Wow...12 whole Allies...wow

[rufruf44]

If US has Turkey's support, that will allow strike from the northern side of Iraq, while southern side of Iraq will be pumelled from Kuwait or Saudi. Either way, Saddam is toast if Bush decide to start up this war.

 

[her209]

WW3

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Chris A
Who cares?? Germany and France are still pissed that we told them we did not need them when we went into Afganistan.. Both of those places are throwing a stink like they are important and matter in world affairs... Hell France cant even pay their own soldiers wages...

Don't they pay them with Bagettes?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: rufruf44
If US has Turkey's support, that will allow strike from the northern side of Iraq, while southern side of Iraq will be pumelled from Kuwait or Saudi. Either way, Saddam is toast if Bush decide to start up this war.

Yep. I actually think 12 is a good number considering most of the nations in the UN are pissant and many can't even feed their own people, let alone be expected to send troops anywhere. Bush's comparisons of the UN to the league of nations are uncannily appropriate.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: her209
WW3

Doubtful. To have a real world war you need real POWERFUL nations that disagree with one another. Even those powerful nations that don't outright support the US are hardly likely to step between the coalition and Saddamn.

 

[majewski9]

OK lets face it the only real powerful nation involved will be the US!

I think I have figured out a couple more!

britain
australia
italy
turkey
kuwait
canada
iran (air space)
oman (Military bases)
qatar ( Military bases)
bahrain (Military bases)
UAE (Military bases )
Isreal

Therotically 12 but 4 would probaly only offer military base support, 1would only allow air space, and the remaining 7 military support.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: her209
WW3

Doubtful. To have a real world war you need real POWERFUL nations that disagree with one another. Even those powerful nations that don't outright support the US are hardly likely to step between the coalition and Saddamn.

I hate all those pissant fake world wars.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I say give Saddam some more time!!

Yep, Iraq needs more time. 12 years just isn't long enough. Multiple resolutions breached. Fact is if the UN can't back up its own resolutions then they are meaningless and, in turn, so is the UN. Question is has Iraq breached the most recent one? If your answer (or the answer that Blix and co. give) is yes then you have two choices: 1) Go to war to back up the resolution; ie put your money where your mouth is, or 2) Disband the UN for uselessness. This isn't the first time Iraq has done it. Not the second, and not the third. Not even the fourth. When is enough enough?

You know what?? This is like Minority Report. Locking people up for stuff that they "MAY" do in the future. I think that's why most people are against a preimptive strike b/c of the sad precedent that it sets for us as a nation. In 1991, we had a CLEAR reason to go after Saddam.

Now it's just that he "MAY" have WOMD or he "MIGHT" unleash them on neihboring countries. If the US is SO convinced that he is going to "Unleash the Fury," then bring out all the evidence and shut the naysayers up. As it stands now, the US just looks like a country out for blood.

I heard one comment on either Meet the Press or Crossfire last week that the US is trying to "Out terrorize the terrorist"

As for 12 years being "long enough," what exactly has Saddam done in those twelve years that put other countries in danger? And if it was so bad, why didn't they do something THEN? WHY WAIT 12 YEARS?? Hell, if they waited 12 years to do something, they can wait another year for a full inspection of Iraq.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: her209
WW3

Doubtful. To have a real world war you need real POWERFUL nations that disagree with one another. Even those powerful nations that don't outright support the US are hardly likely to step between the coalition and Saddamn.

I hate all those pissant fake world wars.

This is skoorb not making the connection. In what way were Japan and Germany pissant in the last world war? They were in my definition of "POWERFUL".

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I say give Saddam some more time!!

Yep, Iraq needs more time. 12 years just isn't long enough. Multiple resolutions breached. Fact is if the UN can't back up its own resolutions then they are meaningless and, in turn, so is the UN. Question is has Iraq breached the most recent one? If your answer (or the answer that Blix and co. give) is yes then you have two choices: 1) Go to war to back up the resolution; ie put your money where your mouth is, or 2) Disband the UN for uselessness. This isn't the first time Iraq has done it. Not the second, and not the third. Not even the fourth. When is enough enough?

You know what?? This is like Minority Report. Locking people up for stuff that they "MAY" do in the future. I think that's why most people are against a preimptive strike b/c of the sad precedent that it sets for us as a nation. In 1991, we had a CLEAR reason to go after Saddam.

Now it's just that he "MAY" have WOMD or he "MIGHT" unleash them on neihboring countries. If the US is SO convinced that he is going to "Unleash the Fury," then bring out all the evidence and shut the naysayers up. As it stands now, the US just looks like a country out for blood.

I heard one comment on either Meet the Press or Crossfire last week that the US is trying to "Out terrorize the terrorist"

As for 12 years being "long enough," what exactly has Saddam done in those twelve years that put other countries in danger? And if it was so bad, why didn't they do something THEN? WHY WAIT 12 YEARS?? Hell, if they waited 12 years to do something, they can wait another year for a full inspection of Iraq.

Well the UN agreed that the most recent resolution was worth signing off on - and Iraq agreed. If Iraq breaks this one, as they've broken so many before, what's the point? Is there any point in the UN ever creating anymore resolutions if any country, when it suddenly feels like it, can break it?

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: her209
WW3

Doubtful. To have a real world war you need real POWERFUL nations that disagree with one another. Even those powerful nations that don't outright support the US are hardly likely to step between the coalition and Saddamn.

I hate all those pissant fake world wars.

This is skoorb not making the connection. In what way were Japan and Germany pissant in the last world war? They were in my definition of "POWERFUL".

what's your favorite color? Maroon?

 

[StageLeft]

what's your favorite color? Maroon?

Rich dark orange; ocassionaly Audis have the color.

 

[acidvoodoo]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: acidvoodoo

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: acidvoodoo
the only ones i can think of are

britain
australia
italy
turkey
kuwait


maybe the scandinavian coutries are gonna help? cause i heard 'eastern european countries' somewhere

You think scandinavian countries are eastern european countries?

yeah, what is with that?

lol, i dunno, they to the east somewhat, and we know that it can't be germany

no we to the north gaddamnit!

Yup, but we're still part of western europe, i can't believe that someone from the UK doesn't know which countries belong to eastern and western europe...

And germany isn't part of eastern europe either... *sighs*

bah, me geog has never been up to scratch. But i concur, if i look at where i am in northern england, adjacently east of me is denmark.

i guess thats not the pc way to say which countries are where.

shoulda taken geog over re now i guess

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: majewski9
OK lets face it the only real powerful nation involved will be the US!

I think I have figured out a couple more!

britain
australia
italy
turkey
kuwait
canada
iran (air space)
oman (Military bases)
qatar ( Military bases)
bahrain (Military bases)
UAE (Military bases )
Isreal

Therotically 12 but 4 would probaly only offer military base support, 1would only allow air space, and the remaining 7 military support.

1)England - Our b*tch, I'm still surprised how Tony Blair's hair is'nt brown yet (whatever is left of it)
2) Austrailia - Wished they were us
3) Italy - Always side with whoever is more powerful (WWI, and WWII)
4) Turkey - Is getting 10 billion in aid from us and wants desperately to be considered 'European'
5)Kuwait - Puppet govt. set up by us
6) Canada - Don't want to anger their powerful neighbors to the south, rely too much on trade, and have 10 tanks
7) Iran - Old Iraq enemy, but i would still be surprised if they help. Maybe they are trying to get off our 'rogue nation' list, and certainly they'll be paid.
9) Oman: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
10) Qatar: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
11 )U.A.E.: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
12) Israel: Another b*tch of ours, and hey killing some more muslim arabs can't hurt i guess.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: majewski9
OK lets face it the only real powerful nation involved will be the US!

I think I have figured out a couple more!

britain
australia
italy
turkey
kuwait
canada
iran (air space)
oman (Military bases)
qatar ( Military bases)
bahrain (Military bases)
UAE (Military bases )
Isreal

Therotically 12 but 4 would probaly only offer military base support, 1would only allow air space, and the remaining 7 military support.

1)England - Our b*tch, I'm still surprised how Tony Blair's hair is'nt brown yet (whatever is left of it)
2) Austrailia - Wished they were us
3) Italy - Always side with whoever is more powerful (WWI, and WWII)
4) Turkey - Is getting 10 billion in aid from us and wants desperately to be considered 'European'
5)Kuwait - Puppet govt. set up by us
6) Canada - Don't want to anger their powerful neighbors to the south, rely too much on trade, and have 10 tanks
7) Iran - Old Iraq enemy, but i would still be surprised if they help. Maybe they are trying to get off our 'rogue nation' list, and certainly they'll be paid.
9) Oman: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
10) Qatar: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
11 )U.A.E.: I'd be surprised, but they are too weak to go against us i guess
12) Israel: Another b*tch of ours, and hey killing some more muslim arabs can't hurt i guess.

LOL @ your description of England, Canada and Israel

 

[StageLeft]

LOL @ your description of England, Canada and Israel

Heh, SherEPunjab definitely doesn't fall into the "lover" category I think you guys (US) should be happy that England is backing you so much. I mean there is a country that really has forgiven as much as possible that whole thing a couple hundred years back and just wants to be friends!

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

LOL @ your description of England, Canada and Israel

Heh, SherEPunjab definitely doesn't fall into the "lover" category I think you guys (US) should be happy that England is backing you so much. I mean there is a country that really has forgiven as much as possible that whole thing a couple hundred years back and just wants to be friends!

Naw, they just want to get in of some of our Crest toothpaste and Glide floss.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: Skoorb

LOL @ your description of England, Canada and Israel

Heh, SherEPunjab definitely doesn't fall into the "lover" category I think you guys (US) should be happy that England is backing you so much. I mean there is a country that really has forgiven as much as possible that whole thing a couple hundred years back and just wants to be friends!

Naw, they just want to get in of some of our Crest toothpaste and Glide floss.

OUCH! I wonder if bad breath is a problem in England? Maybe we can send them C5 Galaxys filled with Listerine

 

[TallBill]

63% of the people backing the war is a majority. Take that how you'd like it.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: TallBill
63% of the people backing the war is a majority. Take that how you'd like it.

63% backing the war ONLY with the full support of the UN. That's different than 63% of Americans backing the war b/c Bush says so.

 

[mboy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

LOL @ your description of England, Canada and Israel

Heh, SherEPunjab definitely doesn't fall into the "lover" category I think you guys (US) should be happy that England is backing you so much. I mean there is a country that really has forgiven as much as possible that whole thing a couple hundred years back and just wants to be friends!

Or maybe the Bitish should be happy we kinda helped them against the Germans in WWII. If it wasnt for the us, u would be speaking german by now.
Anyway, Britian and America wil always be the strongest of allies, becasue they are basically simialr in all principals (except that tax something or other a few hundred years back

 

[XZeroII]

France is opposed...what else is news?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Hans Blix has been a weapons inspector in 1 form or another for over 30 years, yet he has NEVER found 1 weapon of mass destrcution in any country he has searched. GUess they just dont exist then.

Blix received accolades for the early 90s inspections of North Korea. For the record, considering the Bush administration has NEVER verifiably found 1 weapon of mass destruction I guess they just don't exist then.

You want to know why Rumsfeld considers Eastern Europe the REAL Europe? We've essentially paid for their compliance. Our first vocal ally, Poland, received $10B in infrastructure aid in exchange for purchasing $1.6B of F-18s. Nothing like a stimulus package for warfare. Turkey is willing . . . it's just a question of price. Every country EXCEPT for the UK has an ulterior motive to support war with Iraq.

One good element about the current Bush administration is the possibility that US troops will finally stop defending West Germany from East Germany.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Hans Blix has been a weapons inspector in 1 form or another for over 30 years, yet he has NEVER found 1 weapon of mass destrcution in any country he has searched. GUess they just dont exist then.

You want to know why Rumsfeld considers Eastern Europe the REAL Europe? We've essentially paid for their compliance. Our first vocal ally, Poland, received $10B in infrastructure aid in exchange for purchasing $1.6B of F-18s. Nothing like a stimulus package for warfare. Turkey is willing . . . it's just a question of price. Every country EXCEPT for the UK has an ulterior motive to support war with Iraq.

Poland never purchased F/A-18 aircraft.

 

[StageLeft]

If it wasnt for the us, u would be speaking german by now.

Oh don't do the Brits any favors. If it wasn't for western europe taking a beating, losing thousands of people to bullets and bombs, having their homes bombed and putting up one hell of a bloody fight the Germans would have finished up Western europe then made for the US. When it's a TEAM GAME you can't claim credit for the win. Too bad you didn't get off your ass until 1941.

But the thread isn't about this