Poll: Who to invade next after Syria

[SuperTool]

How about instead of wasting another 100 Bill on a new war, we use those troops and money to build a border with Mexico that is more substantial than a picket fence?
I mean multilayer border with at least two electrified fences with a minefield in between and sniper towers. That would be something that would really make the US more secure.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
How about instead of wasting another 100 Bill on a new war, we use those troops and money to build a border with Mexico that is more substantial than a picket fence?
I mean multilayer border with at least two electrified fences with a minefield in between and sniper towers. That would be something that would really make the US more secure.

Have no worries. Mexico will soon be "liberated" and then the much smaller border at the Panama Canal can have added security.

 

[exp]

I'm with SuperTool. Seal the damn border...that will do more to improve national security than any war.

 

[oLLie]

Originally posted by: glugglug
If the WMD were moved to Syria, we would no doubt have seen satellite photos of them being moved.

Anyway, if you were Saddam, wouldn't Saudi Arabia be a much more enticing place to flee to then Syria, as it has so much less chance of being searched by the US?

Your argument that we would NO DOUBT have seen WMD's is seriously flawed.
So our satellite sees a truck caravan moving to Syria.
Enlighten me. What do WMD's look like from space? You assume that they are moved in plain-view of the satellites with some sort of clear marking or identification that they are WMD's.

 

[Insane3D]

Muuuuuuust invade.....possible WMD....WMD.....WMD......WMD........

:disgust:

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: oLLie

Originally posted by: glugglug
If the WMD were moved to Syria, we would no doubt have seen satellite photos of them being moved.

Anyway, if you were Saddam, wouldn't Saudi Arabia be a much more enticing place to flee to then Syria, as it has so much less chance of being searched by the US?

Your argument that we would NO DOUBT have seen WMD's is seriously flawed.
So our satellite sees a truck caravan moving to Syria.
Enlighten me. What do WMD's look like from space? You assume that they are moved in plain-view of the satellites with some sort of clear marking or identification that they are WMD's.

exactly, the u.s. cant really tell if wmd's are being transported or not, they are pretty much talking out of their a$$ right now because they only suspect it to be true.

there still havent been any wmd's found as of yet, im tired of people saying that it's such a big country, give it time. bfd, you dont find this kind of stuff by searching under every rock, you gather intelligence (how did we find those missing pow's?) and find the best places to search, they have around 10,000 iraqi soldiers in custody, republican guard (who im sure would know), civilians, high-ranking military people that have defected, and not one single site yet.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: drewshin

Originally posted by: oLLie

Originally posted by: glugglug
If the WMD were moved to Syria, we would no doubt have seen satellite photos of them being moved.

Anyway, if you were Saddam, wouldn't Saudi Arabia be a much more enticing place to flee to then Syria, as it has so much less chance of being searched by the US?

Your argument that we would NO DOUBT have seen WMD's is seriously flawed.
So our satellite sees a truck caravan moving to Syria.
Enlighten me. What do WMD's look like from space? You assume that they are moved in plain-view of the satellites with some sort of clear marking or identification that they are WMD's.

exactly, the u.s. cant really tell if wmd's are being transported or not, they are pretty much talking out of their a$$ right now because they only suspect it to be true.


How do you know that?

You have absolutely no idea of the kind of intelligence they receive.
there still havent been any wmd's found as of yet, im tired of people saying that it's such a big country, give it time. bfd, you dont find this kind of stuff by searching under every rock, you gather intelligence (how did we find those missing pow's?) and find the best places to search, they have around 10,000 iraqi soldiers in custody, republican guard (who im sure would know), civilians, high-ranking military people that have defected, and not one single site yet.

 

[Insane3D]

Invade first, ask questions later right?

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
Invade first, ask questions later right?

I think we asked enough questions to justify our attack on Iraq,

12 yrs for him to quit his BS.

About 4 months in the UN with inspectors who are irrelevant.

The Iraqi people seem to be thrilled, wonder how you guys can explain that...

And the weapons will be found, considering they have over 2,000 sites to look through...

I love the hurry every is in for the military to find weapons, but the inspectors could have had all the time in the world...

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Insane3D
Invade first, ask questions later right?

I think we asked enough questions to justify our attack on Iraq,

12 yrs for him to quit his BS.

About 4 months in the UN with inspectors who are irrelevant.

The Iraqi people seem to be thrilled, wonder how you guys can explain that...

And the weapons will be found, considering they have over 2,000 sites to look through...

I love the hurry every is in for the military to find weapons, but the inspectors could have had all the time in the world...

I wasn't referring to the attack on Iraq, but more the attitude of the people around here who are all hot and bothered to invade anyone and anyone that they think deserves it.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Insane3D
Invade first, ask questions later right?

I think we asked enough questions to justify our attack on Iraq,

12 yrs for him to quit his BS.

About 4 months in the UN with inspectors who are irrelevant.

The Iraqi people seem to be thrilled, wonder how you guys can explain that...

And the weapons will be found, considering they have over 2,000 sites to look through...

I love the hurry every is in for the military to find weapons, but the inspectors could have had all the time in the world...

I wasn't referring to the attack on Iraq, but more the attitude of the people around here who are all hot and bothered to invade anyone and anyone that they think deserves it.

I see where you are coming from...

But the people who insist to jump on the "U.S is attacking the entire middle east" bandwagon gets old too..

 

[BaDaBooM]

How about an option for nobody, including Syria? The media is the one that is talking about invading more countries. They said the same thing about North Korea, but I guess since Bush is taking some troops out of South Korea they have to talk about invading a different country. The US government has said it has NO plans to invade ANY country after Iraq. Sure, they are putting pressure on Syria and others, but that doesn't mean they are going to invade them. They are looking to use sanctions maybe. It may happen in the future if some of the countries get stupid and don't listen like Saddam did, but there are many things that have to happen between now and then. I don't think it will happen anytime soon.

 

[flavio]

I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Alright i can't resist..

Good one.

You truly are an idiot. And you only make yourself look like a small child...

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Alright i can't resist..

Good one.

You truly are an idiot. And you only make yourself look like a small child...

Personal attacks, the last vestige of those with nothing to say. (...and no sense of humor I might add).

 

[phillyTIM]

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Great idea! That's where the Bush regime's hidden stashes are; we'll take them as payment for what their destructive forces have done to Iraq, especially when it becomes and official failure Bush should be made to pay up for what he's done!

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Alright i can't resist..

Good one.

You truly are an idiot. And you only make yourself look like a small child...

Personal attacks, the last vestige of those with nothing to say. (...and no sense of humor I might add).

When it comes down to a person as ignorant as you, there is nothing else to fall back on...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

LOL!

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Bad idea. Unlike the Arabs of Iraq, the Texans would actually put up a very stiff fight.

 

[Sxotty]

Originally posted by: guigui38well quite documented by pro israel
not so long time ago we wered acused of racism against arab
didnt know anyone could change his mind so quickly
america gave lots of information to israel
i think america is one of the only country who didnt sign the treaty againt personnal mines no?

LOL personnel mines are definetly WMD's.

In any case France has just shown that it has no credibility and no morals. It has not shown itself to be racist just a good capitalistic society ready to sell its soul for a few million.


edit: I voted for Texas too since I think the poll is completely ridiculous. Based on the fact that the start says who should we invade, and then says who should we accuse of having WMD's. WMD's != should invade sorry.

 

[DT4K]

If it was up to me,
I'd go in this order:

Syria
Iran
Jordan
Egypt
Libya
Berkeley
San Francisco

In a couple months we could be done with those and the world would be a much better place.

I'm only partially joking, but we are not invading Syria. Not yet at least. The removal of Saddam will do a great deal to encourage reforms in the rest of the terrorist sponsoring governments in the middle east. I think in the long run, bringing democracy and freedom to Iraq will be looked at as one of the most important steps in bringing stability to the region. Maybe I'm an optimist, but I see the middle east being a much safer place 10 years from now. I really hope there can be a lasting peace there. It has such great history.

 

[phillyTIM]

hey whats wrong with frisco????

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Why don't we "liberate" the Palestinians from the Israeli's? Oh wait, that would be racist. Or help out regimes in Africa... no, that has no profit. Let's just stick to decimating Arabs, they have oil and it makes neo-conservatives ecstatic which is good come election year.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: flavio
I say we invade Texas. They have WMDs and there's oil there we can use to rebuild it after we blow up all their stuff.

Bad idea. Unlike the Arabs of Iraq, the Texans would actually put up a very stiff fight.

Hmmm, what would they have fought back with anyway? We have the most advanced military that has ever existed and we made them destroy most of their Al Samoud II missiles and other armaments before we invaded them. Aparently we are all about the fair fight. Anyone who is willing to take up arms against out military, whethere they are good or evil, deserve some respect for their courage, even if it is ultimately futile.

 

[yoyofatjo]

I vote for DC. See ya Bushy and Rummy.

Let's plan a strategic strike in Nov. 2004.