why are some furry and squirrely peeps opposed to a war on iraq?

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby
I'm against an Iraqi invasion for several reasons. For me it boils down to three questions 1) does Iraq really threaten us? 2) it is right to invade Iraq? and 3) does invasion pass a cost/benefit analysis? My answers: 1) No, 2) No, 3) No.

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists.

2) Yes. See 1).

3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

 

[JellyBaby]

HappyPuppy, there is no link between al qaeda and Saddum. You remember al qaeda? The terrorists who attacked the United States. In addition, Iraq doesn't rank very high on the CIA's Terrorist Troublemaker list.

Invading Iraq will fuel terrorism, create more of the bastages and reduce our security. It could also destabilize the region. It certainly it will foster even more Arab hatred toward us.

 

[mithrandir2001]

We shouldn't be hasty to send our teens and twentisomethings to their deaths, which is certainly something that will happen if we send American troops to Iraq. You want to risk your life for Saddam? Fvck him. He's not worth it.

 

[wQuay]

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists.

2) Yes. See 1).

3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

1) Everything I've read suggests that Al-Quaida operates within the Kurdish areas of Iraq, which are no-fly zones protected by the US.

2) As a proponent of human liberty and not a blind, animal instinct for safety, I believe in punishing individuals and states for what they have done, not what they can do.

3) Actually, the Middle East is about as stable as it ever gets. But, I see your point. A US occupation of Iraq would demonstrate just how baseless suggestions that our foreign policy is domineering and selfish really are. The Palestinians would make peace with Israel, the Saudis would volunteer to build even more US military bases in their country, and the Iranians would drop the "Great Satan" rhetoric and invite Britney Spears to give a concert in Tehran.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: wQuay

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists.

2) Yes. See 1).

3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

1) Everything I've read suggests that Al-Quaida operates within the Kurdish areas of Iraq, which are no-fly zones protected by the US.

2) As a proponent of human liberty and not a blind, animal instinct for safety, I believe in punishing individuals and states for what they have done, not what they can do.

3) Actually, the Middle East is about as stable as it ever gets. But, I see your point. A US occupation of Iraq would demonstrate just how baseless suggestions that our foreign policy is domineering and selfish really are. The Palestinians would make peace with Israel, the Saudis would volunteer to build even more US military bases in their country, and the Iranians would drop the "Great Satan" rhetoric and invite Britney Spears to give a concert in Tehran.

I like the Britney Spears part. Do you think we can arrange for them to keep her?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: wQuay

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists. 2) Yes. See 1). 3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

1) Everything I've read suggests that Al-Quaida operates within the Kurdish areas of Iraq, which are no-fly zones protected by the US. 2) As a proponent of human liberty and not a blind, animal instinct for safety, I believe in punishing individuals and states for what they have done, not what they can do. 3) Actually, the Middle East is about as stable as it ever gets. But, I see your point. A US occupation of Iraq would demonstrate just how baseless suggestions that our foreign policy is domineering and selfish really are. The Palestinians would make peace with Israel, the Saudis would volunteer to build even more US military bases in their country, and the Iranians would drop the "Great Satan" rhetoric and invite Britney Spears to give a concert in Tehran.

I like the Britney Spears part. Do you think we can arrange for them to keep her?

At last- Something we can agree on 😀

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: wQuay

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists. 2) Yes. See 1). 3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

1) Everything I've read suggests that Al-Quaida operates within the Kurdish areas of Iraq, which are no-fly zones protected by the US. 2) As a proponent of human liberty and not a blind, animal instinct for safety, I believe in punishing individuals and states for what they have done, not what they can do. 3) Actually, the Middle East is about as stable as it ever gets. But, I see your point. A US occupation of Iraq would demonstrate just how baseless suggestions that our foreign policy is domineering and selfish really are. The Palestinians would make peace with Israel, the Saudis would volunteer to build even more US military bases in their country, and the Iranians would drop the "Great Satan" rhetoric and invite Britney Spears to give a concert in Tehran.

I like the Britney Spears part. Do you think we can arrange for them to keep her?

At last- Something we can agree on 😀

As long as there is dialogue, there is hope.

 

[wQuay]

Amen 🙂

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: wQuay

1) Yes. Saddam supports terrorists.

2) Yes. See 1).

3) Yes. It would help to stabilize the Middle East.

1) Everything I've read suggests that Al-Quaida operates within the Kurdish areas of Iraq, which are no-fly zones protected by the US.

2) As a proponent of human liberty and not a blind, animal instinct for safety, I believe in punishing individuals and states for what they have done, not what they can do.

3) Actually, the Middle East is about as stable as it ever gets. But, I see your point. A US occupation of Iraq would demonstrate just how baseless suggestions that our foreign policy is domineering and selfish really are. The Palestinians would make peace with Israel, the Saudis would volunteer to build even more US military bases in their country, and the Iranians would drop the "Great Satan" rhetoric and invite Britney Spears to give a concert in Tehran.

1) Things that you read, and things that senior intelligence officials read can be very different.

2) If you only believe in punishing for acts already committed, you may not be around to do the punishing. This isn't about what some country CAN do. It's about what the administration believes they WILL do.

3) Send Britney.

 

[esso]

Stabilization in Iraq will probably come if we overthrow Saddam, but that is something completely separate from a war on terrorism. Al-Qaeda will not even notice Hussein is gone; they have little to no connection to his regime right now.

Saddam's weapons are for the defense of his priorities. He'll only use them if he feels threatened. He's not desperate for money, nor does he want the scrutiny associated with black market arms sales, so his weapons won't be in terrorist's hands anytime soon (if you want to worry about something, look at Russia or China, who have both contributed to the development of WMD in questionable nations (Pakistan, N. Korea, India), and Russia in particular has thousands of nukes scattered across a country surrounded by some of the most unstable areas in the world (the Balkans, Afghanistan, Chechnya)).

I think the first proof that Saddam truly has weapons of mass destruction will come the moment we attack him. It's sad because, as the CIA has stated publicly, he would have never used them otherwise.

 

[HOWITIS]

why are some furry and squirrely peeps opposed to a war on iraq?

i don't know, but there are alot of people in Iraq we gotta kill, and little time to do it. we better get started now.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Remember that everybody dies. Saddam will die. Castro will die. Osama will die (if he hasn't already). Time has a way of "fixing" things.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
Remember that everybody dies. Saddam will die. Castro will die. Osama will die (if he hasn't already). Time has a way of "fixing" things.

If you wait for time to fix things, you and your entire familly might be dead first.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
Remember that everybody dies. Saddam will die. Castro will die. Osama will die (if he hasn't already). Time has a way of "fixing" things.

If you wait for time to fix things, you and your entire familly might be dead first.

I don't see Saddam as a threat to my safety...or anybody else's in this country. For the USA to make a pre-emptive strike against a villian who has many like-minded "friends" in power we must have gold-plated evidence. Have we seen such?