The Onion seems to predict the future

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Millenium
Iraq has been flagrantly denying all UN regulations and breaking the sanctions bestowed up them. Is that not breaking an international law. The law against assasination of foreign heads of state is a US law(unless you can find me an international weblink). Also has the US done ANYTHING to Iraq yet? Are they not trying to build an international coalition first?

So US must attack Iraq because Iraq doesn't co-operate with UN resolutions? So, when can we expect US attack on Israel? I mean, Israel has broken even more UN resolutions that Iraq has.

And it seems that the "international coalition" consists of US and UK, everyone else is against the plan.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Millenium
BTW Europeans and others(including Czar) tell me what YOU would do about Iraq. What would do to prevent Saddam from using his arsenal of weapons?

1. Send weapons-inspectors in to the country. They would have unlimited access to sites they deem necessary to get the job done. If Iraq doesn't co-operate, they get punished accordingly.

2. destruction of any WMD's that they find.

I think that's sensible approach. But it seems that USA is just begging for a war against Iraq. I mean, didn't the weapons-inspectors and Iraq just agree to allow the WI's to return? US refused to accept that agreement, and demanded "destruction of Iraqi WMD's within a month or US will attack". Ummmm, shouldn't you people first make sure that there are WMD's there, before demanding that they are destroyed (and no, it's not good enough evidence if USA claims that they have WMD's, we need independent verification)? It's starting to look more and more that US has decided to have it's war with Iraq, no matter what. I would love to see what would happen if Iraq said "Look, we will agree to do anything you want. you have unlimited access to our country and to our facilities, starting right now". I bet official US reaction would be "Ummmmm.... Well, we are still going to attack!"

How can you punish accordingly? We already have economic,technological, and military sanctions on them. Whats next?

We had weapons inspectors for years! What makes you think Iraq will decide to give unfettered access?

The UN has put out so many resolutions regarding Iraq and they have ignored them all. For years they ignored the UN. Now the that US is tired of Saddam playing grab ass with WMD, we are trying to get him out of power.

I fail to see after so many years that you think Saddam is going to allow unfettered access. When has Saddam lived up to his word? Never.

I am not for assassinating Saddam at all. He should be exiled.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Millenium
How can you punish accordingly? We already have economic,technological, and military sanctions on them. Whats next?

If Iraq doesn't allow the WI's to do their job, THEN start military action.

We had weapons inspectors for years! What makes you think Iraq will decide to give unfettered access?

And to my knowledge, those inspectors didn't really find anything.

The UN has put out so many resolutions regarding Iraq and they have ignored them all. For years they ignored the UN. Now the that US is tired of Saddam playing grab ass with WMD, we are trying to get him out of power.

Israel has ignored even more UN resolutions, when will you attack Israel? And Israel has nukes RIGHT NOW, Iraq does not. By your logic, Israel is a threat to it's neighbours.

fail to see after so many years that you think Saddam is going to allow unfettered access. When has Saddam lived up to his word? Never.

you belive that without giving him the opportunity to do otherwise. You have already decided that he will not co-operate so you will attack. Here's a novel idea: why don't you look that does he in fact co-operate. If he doesn't then attack. If he does, you have no reason to attack. Right now it seems that you have decided to attack, no matter what they decide to do.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Millenium
Iraq has been flagrantly denying all UN regulations and breaking the sanctions bestowed up them. Is that not breaking an international law. The law against assasination of foreign heads of state is a US law(unless you can find me an international weblink). Also has the US done ANYTHING to Iraq yet? Are they not trying to build an international coalition first?

So US must attack Iraq because Iraq doesn't co-operate with UN resolutions? So, when can we expect US attack on Israel? I mean, Israel has broken even more UN resolutions that Iraq has.

And it seems that the "international coalition" consists of US and UK, everyone else is against the plan.

Name a recent UN resolution Israel broke. I believe that Israel pays attention to what the UN says but feels sleighted because they are not a permanent member while Iraq is.

When the UN wanted Israel to withdraw from Jenin it did. When has Arafat ever cooperated with a UN resolution?

Also I wasn't aware that the Israelis have EVER used WMD before.

I brought the UN into the argument because I knew you would. I actually don't care if the UN resolutes all day long. No one cares what the UN says. We need a different International Forum than the UN. The UN has been proven to be pretty ineffective when it comes to the Middle East.

The US has been trying to not piss off foreign allies by trying to get a UN or Allied coalition to go into Iraq.

BTW, if Norway(using Norway because they are a neighbor to you) had WMD and had used them on their on people would that concern you?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Millenium
How can you punish accordingly? We already have economic,technological, and military sanctions on them. Whats next?

If Iraq doesn't allow the WI's to do their job, THEN start military action.

We had weapons inspectors for years! What makes you think Iraq will decide to give unfettered access?

And to my knowledge, those inspectors didn't really find anything.

The UN has put out so many resolutions regarding Iraq and they have ignored them all. For years they ignored the UN. Now the that US is tired of Saddam playing grab ass with WMD, we are trying to get him out of power.

Israel has ignored even more UN resolutions, when will you attack Israel? And Israel has nukes RIGHT NOW, Iraq does not. By your logic, Israel is a threat to it's neighbours.

fail to see after so many years that you think Saddam is going to allow unfettered access. When has Saddam lived up to his word? Never.

you belive that without giving him the opportunity to do otherwise. You have already decided that he will not co-operate so you will attack. Here's a novel idea: why don't you look that does he in fact co-operate. If he doesn't then attack. If he does, you have no reason to attack. Right now it seems that you have decided to attack, no matter what they decide to do.

Not true! The old inspectors were not allowed to inspect many parts of Iraq including Saddam's numerous "Palaces". Why give a liar a chance to keep lying? The inspectors found nothing because they weren't given access to anything! You think Saddam was just going to leave WMD laying around? We already know he used WMD on the Kurds. His own freakin' people.

"And Israel has nukes RIGHT NOW"

I have never seen any proof that Israel has a functioning nuclear weapon or program. Every thinks they do(friends and enemies) but no one has proof. It is a perfect deterrent that Israel uses to prevent countries using WMD against them. Also Israel has never used WMD before. Saddam has.

"you belive that without giving him the opportunity to do otherwise. You have already decided that he will not co-operate so you will attack. Here's a novel idea: why don't you look that does he in fact co-operate. If he doesn't then attack. If he does, you have no reason to attack. Right now it seems that you have decided to attack, no matter what they decide to do"

He has been given YEARS to comply. We are playing Saddam's games if we now allow him to get scared enough that he allows inspection(which he won't because he will change his mind and ban inspectors or give them access to just their hotels like he has done numerous times)and then decides not to. Then we threaten military action and then he decides to play his game of grab ass again. All the time we are wasting allows him to create a bigger arsenal of WMD, which could lead to higher casualties if military action is taken against Saddam.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Millenium
Name a recent UN resolution Israel broke. I believe that Israel pays attention to what the UN says but feels sleighted because they are not a permanent member while Iraq is.

Why it must be "recent"? What do you consider "recent" and what is not? And Israel is a member of UN, just like Iraq is. Or are you referring to being a permanent member of the security-council? Neither Israel nor Iraq is a permanent member there.

When the UN wanted Israel to withdraw from Jenin it did. When has Arafat ever cooperated with a UN resolution?

What does Arafat have to do with this? Fact is that US uses UN resolutions as scapegoat in attacking Iraq. You flame Iraq for ignoring UN resolutions, yet you do nothing when Israel does the same.

Also I wasn't aware that the Israelis have EVER used WMD before.

Iraq used WMD's long ago, why didn't US attack them then? Oh I forgot, Iraqis were the good guys back then, fighting those wicked Iranians...

I brought the UN into the argument because I knew you would. I actually don't care if the UN resolutes all day long. No one cares what the UN says. We need a different International Forum than the UN. The UN has been proven to be pretty ineffective when it comes to the Middle East.

If no-one cares what UN says, why does GWB use UN resolutions as an excuse in attacking Iraq?

The US has been trying to not piss off foreign allies by trying to get a UN or Allied coalition to go into Iraq.

And no-one agrees with you, except UK. But they agree with US by default

BTW, if Norway(using Norway because they are a neighbor to you) had WMD and had used them on their on people would that concern you?

Is Iraq neighour of USA? That's news to me... Why didn't USA act when Iraq used their WMD's? Why act decades later?

Back to your question: if Norway had WMD's... Yep, it would worry me. But where exactly did I say that Iraq should be allowed to have WMD's? All I said was that you must first prove that they have 'em, and then act accordingly if Iraq refuses to destroy them. Right now it seems that you are going in there with guns blazing, no matter what they do or do not do.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
Seeing as though there was already an economic downturn visible coming into 2001, I don't see how this article states anything but the obvious.

Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money.

All Bush wants is to protect and defend our assets overseas. Iraq is a hard campaign to win in Europe because they buy oil illegally from Saddam.

Edit-I find it funny that the only people who think it is accurate is from overseas or not in the US.

BTW Europeans and others(including Czar) tell me what YOU would do about Iraq. What would do to prevent Saddam from using his arsenal of weapons?

Most of the funding for the IRA came from the US (New York, prdominantly), blowing up MY countrymen.

Can you remember who supported the Taliban fight against the Russians in Afghanistan?

Step out of the glass house before throwing stones

Bigot.

Is that your signiture exit? How can you bring Ireland vs British into this and go so far as to call anyone else a bigot?

Ever heard of biting the hand that feeds you? It really does happen, imagine that!

Not Ireland Vs England, re read the post if you didn't understand it. The perp quoted Europeans as funding terrorism. This was embolded just for the likes of you. I pointed out the hypocrisy of this unfounded comment.

I have friends in Ireland, have been there and you? Get a passport and get a clue.

I still stand by my 'bigot' call, I feel it is still valid for this individual.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
Seeing as though there was already an economic downturn visible coming into 2001, I don't see how this article states anything but the obvious.

Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money.

All Bush wants is to protect and defend our assets overseas. Iraq is a hard campaign to win in Europe because they buy oil illegally from Saddam.

Edit-I find it funny that the only people who think it is accurate is from overseas or not in the US.

BTW Europeans and others(including Czar) tell me what YOU would do about Iraq. What would do to prevent Saddam from using his arsenal of weapons?

Most of the funding for the IRA came from the US (New York, prdominantly), blowing up MY countrymen.

Can you remember who supported the Taliban fight against the Russians in Afghanistan?

USA supported the Afganistan rebels(they were not exactly the Taliban at the time my friend).

Do you have any links or sources to back up your claims that New York was a major cash source to the IRA terrorists?



Step out of the glass house before throwing stones

Bigot.

I am not impartial to other points of view. You,however,seem to be.

Here is your link:


US funding for IRA

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Millenium
Not true! The old inspectors were not allowed to inspect many parts of Iraq including Saddam's numerous "Palaces". Why give a liar a chance to keep lying? The inspectors found nothing because they weren't given access to anything! You think Saddam was just going to leave WMD laying around? We already know he used WMD on the Kurds. His own freakin' people.

Why didn't US act when Iraq denied WI's access to the palaces? Why wait 'till now? Why didn't US act when Iraq killed kurds with gas? All I'm saying that first look and see that are the WI's allowed in the country and are they allowed to do their job. Are any WMD's that are found promptly destroyed. If not, THEN by all means attack and kick saddams ass!

I have never seen any proof that Israel has a functioning nuclear weapon or program. Every thinks they do(friends and enemies) but no one has proof. It is a perfect deterrent that Israel uses to prevent countries using WMD against them. Also Israel has never used WMD before. Saddam has.

It's common knowledge that Israel has nukes. And again, why didn't US act when Saddam gassed the kurds? Why wait this long? They killed their citizens, US knew about it and did nothing. You really have no high moral ground on this issue. You could have acted back then, but you did not. What next? EU declares war on USA because you killed native amiercans centuries ago?

He has been given YEARS to comply. We are playing Saddam's games if we now allow him to get scared enough that he allows inspection(which he won't because he will change his mind and ban inspectors or give them access to just their hotels like he has done numerous times)and then decides not to. Then we threaten military action and then he decides to play his game of grab ass again. All the time we are wasting allows him to create a bigger arsenal of WMD, which could lead to higher casualties if military action is taken against Saddam.

It's been years.... And now, all of a sudden he's going to come up with massive arsenal of WMD's in month or two. Why do you refuse to wait that long to see that are the WI's allowed _everywhere_? Instead you do your best to pick a fight with them.

 

[Mill]

I have friends in Ireland, have been there and you? Get a passport and get a clue.

Actually I have a passport and have been to several European and African countries. I visited England,Switzerland,Germany,Spain,Portugal,and Morrocco.

What parts of the US have you been to?

"Europeans as funding terrorism'

Yes.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Millenium
Iraq has been flagrantly denying all UN regulations and breaking the sanctions bestowed up them. Is that not breaking an international law. The law against assasination of foreign heads of state is a US law(unless you can find me an international weblink). Also has the US done ANYTHING to Iraq yet? Are they not trying to build an international coalition first?

Iraq has broken a law yes, but not shown aggression to the US or its allies.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/991120-chechen-ru1.htm
Aggression is one of the most dangerous international crimes. The Resolution of the UN General Assembly of December 14, 1974 "Definition of Aggression" defines aggression as the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.
Even if it were just a US law then all the more important for the US to abide by its own laws.
The US and Brittain who patrol the no fly zones have increased its bombing of Iraq ever since this talk began, latest a radar tower on a civilian airport in Iraq was destroyed.

Those two go together. The article was implying that Bush would deregulate dangerous, greedy industries. Actually, Clinton was your deregularatory buddy. He did it to telecom, energy, and cable. That is what LED to Enron(energy), Worldcom(telecom), and Adelphia Cable(cable) and their busted up companies.

But in regard of the onion article it happens undir Bush and it did.

Need a link to that.

sorry, couldnt find a link it was in regard of the increased number of people in the US living in poverty.

 

[Mill]

"Why didn't US act when Iraq denied WI's access to the palaces? Why wait 'till now? Why didn't US act when Iraq killed kurds with gas? All I'm saying that first look and see that are the WI's allowed in the country and are they allowed to do their job. Are any WMD's that are found promptly destroyed. If not, THEN by all means attack and kick saddams ass!"

The US was once again trying to appease the pacifists in Europe. During the Persian Gulf War, we were ready to go into Baghdad and force a regime change. International sentiment at the time would not allow that so we desisted. Now it has reach the point that sanctions and enforcement of them are no longer even remotely working(they never did). Lots of Iraqi Oil from the Oil for Food program(and illegal oil) goes to Europe. Why would they want to disrupt that?



"It's common knowledge that Israel has nukes. And again, why didn't US act when Saddam gassed the kurds? Why wait this long? They killed their citizens, US knew about it and did nothing. You really have no high moral ground on this issue. You could have acted back then, but you did not. What next? EU declares war on USA because you killed native amiercans centuries ago?"

If you remember correctly, the Iraqis used gas on both Kurds and Iranians. The Iranians responded with chemical weapons. The Iranians were the Soviet's buddies back then. Did you really want the US to go attack Iraq and Iran back then and piss off the Soviets? The Cold War wasn't exactly the easiest time to intervene in another country's affairs. Let me ask you this... why didn't Finland(who was a lot more cozier with the Soviest at the time then we were) do anything? Also EUROPEANS settlers started the trend of killing the Native Americans. The US government continued the trend(which I detest how Native Americans were treated and I did my Senior Thesis on the treatment of the Seminole Indians by the Europeans and the US)and that is how the fate of the Native Americans ended up. Europe has no moral highground either when it comes to the Native Americans.


"It's been years.... And now, all of a sudden he's going to come up with massive arsenal of WMD's in month or two. Why do you refuse to wait that long to see that are the WI's allowed _everywhere_? Instead you do your best to pick a fight with them."


So we should just keep adding months on? Before you know it he will have more advanced WMD. Saddam has been given YEARS to allow inspections. What makes you trust him now?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Millenium

I have friends in Ireland, have been there and you? Get a passport and get a clue.

Actually I have a passport and have been to several European and African countries. I visited England,Switzerland,Germany,Spain,Portugal,and Morrocco.

What parts of the US have you been to?

"Europeans as funding terrorism'

Yes.

That reads as 'people living in Europe stashing money'. Not 'Europeans all support terrorism' which is how your badly composed statement reads. You are a BIGOT if you wish to tar all Europeans with the same brush. You would think the same of me if I stated 'all Americans fat, stupid, gun toting, energy wasting, Media fed, isolationist fools', which patently is not the case, but then I am not bandying this type of trash around, you are, about Europeans IN GENERAL. Don't be surprised if you get a rise out of it.

I have visited SanFrancisco, LA and Las Vegas in N.America. I intend to visit the east coast in the near future and I have American friends I work and socialise with every day, so don't go giving me all the 'you hate Americans' crap either as it won't wash.

 

[Mill]

Why it must be "recent"? What do you consider "recent" and what is not? And Israel is a member of UN, just like Iraq is. Or are you referring to being a permanent member of the security-council? Neither Israel nor Iraq is a permanent member there.

Could Iraq have a seat on the security counsel? Yes. Could Israel? No. That is why they feel sleighted.



What does Arafat have to do with this? Fact is that US uses UN resolutions as scapegoat in attacking Iraq. You flame Iraq for ignoring UN resolutions, yet you do nothing when Israel does the same.

I am asking you to name the resolutions that Israel breaks or the general background behind one that Israel broke. You cannot make any fairer of a Iraq/Israel resolution breaker judgement than I can.


Iraq used WMD's long ago, why didn't US attack them then? Oh I forgot, Iraqis were the good guys back then, fighting those wicked Iranians...

I answered this in my above post. The Iranians were doing the same thing and they were Soviet Allies and this was in the middle of the Cold War.

If no-one cares what UN says, why does GWB use UN resolutions as an excuse in attacking Iraq?

He is trying to build an international coalition and not make countries feel left out. Smart move internationally for Bush and he was hoping to clue in other countries on WHY he wants to attack rather than just doing it. Common courtesty I guess. The man is a Texan after all. They are goofy like that.


And no-one agrees with you, except UK. But they agree with US by default
Because they buy illegal or food program oil from Iraq. Plus, they want to keep giving Saddam chances and hope he will just go away.


Is Iraq neighour of USA? That's news to me... Why didn't USA act when Iraq used their WMD's? Why act decades later?

No but our Ally Israel is within range of Iraq's WMD as is our troops stationed in Turkey and other nations.

Back to your question: if Norway had WMD's... Yep, it would worry me. But where exactly did I say that Iraq should be allowed to have WMD's? All I said was that you must first prove that they have 'em, and then act accordingly if Iraq refuses to destroy them. Right now it seems that you are going in there with guns blazing, no matter what they do or do not do.


I agree and proof has been given. You think they destroyed them after the Iran-Iraq conflict? Why would Saddam do something nice like that for?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Millenium

And no-one agrees with you, except UK. But they agree with US by default
Because they buy illegal or food program oil from Iraq. Plus, they want to keep giving Saddam chances and hope he will just go away.

Link me that 'Illegal or food program oil' factoid will ya

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Millenium

I have friends in Ireland, have been there and you? Get a passport and get a clue.

Actually I have a passport and have been to several European and African countries. I visited England,Switzerland,Germany,Spain,Portugal,and Morrocco.

What parts of the US have you been to?

"Europeans as funding terrorism'

Yes.

That reads as 'people living in Europe stashing money'. Not 'Europeans all support terrorism' which is how your badly composed statement reads. You are a BIGOT if you wish to tar all Europeans with the same brush. You would think the same of me if I stated 'all Americans fat, stupid, gun toting, energy wasting, Media fed, isolationist fools', which patently is not the case, but then I am not bandying this type of trash around, you are, about Europeans IN GENERAL. Don't be surprised if you get a rise out of it.

I have visited SanFrancisco, LA and Las Vegas in N.America. I intend to visit the east coast in the near future and I have American friends I work and socialise with every day, so don't go giving me all the 'you hate Americans' crap either as it won't wash.

You seemed to have me all picked out.

As to being a bigot, I am not partial to only my people. I listen to others viewpoints and research them. You obviously don't.

I could care less about your American co-workers because the same could be said for my European(specifically German and British) co-workers at my past employer. BFD!

If you want to go into stereotypes I can, but I will leave it that you don't understand tongue in cheek humour. I guess I made a poor attempt at saying Bush is too Conservative and aggressive for European tastes.

That came out as "Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money. "

If you actually thought I trully meant that then you are the demented one. The link was just to see how far you will swallow my hook and line. Get a sense of humor and come back. They always seem to be lacking in these threads.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
Seeing as though there was already an economic downturn visible coming into 2001, I don't see how this article states anything but the obvious.

Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money.

All Bush wants is to protect and defend our assets overseas. Iraq is a hard campaign to win in Europe because they buy oil illegally from Saddam.

Edit-I find it funny that the only people who think it is accurate is from overseas or not in the US.

BTW Europeans and others(including Czar) tell me what YOU would do about Iraq. What would do to prevent Saddam from using his arsenal of weapons?

I'd like to thank you for bringing that up millenium, because I know the reasone that I hold some viewpoints that are slightly to the left is that, well, I DO support drug smuggling, terrorist funding, money laundering, oh and lets not forget the kiddie porn! I really cannot wait for all republicans to be elected out of office, so that the liberal plan can come about. On that day, with kiddie porn and crack cocaine in hand. utopia will be upon us! Well except for those cute terrorist running around, we'll probably have to hold our photo sessions in basements to avoid shrapnel, but hey those guys are just having their fun. Thanks for bringing things to light in such an intellegent and mature manner! Bye now

 

[CantedValve]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Millenium
Not true! The old inspectors were not allowed to inspect many parts of Iraq including Saddam's numerous "Palaces". Why give a liar a chance to keep lying? The inspectors found nothing because they weren't given access to anything! You think Saddam was just going to leave WMD laying around? We already know he used WMD on the Kurds. His own freakin' people.

Why didn't US act when Iraq denied WI's access to the palaces? Why wait 'till now? Why didn't US act when Iraq killed kurds with gas? All I'm saying that first look and see that are the WI's allowed in the country and are they allowed to do their job. Are any WMD's that are found promptly destroyed. If not, THEN by all means attack and kick saddams ass!

I have never seen any proof that Israel has a functioning nuclear weapon or program. Every thinks they do(friends and enemies) but no one has proof. It is a perfect deterrent that Israel uses to prevent countries using WMD against them. Also Israel has never used WMD before. Saddam has.

It's common knowledge that Israel has nukes. And again, why didn't US act when Saddam gassed the kurds? Why wait this long? They killed their citizens, US knew about it and did nothing. You really have no high moral ground on this issue. You could have acted back then, but you did not. What next? EU declares war on USA because you killed native amiercans centuries ago?

He has been given YEARS to comply. We are playing Saddam's games if we now allow him to get scared enough that he allows inspection(which he won't because he will change his mind and ban inspectors or give them access to just their hotels like he has done numerous times)and then decides not to. Then we threaten military action and then he decides to play his game of grab ass again. All the time we are wasting allows him to create a bigger arsenal of WMD, which could lead to higher casualties if military action is taken against Saddam.

It's been years.... And now, all of a sudden he's going to come up with massive arsenal of WMD's in month or two. Why do you refuse to wait that long to see that are the WI's allowed _everywhere_? Instead you do your best to pick a fight with them.

This hasn't happened overnight. In 1998, the LAST TIME INSPECTORS WERE THERE, Clinton wanted to go in and oust Saddam. he was given (note: he did not seek it) international support, and support from Congress NO QUESTIONS ASKED. The VERY SAME PEOPLE that are screaming that Bush was is a lunatic were lining up to service Clinton. Germany and France, two VERY VOCAL opponents today, were all OVER this in 1998. Daschle SPRINTED to the Hill to draft a resolution authroizing force. None of this is in dispute.

WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN? Have things gotten BETTER in Iraq all on their own? Did the departure of the inspectors somhow trigger the destruction of these weapons? The ONLY thing that could have happened is the situation getting WORSE. Saddam has had 4 years of NO supervision to build his weapons. Do you really believe he hasn't taken advantage of it!?

We don't wait because the last DECADE has proven that Saddam is a lying two-faced bastard. He has said these VERY WORDS BEFORE. You know what happend? HE THREW THE INSPECTORS OUT 2 WEEKS LATER!! How many chances do you have to give this asshole?!

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Millenium

And no-one agrees with you, except UK. But they agree with US by default
Because they buy illegal or food program oil from Iraq. Plus, they want to keep giving Saddam chances and hope he will just go away.

Link me that 'Illegal or food program oil' factoid will ya

Read here.

The US has more arrangments for Oil and larger domestic supplies than any one country in Europe if not the whole EU.

They are WAY more dependant on Iraqi oil than the US. Also where do you think the illegally smuggled and pipelined oil goes to? It goes to Turkey, Syria, etc and is resold as legit exports to Europe and Asia even though they KNOW it is illegal oil.

 

[CantedValve]

Originally posted by: Czar
http://www.theonion.com/onion3701/bush_nightmare.html

That article is over a year old and surprisingly accurate

Seeing as you are not a US citizen, and you have no concept of what is expected from us on a global scale (when was the last time anyone turned to Iceland for anything?), you have little room to judge or dictate US policy.

The view is pretty good from the cheap seats isnt it?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
Seeing as though there was already an economic downturn visible coming into 2001, I don't see how this article states anything but the obvious.

Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money.

All Bush wants is to protect and defend our assets overseas. Iraq is a hard campaign to win in Europe because they buy oil illegally from Saddam.

Edit-I find it funny that the only people who think it is accurate is from overseas or not in the US.

BTW Europeans and others(including Czar) tell me what YOU would do about Iraq. What would do to prevent Saddam from using his arsenal of weapons?

I'd like to thank you for bringing that up millenium, because I know the reasone that I hold some viewpoints that are slightly to the left is that, well, I DO support drug smuggling, terrorist funding, money laundering, oh and lets not forget the kiddie porn! I really cannot wait for all republicans to be elected out of office, so that the liberal plan can come about. On that day, with kiddie porn and crack cocaine in hand. utopia will be upon us! Well except for those cute terrorist running around, we'll probably have to hold our photo sessions in basements to avoid shrapnel, but hey those guys are just having their fun. Thanks for bringing things to light in such an intellegent and mature manner! Bye now

Maybe you should read whole thread before you post next time:

This is from the post directly above yours. You have a good day now!




"You seemed to have me all picked out.

As to being a bigot, I am not partial to only my people. I listen to others viewpoints and research them. You obviously don't.

I could care less about your American co-workers because the same could be said for my European(specifically German and British) co-workers at my past employer. BFD!

If you want to go into stereotypes I can, but I will leave it that you don't understand tongue in cheek humour. I guess I made a poor attempt at saying Bush is too Conservative and aggressive for European tastes.

That came out as "Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money. "

If you actually thought I trully meant that then you are the demented one. The link was just to see how far you will swallow my hook and line. Get a sense of humor and come back. They always seem to be lacking in these threads.
"

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Millenium

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Millenium

I have friends in Ireland, have been there and you? Get a passport and get a clue.

Actually I have a passport and have been to several European and African countries. I visited England,Switzerland,Germany,Spain,Portugal,and Morrocco.

What parts of the US have you been to?

"Europeans as funding terrorism'

Yes.

That reads as 'people living in Europe stashing money'. Not 'Europeans all support terrorism' which is how your badly composed statement reads. You are a BIGOT if you wish to tar all Europeans with the same brush. You would think the same of me if I stated 'all Americans fat, stupid, gun toting, energy wasting, Media fed, isolationist fools', which patently is not the case, but then I am not bandying this type of trash around, you are, about Europeans IN GENERAL. Don't be surprised if you get a rise out of it.

I have visited SanFrancisco, LA and Las Vegas in N.America. I intend to visit the east coast in the near future and I have American friends I work and socialise with every day, so don't go giving me all the 'you hate Americans' crap either as it won't wash.

You seemed to have me all picked out.

As to being a bigot, I am not partial to only my people. I listen to others viewpoints and research them. You obviously don't.

I could care less about your American co-workers because the same could be said for my European(specifically German and British) co-workers at my past employer. BFD!

If you want to go into stereotypes I can, but I will leave it that you don't understand tongue in cheek humour. I guess I made a poor attempt at saying Bush is too Conservative and aggressive for European tastes.

That came out as "Because Europeans and Democrats think that Bush wants to attack their liberal policies that allow them to smuggle drugs, fund terrorists, house child pornography rings and launder money. "

If you actually thought I trully meant that then you are the demented one. The link was just to see how far you will swallow my hook and line. Get a sense of humor and come back. They always seem to be lacking in these threads.

So all along you were [/b]Joking.

Riiiiiiight.

You are the joke. These are serious matters that you seem to relish in taking lightly. Might I suggest you move away from the keyboard lest you incriminate yourself any further...

 

[CantedValve]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Millenium
Iraq has been flagrantly denying all UN regulations and breaking the sanctions bestowed up them. Is that not breaking an international law. The law against assasination of foreign heads of state is a US law(unless you can find me an international weblink). Also has the US done ANYTHING to Iraq yet? Are they not trying to build an international coalition first?

So US must attack Iraq because Iraq doesn't co-operate with UN resolutions? So, when can we expect US attack on Israel? I mean, Israel has broken even more UN resolutions that Iraq has.

And it seems that the "international coalition" consists of US and UK, everyone else is against the plan.

When was the last time Israel ever AGREED TO AND SIGNED a UN resolution that promises they will/will not do anything? See, I have never seen one, and the ONLY THING people present when they say Israel has "violated" UN resolutions is a list of UN resolutions that judge past actions. Let us also forget that Israel is battling for its life, and has shown (IMHO) great restraint in not obliterating the Palestinians (notice I didnt say Arabs or Muslims... I said PALESTINIANS... just so we are clear on that).

 

[CantedValve]

People, the issue isn't really the posession of these weapons. The issue is Saddam's desire (call it an erotic obsession) to USE them. The guy is a raving psycho! I am nearly convinced he would turn them on his own people JUST TO SEE WHAT THEY DO. Sound familiar? Its called NAZI GERMANY a la WW2.

 

[Linflas]

DivideBYZero - Nice link to the BBC article. Funding for the IRA from private US citizens has been a dirty little not so secret thing for 30 years now and if it finally gets caught up in the current fight to curtail terrorism then that is a good thing IMHO. It has been a political third rail for politicians of all stripes from both New York and Massachusetts. IIRC 60 Minutes even did a piece on it back in the 1980's showing among other things collection jars in irish pubs in New York and Boston. I have always thought it was a shameful thing for our government to turn a blind eye to this for the sake of ethnic politics. Terrorism is terrorism no matter what the cause or what civilian targets are involved.