What he should of said was establish democracy. Because the iraqi people have never know democracy.
What he should of said was establish democracy. Because the iraqi people have never know democracy.
DEMOCRACY - like an unelected leader that does anything he wants and starts needless wars regardless of the opinions of his people and the world.
911paramedic
Diamond Member
- Jan 7, 2002
- 9,448
- 1
- 76
We may after, but if it will expose how we gathered the information we may not disclose it. It would be worse to disclose how we know what we know, and expose our intelligence methods, than not explaining what we DO know. I am sure the administration will give up some of the info, but not all.
Please tell me you aren't refering to Bush!!!!!
If you are still pissed about the election you need to go read a book on government and learn what the EC is. Popular vote doesn't mean jack crap because I know in that election like 20-30% of the votes in SC were never counted because once Bush had a majority there was no point in counting. So stop your whining because you don't have a leg to stand on even when trying to say Gore won the popular vote even though that doesn't mean matter because popular vote doesn't matter. I sure as hell don't want Cal, NY, and Texas making all the decisions for the entire country.
Ideally<sp?> we'd do the same thing we did in Japan and Germany after WWII. Unfortunetly that will never happen 'cause the world PC police will never let the US have that much control over another country again even if it's the right thing to do.
Lethal
There are a few things to look at here.
1. We aren't showing them our cards because they might reveal more than we know. That would prevent us finding out what else they might have that we don't know.
2. If we show them our cards right now, our sources that gave us the info will dry up.
3. The world doesn't want us to run in and clean house. They want the Diplomatic approach of having the inspectors.
4. The inspectors are not going to give out information until the report is COMPLETE! Anything you hear before the completion is leaked info.
5. The following statement is aimed at most Democrats..... Bush is the President by Electoral College. Even after the many recounts in FL he still won the EC. The United States still uses the EC since by population roughly 4 of the 50 states would decide the presidency. I don't want who Californians would normally vote in for president. I am not 100% for the EC but I also know that I don't have a solution for a replacement. Fact of the matter, any way you slice it... Bush is the President of the U.S. and the Citizens of the U.S. should support him as our leader until he is no longer our leader (but that's a different soapbox that ATOT will be able to read in a little bit).
1. We aren't showing them our cards because they might reveal more than we know. That would prevent us finding out what else they might have that we don't know.
2. If we show them our cards right now, our sources that gave us the info will dry up.
3. The world doesn't want us to run in and clean house. They want the Diplomatic approach of having the inspectors.
4. The inspectors are not going to give out information until the report is COMPLETE! Anything you hear before the completion is leaked info.
5. The following statement is aimed at most Democrats..... Bush is the President by Electoral College. Even after the many recounts in FL he still won the EC. The United States still uses the EC since by population roughly 4 of the 50 states would decide the presidency. I don't want who Californians would normally vote in for president. I am not 100% for the EC but I also know that I don't have a solution for a replacement. Fact of the matter, any way you slice it... Bush is the President of the U.S. and the Citizens of the U.S. should support him as our leader until he is no longer our leader (but that's a different soapbox that ATOT will be able to read in a little bit).
I can only assume one of two things.
1) You're a democrat who is not interested in anything other than getting Bush out of office. No matter what effects it has on our troops morale.
2) As a citizen of any nation, You have not seen any television shows, read any newspapers or spoken to anyone since Saddam's forces were pushed out of Kuwait. At which point, he signed an agreement to not create or store weapons of mass destruction as a way to prevent the united forces to keep moving through to Baghdad. At which point he also stated he would make the United States like a living hell where Day would be night etc....
So, which are you?
nope.
Yeah, I seem to recall that. Too bad the "indians" didn't have you around to protect them back in the 18th and 19th century. Oh...right.
Who did he make the agreement with? Were to I find a copy of this agreement?
Guess he doesn't like you much.
So, which are you?[/quote]
First of all, What does this have to do with a current threat? Please don't revert to 10 year old tactics at winning and argument or I'll pull the "I'm rubber and you're glue" card and win.
You can obtain a copy of this document from your UN Representative if this is available to the public.
We don't like him much either. Don't care how much he likes me or the U.S. Fact is, he has made public that he was willing to use these weapons of mass destruction on the U.S.
Go ahead and crawl back into your hole and you come out in a few years and hope we win.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
What do you think the consequences of going to War and kicking the sh!t out of Iraq and their Military will be? Will it make the region more secure and stable? How do we go about adminstering the country to make sure it doesn't turn into a hotbed of Anarchy and Fundamentalist Radicalism? If it does how do we go about preventing some of those WMD Caches he has hidden all over Iraq from ending up in the hands of those who support Al Qeada?
Minor issues. We'll jump those hurdles when we reach them. There has not been and will not be open discussion of consequences. Keep the American people clueless. It just works better that way.
Hopefully, at the end of the day, the propane you buy to run your gas grill will be dirt cheap as will the crude used for your Suburban. Your taxes went up to keep the peace abroad? Who cares, the burgers are juicy![/quote]
All of those can be turned around and directed to the one who asks.
I don't have the answers. I am a Computer Tech for God's sake. I know for a fact though that if we do nothing then the WMD will end up in the hands of those that support the destruction of all that is not Islam. I have personal thoughts as to why this war is needed too and those are not at question here.
The fact is, if we don't do anything, all of your questions you posted above wont matter. WMD will get to Radical's, The region will not (and never will in my opinion) be more stable than it is right now, The country currently has a radical in power. If we go in and try, at least the U.S. wont be to blame when other countries (like Canada) are brought into the front lines of terrorism.
Do you really think we should sit back and wait for ANOTHER attack on our country? Saddam has said publicly what he wants to do to the U.S and he has the ability to carry it out. Should we wait for him to do it and then attack after more have died? I think that if the leader of a country states that they are going to destroy another country, then they should either back up their words or retract them D@MN quick. What would you think China would do if we flat out said "We will drop nuclear weapons on main land China and make their days nights and nights hell." I promise you they wouldn't sit on a beach with a drink in hand waiting for us to show up, having anti China demonstrations in Bejing(sp?).
Just pointing out that you're not so morally superior to go around teaching other countries a lesson. Not only that, the US was one of the last industrialized nations to abolish slavery.
You can obtain a copy of this document from your UN Representative if this is available to the public.[/quote]
Since when does the United States government care what the UN does?
We don't like him much either. Don't care how much he likes me or the U.S. Fact is, he has made public that he was willing to use these weapons of mass destruction on the U.S.[/quote]
Why wouldn't he? Now, if he actually had a nuke or two, he might actually be sucessful in averting an attack on his country, it worked for NK.
No on both counts.
What? Saddam isn't a Islamic radical. He used to be Washington's man in the mideast when he was battling the Iranians. As for religious "radicals", I don't feel much more secure with Christian radicals than Muslim ones. They're both fanatics that have more in common with each other than with me.
They haven't attacked your country, though the US intends to attack theirs.
He hasn't attacked the US. Anything else is sabber rattling
That's pretty much how NK reads Bush, hence the trouble your in there as well. Clearly, the US is the largest danger to world peace today.
You're right, Canada is the best. U.S. and Bush are the ones that cause and have caused all the bad things to happen in the world. Your disjointed ramblings are impossible to converse with. Enjoy your comfort as long as you can. If Saddam and other supporters of Terrorism have their way, it wont last long.
If you would like to have an educated conversation, let me know and we can talk. Until then. Good day and good luck.
If you would like to have an educated conversation, let me know and we can talk. Until then. Good day and good luck.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
First of all Iraq doesn't have the capability to deliver a Nuclear strike on the US and even if he did it would be suicide. If theres one thing he's demonstrated over the years it's his instinct for survival. Secondly he's never said he was going to attack our Homeland, most of his blustery Saber Rattling has been in response to our threats of invasion. And if we do wipe out the Iraqi Government we need to make sure that we have control of all his caches of WMD's or it's a certainty that those with no qualms about using it against us will get possession of some of them
All that aside, he's definately a pain in our ass and obviously unstable because if he had any common sense he'd agree with our demands and try to cozy up with us like he did in the early 80's. If there is anything that is certain it's that the US will tolerate a Despot Dictator as long as he's on opur side. If we are going to get rid of him we better make damn sure that it will make things better. Him retracting his worthless rhetoric is a non issue. His threats mean about as much as some wanker threatening to kick your ass over the Internet.
That's the deal...
His current course of action is as much suicide as delivering any kind of WMD in the U.S. He doesn't have the ability to launch a missle to attack the US. He does have the ability to send people to the US with WMD's and devices to deliver the WMD. That is what we need to protect ourselves from. Besides the threat to the U.S., the point of the matter is that Saddam flat out disregarded that UN Agreement that he signed and the UN (not the US) is taking action on that with a coalition force led by the U.S. He has proven he is willing to use WMD's on his people so I have no doubt that he is willing to use them on the U.S.
I don't want to wait for him to use the WMD in the U.S. before we take action against him. Look at it like this. 1) He has WMD's. 2) He has used them on his own people. 3) He has threatened to use them on the U.S. That really does come accross as much more than "Saber Ratteling"
His current course of action is as much suicide as delivering any kind of WMD in the U.S. He doesn't have the ability to launch a missle to attack the US. He does have the ability to send people to the US with WMD's and devices to deliver the WMD. That is what we need to protect ourselves from. Besides the threat to the U.S., the point of the matter is that Saddam flat out disregarded that UN Agreement that he signed and the UN (not the US) is taking action on that with a coalition force led by the U.S. He has proven he is willing to use WMD's on his people so I have no doubt that he is willing to use them on the U.S.
I don't want to wait for him to use the WMD in the U.S. before we take action against him. Look at it like this. 1) He has WMD's. 2) He has used them on his own people. 3) He has threatened to use them on the U.S. That really does come accross as much more than "Saber Ratteling"
Uh, thats an end game plan. Bush/Cheney and Rumsfeld have not gotten past drooling over the oil field winfall they are looking at.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
Only to willy nillies who are afraid of their own shadow. What I am saying that a chaotic Iraq without any type of authority poses a much greater risk to us than a Fat Bastard in a Olive Uniform talking out his ass. Also, I can assure you that he doesn't consider the Kurds in the North and the Shiites in the south his own people. His using those weapons on them posed no retalitory risk for himself as we proved that we would sit by and allow it. Attacking us on the other hand would guarantee fast and total destruction.
The time to rid ourselves of Hussien was after the Gulf War but our cowardly leadership was more afraid of upsetting those who were our enemies anyway. A lot of good appeasing them did. Nothing like backing down when we were in a position of power. Since we fscked the dog with that we better make sure were aren't screwing the pooch again. If we do attack Iraq we need to have definate fail safe plans regarding securing the WMD's that Saddam has stashed around Iraq.
Red, I partially agree with you but wankers on the internet don't control a large army. They don't have(at least I hope the ones I have pissed off don't have) chemical or biological weapons. All it would take is one person with an aerosol can or even deliberately infected (such as small-pox) to spread a disease throughout the US. Iraq has that capability. It would also be very difficult to impossible to trace it back to Iraq. Do not discount so flippantly his threats.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter