treaties, etc, etc. I'm still against the war. You will see that in the rest of my post or rant or whatever you call it. Getthing rid of Sadaam is ok, but the US of A does it the wrong way, with the wrong reasons. The whole world only suffers from this.
Little extra note on "suffering", you US want to exept the little "suffering", put obviously don't mind at all about other countries. I will take Egypt as an example. What does Egypt have to do with Sadaam ? In Egypt there are soldiers on about every corner on the street to protect the tourists from a terrorist attack. An attack wich would be stupid in the first place, because it scares of tourists wich is the second largest income to the people. The first income is the suez canal wich connects the red sea with the mideteranian sea. Most people live on the street. People live in unfinished buildings (to not pay tax) or even on the graveyards. They live from the 0.1 US dollar they get from the tourists, by selling statues or banana leaves (wich they sell as papyrus, they can't afford to sell real papyrus). In Cairo (the capital, one city) live about 17 million people, in the entire netherlands live about 16 million people.
Now with this threat from the US of A to attack there is a big drop of the number of tourists. The entire middle east and even countries close to the middle east (many east european countries) experience this loss. Many people are going to suffer and die just because of a lack of tourists. The US of A or it's leader at this moment (Bush) is the cause.
About the war coming or not. I always thought there would be a war eventually. I think Bush (and Blair to) has caught himself in so much speaches, promises and things, he must fight this war just to not loose his credibility. Wether he wants to, is allowed to or not. I actually thought that up long ago.
I won't believe Bush is ****ed up enough to fight this war because of oil. A fact is he owns alot of oil himself and if he places a pro american government in Iraq that surely wouldn't be negative to him. If it was up to me he'd fight this war in Texas. Big dessert, put some guy with a moustache in there, throw some a b c d e bombs. W00t, fun fun.
Bush is atm giving Sadaam 48 hours to get out of his palace so he can kill all thousenths of people who can't pay a bus or a taxi to get out of that place... The problem was Sadaam right ? And his friends... You should take those out, not the people who didn't do anything wrong, who can't even pay the ammount of bullets one US soldier can use in one minute.
I don't care about treaties etc, because the US of A can ignore them anytime they like. For example, the US (and england and spain) now start a war without permission of the UN. The UN is allowed to start a war against those countries now, with permission of the UN security council of course. The US of A can use it's veto, but hey, voting against the majority is unethical. The US of A used that veto over 200 times (makes you wonder why the UN get's so little done ?) France and Russia (on the second and third place, right after the US) used their veto about 10 times.
The US of A now made somekind of law, that allowes them to invade for example the netherlands... WTF !!! Our government are some weak bastards now.
The US of A did some nice things. Of most things I'll never know if they would've went bad if the US would not have interfered. I think atm though, the US got something really wrong their head. I almost look at it as a disease. Bush, Sadaam and Sharon, go live on the moon and take all yer brainflushed friends with you. I know people who would happily have shot Bush for all this crap. This list could go on and on, both with good and bad things (now only bad things, I got my reason for that), I won't do it becasue noone would read it anyways.
Blargh, wait till the US of A isn't the most powerfull nation anymore.
p.s.
Don't go quote me on all little details like some off you are so very very good at. It's not a debate nor a discussion like you have to kick one of my words to make the whole text worthless. Intelligent people know what I mean, others don't. Live with it if yer ignorant (new word I just learned), I don't give a **** anymore.
p.p.s.
Peace to all "nice" people of the US of A, England, Spain, bla. More peace to all other people. Call me a treehugging hippy, who invented hippies ? I will fight the US of A because who does have forbidden weapons ?
-
citizen for peace
Not all U.S. citizens support the invasion and demonstrations are occuring daily here as in the rest of the world. I can't stomach a fight for oil when I think of who the real casualities of this war will be-the woman and children and the working stiff who only wants to put food on the table for his family.
Flame me all you want but our actions overseas will not provide peace and harmony for the global community, it will have the opposite effect and is already dividing nations and people. Nobody can deny that hussein is wrong but the bombs won't hit him.
I can't even begin to imagine what the iraqi citizens feel knowing we are going to implement our weapons of mass destruction agianst them and their children-probably a useless post but to say nothing is to agree with the warpigs
-
thast the things, they dont comply. it wasnt untill the us put an army on their doorstep and threatned war, iraq refused to co-operate. then the day before the vote, they say they will comply, the vote goes in iraqs favor, then iraq imposes conditions on the demands they have accepted. the un didnt say only comply when u feel threatned, but comply fully. after 12 years they have yet to do so. there is no excuse for that. the fact they have finnaly begun co-operating is irellavant, they are only doing so to stave off war, and the moment the us backs off all this progress will stop. that is unacceptable. the terms where disarm or be disarmed, thay have not disarmed. the fact that they have started throwing out crumbs the pst few weeks arent sighns that the inspections are working, its signs that they have failed for the past 12 years.
-
no fuking war understand???
-
-
The reasons for war don't matter. What matters is that one working stiff, one woman or one child should not have to pay the ultimate price in the name of politics. There is nothing right about children dying for ANY reason. I need to avoid these discussions but until we recognize that are lives are a gift we will continue to squander them along with the lives of others.
As my prayers for the safety of the U.S kids over there go out so do my prayers for all those whose lives are insignificant in the eyes of the god called politics
