Uh oh...bye bye Saddam

tigerwannabe

Golden Member
Apr 11, 2001
1,646
0
0
i wonder if that news report is for real. if so, i feel sad about how a war will impact the civilians :( i'm no saddam fan but is it really necessary to go blasting away?
 

SaltBoy

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2001
8,975
11
81
All I ask is that somebody shave off that ridiculous mustache of his -- then I'll be happy. :)
 

Cattlegod

Diamond Member
May 22, 2001
8,687
1
0
yeah, is this link real? if so, it is about time for this to happen.

however, i'm worried if other countries might step in and say no and try to stop us because they think we are going on some kind of psycho power by taking out nation after nation.
 

fatalbert

Platinum Member
Aug 1, 2001
2,956
0
0
it would be nice to see Saddam gone, but I don't know if Bush is willing to alienate that many allies at once.

Also, legitimacy of that site?
 

djs1w

Senior member
Apr 17, 2001
282
0
0
I hope it's true. That piece of cow dung needs to be hoisted outta there.
 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0
I think the link is real, as is the intent, but, I don't think any military intervention is going to take place in the near future. This is most likely "posturing" for several reasons and purposes. What they are probably attempting to do is make other nations aware that we are serious and consider the threat real, and at the same time seeing what kind of reaction this brings from Saddam.......;)

I also believe there is more here than we are hearing. It strikes me as odd that most everyone in any position in D.C. seems to have about the same feelings toward ousting Saddam..............hell, even Daschle says Saddam must go as well as Gore! Perhaps there is information we do not know of as of yet because if this was just a "rogue" U.S. or Bush descion to take out Saddam it seems there would be a lot of detractors to these plans but everyone interviewed seems to agree that the time has come for Saddam to go..............
 

djs1w

Senior member
Apr 17, 2001
282
0
0


<< go to hell Bush. You will pay for this some day. >>



He's paying for it now since he has to deal with it since the CLINTON administration let him go.
 

badluck

Diamond Member
Feb 19, 2001
5,357
0
76


<< He's paying for it now since he has to deal with it since the CLINTON administration let him go >>




ummmm....Bush Sr. let him go b4 that. Remember we had a little war in the early 90's???? I hate when politics clouds peoples minds.....
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
The same story is posted on yahoo around the top of their news...still waiting on cnn tho ;)
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0


<< He's paying for it now since he has to deal with it since the CLINTON administration let him go. >>



Check your history. The gulf war probably happened when you were in diapers.
Clinton had nothing to do with it. It was Bush's daddy. All Clinton did was to contain Iraq after the fact
Also, the original agreement for the Gulf was to remove Iraq from Kuwait, not remove Saddam from power. That would have jusut been icing on the cake.

Unless Iraq chooses to challenge us militarily, we will not be able to remove Saddam. The internal power structure is too loyal/scared of him. Just like, we have been unable to remove Castro or any of the Soviet Union leaders.

Bush is asking for options, however, unless Iraq starts the fight, we will not (and should not) go in militarily. Trying to use our economic or political clout will not work. It has not done anything for the last 10 years and the allies are less supportive now than they were then
 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0


<<

<< He's paying for it now since he has to deal with it since the CLINTON administration let him go >>




ummmm....Bush Sr. let him go b4 that. Remember we had a little war in the early 90's???? I hate when politics clouds peoples minds.....
>>


Oh really????? How do you account for the fact then that Schwarzkopf & Bush Sr. wanted us to proceed into Baghdad??????? Get your facts straight.........the U.N. decided that the objective had been reached and several allies agreed....................Bush and Schwarzkopf gave in to appease the coalition, the U.N. and NATO!
 

badluck

Diamond Member
Feb 19, 2001
5,357
0
76
ToBeMe:

Why don't you check your facts. The fact is that Bush Sr. let him go. You can carve it up anyway you like it, the fact is they let him go. Since when are we Governed by Nato or the U.N.? They could have easily finished the job. They didn't. That is a fact.

 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0


<< ToBeMe:

Why don't you check your facts. The fact is that Bush Sr. let him go. You can carve it up anyway you like it, the fact is they let him go.
>>


OH.......I see.....I guess you would know better............nevermind the fact that I WAS THERE!!!!:| My facts ARE correct kiddo'......you go check it out........;) The reason it is constantly refferred to as Bush Sr.'s unresolved problem is because he and Schwarzkopf WANTED to proceed into Baghdad but was not permitted!!!!;)
 

badluck

Diamond Member
Feb 19, 2001
5,357
0
76
You are brainwashed......Is Saddam Hussein still alive or not? Bush wasn't permitted? Hahahahahhaaa....okay.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
It's funny the same people on this board that hammer the US for doing things unilaterally also b!tch and moan when we do things in a coalition. Pick a side as$holes and don't just bash the US for the sake of bashing.
 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,395
78
91


<< Why don't you check your facts. The fact is that Bush Sr. let him go. You can carve it up anyway you like it, the fact is they let him go. Since when are we Governed by Nato or the U.N.? They could have easily finished the job. They didn't. That is a fact. >>


There is no getting around this. For whatever reason the decision was made that our commitments to the coalition were more important than taking him out. I agree with you that we should have solved this problem then irregardless of whether the UN or coalition agreed. Clinton then compounded the problem by not really dealing with issue of Iraq kicking out the weapons inspectors etc. There is plenty of blame to spread around to both sides of the political aisle when it comes to Iraq.
 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0


<< You are brainwashed......Is Saddam Hussein still alive or not? Bush wasn't permitted? Hahahahahhaaa....okay. >>


No................LOL! I'm not "brainwashed".........you merely don't have all the facts!;) Go do some reading on the real occurances!;) I can guarrantee you that if Bush and Schwarzkopf had had their way.........we would have been in Baghdad in days!;) The U.N blocked it as well as several coalition mnembers, especially France, and several congressional members as well as Powell were in favor of keeping the coalition together rather than proceeding with the plans Schwarzkopf already had!
 

djs1w

Senior member
Apr 17, 2001
282
0
0
-Clinton looked the other way on the FIRST attempt on the WTC in Feburary of 93.

-Clinton lifted the trade embargo after Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors.
 

Chipster

Senior member
Aug 8, 2001
213
0
0
Whether the article is true or not,Hussein should be overthrown sooner than later. All of Iraqs neighboring countries that our bitching about the possible US attack will be calling us first for help when Saddam gets into one of his moods and launches an attack on them.

This man is a very unstable person and has been more than likely building up a pretty large supply of pretty nasty weapons and is just loooking for an excuse to use them. The longer you let him go on ruling,the more equipped he will get.

The objective of the Gulf war was to get Iraq out of Kuwait and it was done very easily by the US/coalition. Yes they should have go in and killed Saddam but I think they backed down due to some existing war time laws that was in place reguarding taking out a countries leader and they didn't want to stir up things more than have already out there. Remember,most countries in the Middle East do not like us there period.
 

squirrelman

Senior member
Jan 1, 2001
869
0
76
I thought a few years ago time was going to overthrow Saddam for us, I remember it being reported he had cancer. Unfortunatly it seems he has beaten it or it at least hasnt got him yet. Its a real shame that Iraq is in such a terrible state that it is now. I know I for one would love to visit Baghdad after reading the Arabian Nights. One last thing, I think that the fact that we let the U.N shape our plans is absolutly obsured. We should have dropped the U.N years ago. They do nothing right and are just a waste of time. They have no power they are just shaking a finger at people saying no no. Its funny how they are supposed to be the worlds police but we always end up doing it. We should just drop them already.
 

hoihtah

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2001
5,183
0
76
after saddam, is bush going to go after kim jung il as well? the chairman of north korea?