Bush, 'Saddam's exile only way now to avoid military action"

[Grasshopper27]

I'm surprised no one has posted this...

I think it has been made crystal clear beyond any possible doubts, the war will start within the next week. Bush will address the nation tomorrow night, he will give Saddam 72 hours to get out of Iraqi, or we're going to attack.

Agree/Disagree?

 

[snidy]

Should have been done 12 years ago

 

[cmdavid]

i agree... during all these so called UN "negotiations" he has been preparing for war and is now just about ready.. smart man....

 

[melly]

i'm surprised that more people haven't noticed that bush's plan all along was to attack. he could care less about any peace rallies. as if that would change his mind! bush is convinced that saddam has links to al queda and he used the guise of 'weapons dissarming' to make a case for war. let's just say, i'm surprised georgie boy waited this long.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

By the coming weekend we should be shootin' barring something like exile/assasination

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: caramel
i'm surprised that more people haven't noticed that bush's plan all along was to attack. he could care less about any peace rallies. as if that would change his mind! bush is convinced that saddam has links to al queda and he used the guise of 'weapons dissarming' to make a case for war. let's just say, i'm surprised georgie boy waited this long.

I dunno if Bush is convinced of saddam's links to al quaeda, but he sure likes to convince the american public that we should be!

 

[Cuda1447]

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

 

[HappyPuppy]

I'm still hoping he packs his bags and goes into exile in France.

 

[melly]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

 

[LordMaul]

I think it would be great if Bush just sent some Delta Force in there and punched some pellets into Saddam's skull.

But yeah, that's a little simplistic.

 

[MinorityReport]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I'm still hoping he packs his bags and goes into exile in France.

Yes why are the French not proposing a lovely 50 room palace for Saddam in the French riveria over looking the warm, golden sunsets ?

Or pehaps Monte Carlo ?

Saddam has enuff dough to live peacefully in Monte Carlo for a long long time.

Arrogant Saddam and Arrogant Bush . .. but the later seems better overall.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

and within next week...my cousin will get tehre...he left w/ the nimitz battle group that left san diego some weeks ago....

by the time that battle group gets there, the war will start.....

i hope to God that my cousin will be safe....and US/Brit forces casualties will be minimal....

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

Well, I could give a full explanation, but it would take a while. I can abbreviate it a bit. First, what is your current life expectancy?

 

[ViperXX]

I support the President 100%. It's time to finish what was started over a decade ago.

 

[huey1124]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I'm still hoping he packs his bags and goes into exile in France.

good, after that we can have an excuse to nuke France



















😛

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

I don't hate bush. I just think he is an idiot. I think he would be a cool guy to go have a beer with and swap stories or something. But he isn't one that should be running the country IMO.

 

[snidy]

Originally posted by: LordMaul
I think it would be great if Bush just sent some Delta Force in there and punched some pellets into Saddam's skull.

But yeah, that's a little simplistic.

That would solve a lot of problems, and only the guilty one dies

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I support the President 100%. It's time to finish what was started over a decade ago.

Such statements highlight the perverse nature of this conflict. The issue of Saddam/Iraq did NOT start 12 years ago. We ignore the extensive history of conflict and US intervention to our peril. The US invasion of Iraq will NOT be the culmination of the 1991 Gulf Conflict . . . it will be yet another chapter in a long tired story of foreign powers sticking their wankers into Middle East affairs entirely for the purpose of advancing said powers self-interest.

 

[melly]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

What power to do anything do the organizations you named have to do anything? They are powers in name only, empty bags of air.

 

[melly]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

What power to do anything do the organizations you named have to do anything? They are powers in name only, empty bags of air.

obviously they have some power if georgie boy went running to all of the said organizations looking for support. but they do implement all the treaties and protocols, etc etc...and i'm sure bush is in for some violations.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

sight they bring it on themselves...
I'll just go straight down the list on this one

1. Pre-emptive strikes play an integral role in keeping the peace.
Hostile nations who posess weapons of mass destruction are an inherrent threat to the peace and stability of the world, failing diplomatic measures the only way to preserve peace is in fact war. A quick war followed by a time of rebuilding and reorganization is preferable to a long drawn out war brought on by a rogue nation.

2. The USSR is not the United States.
The former ussr was a communist state who lacked the infrastructure to compete for long with the United States. The united states is a capitalistic society which breeds innovation. Communism breeds stagnation and apathy. Your link fails on face value.

3. When the United Nations lacks the backbone to enforce their own policies they have relinquished power.
The United Nations has continued to appease saddam Hussein, they lack to backbone and the moral aptitude to enforce their own policies, as such they have given their power in this respect up, in this case to saddam, by allowing saddam to call the shots, the balance of power has shifted from the security council towards saddam. The United states as the sole remaining superpower has a duty to the world to preserve peace, the united nations will not preserve peace, they are weak in principle and in direction, if the united states does not enforce the policies of peace, saddam continues to gain power. Its called appeasement, read about it in pre-world war II history, hitler could have been stopped in his tracks had the world (specifically europe) taken a firm stance against him early on.

 

[snidy]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

sight they bring it on themselves...
I'll just go straight down the list on this one

1. Pre-emptive strikes play an integral role in keeping the peace.
Hostile nations who posess weapons of mass destruction are an inherrent threat to the peace and stability of the world, failing diplomatic measures the only way to preserve peace is in fact war. A quick war followed by a time of rebuilding and reorganization is preferable to a long drawn out war brought on by a rogue nation.

2. The USSR is not the United States.
The former ussr was a communist state who lacked the infrastructure to compete for long with the United States. The united states is a capitalistic society which breeds innovation. Communism breeds stagnation and apathy. Your link fails on face value.

3. When the United Nations lacks the backbone to enforce their own policies they have relinquished power.
The United Nations has continued to appease saddam Hussein, they lack to backbone and the moral aptitude to enforce their own policies, as such they have given their power in this respect up, in this case to saddam, by allowing saddam to call the shots, the balance of power has shifted from the security council towards saddam. The United states as the sole remaining superpower has a duty to the world to preserve peace, the united nations will not preserve peace, they are weak in principle and in direction, if the united states does not enforce the policies of peace, saddam continues to gain power. Its called appeasement, read about it in pre-world war II history, hitler could have been stopped in his tracks had the world (specifically europe) taken a firm stance against him early on.

Well said

 

[melly]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: caramel

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Why does everyone hate bush? I think he's a somewhat smart guy, and Im happy he's going after Saddam. It needed to be done.

don't get me wrong, i strongly despise the premise of a dictatorship. and i don't necessarily hate bush but i do think he has a chip on his shoulder in how he thinks that u.s.a. is the centre of the universe and can DICTATE to other countries. hmm.

Its called hegemony. As the sole remaining superpower we have a duty to the world to keep the peace.

keeping the peace by starting war. double hmmm! being a superpower is over-rated. look what happened to the former u.s.s.r. i don't think it's america's 'duty'. that is for the security council, nato, united nations, etc.

sight they bring it on themselves...
I'll just go straight down the list on this one

1. Pre-emptive strikes play an integral role in keeping the peace.
Hostile nations who posess weapons of mass destruction are an inherrent threat to the peace and stability of the world, failing diplomatic measures the only way to preserve peace is in fact war. A quick war followed by a time of rebuilding and reorganization is preferable to a long drawn out war brought on by a rogue nation.

2. The USSR is not the United States.
The former ussr was a communist state who lacked the infrastructure to compete for long with the United States. The united states is a capitalistic society which breeds innovation. Communism breeds stagnation and apathy. Your link fails on face value.

3. When the United Nations lacks the backbone to enforce their own policies they have relinquished power.
The United Nations has continued to appease saddam Hussein, they lack to backbone and the moral aptitude to enforce their own policies, as such they have given their power in this respect up, in this case to saddam, by allowing saddam to call the shots, the balance of power has shifted from the security council towards saddam. The United states as the sole remaining superpower has a duty to the world to preserve peace, the united nations will not preserve peace, they are weak in principle and in direction, if the united states does not enforce the policies of peace, saddam continues to gain power. Its called appeasement, read about it in pre-world war II history, hitler could have been stopped in his tracks had the world (specifically europe) taken a firm stance against him early on.

1. Saddam wasn't planning a war, was he? Is North Korea planning a war? Is Russia? These are some of the few nations that produce weaponry.
2. The fact that "the United States is a capitalistic society which breeds innovation" is the very reason you were attacked on 9/11; Bin Laden and co flat-out said that he hated that society (I don't condone him, I'm just stating his belief).
3. I disagree with your statement that the UN lacks backbone. Just because they don't take an aggressive approach with Saddam does not mean that they have been cutting him slack. Maybe they believe that he wasn't a threat because he has been relatively calm since the Gulf War?