Just think if we new the true outcome of all events before they accurred. History is easy to read once it is history. Tomorrow is the unknowen. We have been stuck in a 50 year war for some time now. This is just another step in it.
Probable War Cost...90 Billion large..
- Thread starter aldabra
- Start date
dr. freeze said:
Freeze,
Seriously, you are one of the most entertaining posters here. It's amazing how people that seem to be so consistently conservative on any and every issue ever presented here at MJ's(specifically in this thread: aganist any sort of social programs here at home, against money for schools for our own kids, etc..) turn into humanitarians when it comes to 'liberating' Iraqi's and somehow trying to relate it to the Civil War. LMAO! Come on, man.
Yes, I know that you are terribly concerned about the Iraqi populous. You empathize with them, because you have great compassion for human suffering. Right? That 90 Billion (will be tons more than that once all is said and done) is money well-spent, if only we can liberate the poor Iraqi civilians. Pulllease. Hypocrisy at it's most blatant.
After we take over and occupy Iraq, perhaps we should continue on and 'liberate' the 'slaves' in Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Qatar, etc. Now why in the world wouldn't you support 'liberating' the whole Middle East, being the suddenly compassionate guy that you are? Or maybe you would.
Your comment earlier about our occupation 'stabilizing' the region is incredibly naive and downright laughable. Just wait and see how this develops(if we invade, which is almost certain, of course)) and then come back here and announce how 'stable' the region is.
On that note, can you (or anybody else) present a viable prediction for the end-game of this thing. I mean, once the main fighting is done and our troops now control the country. Now what? What is our exit strategy? Even the administration isn't really trying to present anything about *that* part of it. There are only offering vague references to setting up a democracy and that we'll only be there 'as long as necessary and not a second longer'. Ummm, gee, great plan and thanks for the explanation.
Also, Eddie is right on with his John Wayne analogy. I mean, we demand they destroy their missles as a condition of peace, they do so (if they actually do), we say 'that's not good enough, we're still coming and now our job is a lot easier, thanks'. How can somebody not see the absurdity of this, from the reference point of somebody on the outside looking in. Naturally, I am all for our troops being less at risk, but it's incredibly twisted logic that can only infuriate the rest of the world, certainly not limited to the Middle East.
What possible motivation would Iraq have for destroying, or not using, their nerve agents (if they indeed have them) if we have set the precedent of making demands that they destroy certain CONFIRMED weapons, and then attacking anyways, without giving them any more time.
But now, the thing is, is that there is no turning back. Bush has painted us into a corner by sending almost 200,000 troops to the region at a great cost, and there really is no chance in hell, no matter what Iraq does, that Bush is going to say, 'alright guys, come on back now'.
He has long ago made the decison that toppling Hussein will be his legacy. All this crap with the U.N. is, of course, a dog and pony show to try to muster up at least a decent amount of worldwide support. At this point, the longer we wait, the better the chance that we actually LOSE support. So, faced with the inevitable, I say 'the sooner the better' with the hope that these hawks have a decent post-war occupation plan and more importantly an exit strategy with a reasonable time-table to get our guys out of there.
me being a teacher and reading this:
:thumb: :thumb: :clap: :yup
time for most parents to get their heads out of their asses and to start doin their job a little bit better instead of not goin over the basics being taught in class.
i see it too often in teaching that parents aren't spending enough time with their kids...and when the parents DO get home from work, it's like, "leave me alone, i'm resting..."
i say, fawk that,....i spend ALL day with your kids five days a week, yet you cannot find an EVENING to spend with them and even ask them how THEIR day was?
society IS getting worse.
WHO WILL STEP UP AND MAKE THINGS BETTER?
man, kosar, that was probably the longest piece of prose i've EVER seen you type.....???
you know what, i'll admit to that too....!!
you know what, i'll admit to that too....!!
Kosar, Haskell , et all, I am sitting here in a position most do not find themselves in, after reading the opposing point of view I ask myself, what if I am wrong and the left wingers here have it right. You guys make very convincing arguments about why Bush is wrong, but what I don't see is your idea of how to handle things better. Is there a better way to handle this or are you guys saying we should just not be there at all and wait until properly provoked to react. I for one am tired of reacting to tragedy and would like to see it averted before it happens if possible. Let's just say that we have evidence of weapons of mass destruction, what so you think the intention of Hussein is with these weapons, he does not strike me a the collector type. I know, he does not have the capibility of getting them from there to here so he poses no risk, but on Sept 10 nobody had the capability of hijacking several planes and flying them into buildings, or so we thought. Is your plan reaction or do you have another way? I am serious here, I like to read the opposing point of view, even your Haskell.
Penguinfan
Penguinfan
Once Saddam is ousted oil production in Iraq will increase dramatically to drop world prices and fund rebuilding of Iraq.
guys
guys
do you really think the world will be better off long range with saddaam left to his own devices?...kosar...what about him lobbing scuds into israel during the gulf war...invading iran(yes,i know the u.s. was behind him)...gassing the kurds...invading kuwait....what happens when we remove the troops from the border?....12 years and 17 u.n. resolutions....nothing....now the u.s. masses one hundred thousand troops on the border and all of a sudden he starts destroying missiles he heretofore denied he had?....coincidence?...you guys are smarter than that....if left on his own,he develops chemical,biological and possibly,down the road nuclear devices...and it`s not far fetched to think they might find their way into terrorist hands...and then,instead of 3,000 americans dead,you`ve got 10,000....maybe 100,000....do we listen to france and germany who are lining their pockets in iraq?.......or do we do what`s in OUR OWN BEST INTERESTS....why is that considered such a taboo phrase...damnit....yes....do what`s in the best long term interests of OUR country while we still can...what a novel idea....don`t let our potential fates rest in the hands of the impotent u.n.....and the say so of the france`s,germany`s and maybe the vote of a cameroon or a mexico(and these counties love seeing us beholding to them...blackmailing us for everything they can get)...
guys
do you really think the world will be better off long range with saddaam left to his own devices?...kosar...what about him lobbing scuds into israel during the gulf war...invading iran(yes,i know the u.s. was behind him)...gassing the kurds...invading kuwait....what happens when we remove the troops from the border?....12 years and 17 u.n. resolutions....nothing....now the u.s. masses one hundred thousand troops on the border and all of a sudden he starts destroying missiles he heretofore denied he had?....coincidence?...you guys are smarter than that....if left on his own,he develops chemical,biological and possibly,down the road nuclear devices...and it`s not far fetched to think they might find their way into terrorist hands...and then,instead of 3,000 americans dead,you`ve got 10,000....maybe 100,000....do we listen to france and germany who are lining their pockets in iraq?.......or do we do what`s in OUR OWN BEST INTERESTS....why is that considered such a taboo phrase...damnit....yes....do what`s in the best long term interests of OUR country while we still can...what a novel idea....don`t let our potential fates rest in the hands of the impotent u.n.....and the say so of the france`s,germany`s and maybe the vote of a cameroon or a mexico(and these counties love seeing us beholding to them...blackmailing us for everything they can get)...
Last edited:
Seems to me everyone wants a Win/Win from this Iraq problem. There is no win/win. Not in war. I dont care if Left/Right/Middle. War means losses for all. What is price for security? No one can know. This a differant type of long range battle. The pressure had to be put on Iraq. I agree. Should our President had troops sent to places like Turkey to sit on ships for three weeks with out permission to land them in Turkey. No. Should we keep talking as war is a must when it may not be. No. Some how I saw Security at home a higher priority. We could have contained Iraq as we have right now. I mean they cant take a chit in Iraq right now with out us knowing. Spent more time for our home land security. Then fininshed job in Iraq if needed. This administration just seems to have priorites back ward. But when one opens mouth wide enough puts foot in that mouth. Some times it becomes hard to say dam I talk to much. When one sees terroist behind every tree. Guess who wins.
Education has been brought up here many times. Folks say lets try to get it funded and done right. Folks from the right say that dont work. I find it hard to believe that all these folks from the right went to private schools. So I see some very good debate here and great typing compared to mind. So I say our public schools have done some good work already. If some funds might help get a few more that good. Im for that. Anyone extra we can help learn and get a job to help pay taxes. Im really for that.
Anyhow Iraq is a no win for all of us. I hope its worth the lifes we lose. They better come up with tons of there bad ass weapons he is believed to have once were there. If not we will look real dumb. But then again we can make sure we find something. There is always a way to say we found something. Even if we care it there are selfs. God I hope thats not the case. We better make sure we know where Oli North is at all times.
Education has been brought up here many times. Folks say lets try to get it funded and done right. Folks from the right say that dont work. I find it hard to believe that all these folks from the right went to private schools. So I see some very good debate here and great typing compared to mind. So I say our public schools have done some good work already. If some funds might help get a few more that good. Im for that. Anyone extra we can help learn and get a job to help pay taxes. Im really for that.
Anyhow Iraq is a no win for all of us. I hope its worth the lifes we lose. They better come up with tons of there bad ass weapons he is believed to have once were there. If not we will look real dumb. But then again we can make sure we find something. There is always a way to say we found something. Even if we care it there are selfs. God I hope thats not the case. We better make sure we know where Oli North is at all times.
Tor-Vig,
lol- yeah, that may be one one of my longer posts, not including a few on the Korean crisis.
Gardenweasel and Penguin,
Knowing that there is no turning back now, I really don't have any 'ideas' or 'solutions' other than getting in and out of there as soon as possible.
What I *am* extremely confused about is what flipped the switch to Iraq. There was little or no mention of Iraq from this admin, either before or for a good while after 9/11. We go about our business attacking Al-Queda, trying to re-habilitate Afghanistan, trying to track down Bin-Laden & co. We are doing a reasonably good job at all of that(except for getting Osama himself and other key guys) and then BAM, very little mention of Al-Queda and all attention paid to Iraq.
With all of our intelligence and all of our information and contacts, we can't muster up the slightest bit of evidence of a link between Iraq and 9/11. The 'best' we came up with in all this time is a questionable tape of someone who may have been Bin-Laden urging Iraq to kill Americans. I'm embarrassed for Powell and others who actually tried to sell to us that that proves a link. WTF? Therefore, any of the ' do you remember 9/11' arguments used to support our actions really ring hollow.
Now, what happened here? I'm pretty certain that if it was Clinton that pulled this 180, the more cynical among us would accuse him trying to divert attention away from that 'somewhat stalled' mission.
But since it's Bush, I suppose the more cynical could opine that this sudden fascination is the result of a personal vendetta mixed with oil interests.
Now, can some of you who whole-heartedly support this occupation please explain to me why we shouldn't also invade and occupy another half-dozen countries while we're there? Surely Iraq can't be the only rogue country over there. Could there be a reason that we are only concerned with Iraq?
Garden,
Yes I remember Iraq lobbing scuds into Israel. I'm not quite sure what your point is. There was a war going on, buddy. I hope you're not surpised when the same thing happens this time. I don't get that one, Garden.
Iraq was much closer to having a viable nuclear program some years back than it is now, and it was solved in about 1 hour of surgical strikes by the Israeli air force. There was solid and accurate evidence of a well-developed plant and they destroyed it.
What we're working with now is some supposed chemicals and nerve agents that are missing, some missles that fly 8 miles longer than they're allowed, and absolutely no evidence of anything close to resembling a nuclear program.
Now, I also see, Garden, that you are feeling sympathy for those Kurds. While it's obviously horrible what Saddam did to them, we have pretty much taken care of that since 1991 with the no-fly zone. Hopefully you aren't losing too much sleep worrying about those Kurds.
I believe that if we have such specific intelligence on Saddam and his weapons, then we could systematically destroy them without reproach from anybody. And any plaintive wails in the distance coming from some country like France could simply be ignored. The problem with this approach is that we really don't *have* any specific information, so we need to take over the country to see for ourselves. Those bumbling inspectors surely didn't find anything, so let's go take a look. Right?
I really don't think this situation requires a full-blown invasion and occupation that will certainly cost us hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars, some amount of lives on our side and tons of Iraqi civilian lives-the same folks we are 'liberating' , it will inflame even more hatred for the US leading to even more terrorist attacks and will destabilize an entire region for many years to come.
What exactly is in this for us?
lol- yeah, that may be one one of my longer posts, not including a few on the Korean crisis.
Gardenweasel and Penguin,
Knowing that there is no turning back now, I really don't have any 'ideas' or 'solutions' other than getting in and out of there as soon as possible.
What I *am* extremely confused about is what flipped the switch to Iraq. There was little or no mention of Iraq from this admin, either before or for a good while after 9/11. We go about our business attacking Al-Queda, trying to re-habilitate Afghanistan, trying to track down Bin-Laden & co. We are doing a reasonably good job at all of that(except for getting Osama himself and other key guys) and then BAM, very little mention of Al-Queda and all attention paid to Iraq.
With all of our intelligence and all of our information and contacts, we can't muster up the slightest bit of evidence of a link between Iraq and 9/11. The 'best' we came up with in all this time is a questionable tape of someone who may have been Bin-Laden urging Iraq to kill Americans. I'm embarrassed for Powell and others who actually tried to sell to us that that proves a link. WTF? Therefore, any of the ' do you remember 9/11' arguments used to support our actions really ring hollow.
Now, what happened here? I'm pretty certain that if it was Clinton that pulled this 180, the more cynical among us would accuse him trying to divert attention away from that 'somewhat stalled' mission.
But since it's Bush, I suppose the more cynical could opine that this sudden fascination is the result of a personal vendetta mixed with oil interests.
Now, can some of you who whole-heartedly support this occupation please explain to me why we shouldn't also invade and occupy another half-dozen countries while we're there? Surely Iraq can't be the only rogue country over there. Could there be a reason that we are only concerned with Iraq?
Garden,
Yes I remember Iraq lobbing scuds into Israel. I'm not quite sure what your point is. There was a war going on, buddy. I hope you're not surpised when the same thing happens this time. I don't get that one, Garden.
Iraq was much closer to having a viable nuclear program some years back than it is now, and it was solved in about 1 hour of surgical strikes by the Israeli air force. There was solid and accurate evidence of a well-developed plant and they destroyed it.
What we're working with now is some supposed chemicals and nerve agents that are missing, some missles that fly 8 miles longer than they're allowed, and absolutely no evidence of anything close to resembling a nuclear program.
Now, I also see, Garden, that you are feeling sympathy for those Kurds. While it's obviously horrible what Saddam did to them, we have pretty much taken care of that since 1991 with the no-fly zone. Hopefully you aren't losing too much sleep worrying about those Kurds.
I believe that if we have such specific intelligence on Saddam and his weapons, then we could systematically destroy them without reproach from anybody. And any plaintive wails in the distance coming from some country like France could simply be ignored. The problem with this approach is that we really don't *have* any specific information, so we need to take over the country to see for ourselves. Those bumbling inspectors surely didn't find anything, so let's go take a look. Right?
I really don't think this situation requires a full-blown invasion and occupation that will certainly cost us hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars, some amount of lives on our side and tons of Iraqi civilian lives-the same folks we are 'liberating' , it will inflame even more hatred for the US leading to even more terrorist attacks and will destabilize an entire region for many years to come.
What exactly is in this for us?
Very good Kosar, I can actually agree with alot of what you said there, I guess it is just that I am over here in camp paranoia and think that if/when this nit-wit gets hold of enough nuclear technology, he will certainly use it and we would then all be saying, "That A-hole Bush should have got rid of him when he had the chance."
Do we have reason to be there, is there anything in it for us, is Bush just creating his Legacy here with Iraq, I doubt we may ever know the truth, and thats hard to take.
Penguinfan
Do we have reason to be there, is there anything in it for us, is Bush just creating his Legacy here with Iraq, I doubt we may ever know the truth, and thats hard to take.
Penguinfan
kosar said:
I don't know if this is a rhetorical question or not. I have to think that Iraq is so crucial to our government's needs because Saddam is the Arab leader who has his sites on being the leader of the Arab world. The easiest way to unify the Arab nations would be to attack and occupy Israel.
I don't know of another country in that region that has the potential to do that besides Iraq. North Korea is making us look foolish right now. They would make us look more foolish if they overran South Korea. We would be forced into a situation that nobody wants and into a war that would be devastating to all of Asia and possibly back here.
I think that we realize that there are some nations that we are in a no win situation in right now and we don't want Iraq to turn into that. I don't think that this war is about oil, our economy, the election in 2004, or for moral reasons. I think that it's about all of the above and possibly more.
I am for this war and it's mainly because I do trust Bush and I still trust that the government has made this decision on information that I don't have. I still trust the government and believe that they believe that they are doing the right thing.
I just hope the benefits outweigh the costs.
BTW.......the 90 plus billion figure does not include the cost of ten years of projected occupation of Iraq by 100's of thousands of U.S. troops per the discussion on "Meet the Press" today.
Last edited:
What about this solution: Since Middle East countries have already voted for him to go into exile and getting rid rid of Saddam is our priorty: Let the M.E. countries he has terrorized give him the "Ultimadum" to leave or (they) will remove him. If he offers military resistance WE will step in with military and aid them.
A. We do not look near as aggressive.
B. Other countries can not say we went it alone
C. Maybe? Their own people will aid in ousting him if they see it as not a Western invasion.
also after he is gone I think the ME should play biggest part in reorganization.
a little on N Korea: Bobby I don't disagree with you often but do on fact that N Korea is making us look foolish-on the contrary. I have been following Chinese,Korean and other foreign papers and this has been a huge game of chicken throughout. This is how I see it.
You have NKorea whose country is on verge of total economical collapse. Reason is it is ran by mad man who has spent almost entire GNP on weapons and military leaving common man to starve and freeze.
He has been able to do this because countries have been pouring in econmic aid for years (the U.S. in particular) enabling
to continue to use all their resources for military. WE have contributed to putting their military where it now stands( pretty damn powerful.Why do you think NK only wants to negotiate with us??--and China and Russia agreeing? Now his meal ticket is cut off and he is grasping at straws as his own people are trying to leave in droves which brings us to China--
China: They have had to double forces on their border to stop droves of NKoreans trying to cross.They and Russia no more want NK to increase nuclear capabilities than we do: HOWEVER they do not want to have to foot the bill on economic aid and along with Russia are staying on the fence in hopes we will continue past efforts of aid there which is totally what enabled them to build their arsenal to begin with by freeing up their GNP for military. There is a lot of gray areas in Iraq situation but I think this is CRYSTAL CLEAR and I have to back Bush 100% by not giving in and going back to past errors. I don't care if he backs out of Iraq issue but if he budges off this stance he would not get my vote.In the end I think China and Russia will have to put their foot down once they see we will not contribute to enabling them to build war machine at our expense as past adminstration did. NK is MUCH more a threat to them than us.
South Korea: The worm is turning!! I made note in another thread while you only see anti U.S. in most press here country is really divided 50/50 with the older generation pro US (from experience) and younger anti US(they have known nothing but prosperity and are clueless how it come about).
The young are starting to get a clue as possibilty of shit hitting the fan is more of a reality now.
Here is a reading you won't find in US liberal press or is buried so don't be misled.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/030302/1/38f47.html
P.S. If you want to read news from other countries in asia you might find this link of interest.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/asia/kr.html
One added note.What really pisses me off on Iraq affair is Bush senior not completeing job back then. I have read on many forums with ties to Iraq that while we had many iraqi citizens to over throw Hussein then,we left and hung em out to dry(or I should say die) We made promises we didn't keep and many died and were tortured as result and they are leary same shit will go down this time--and I can't blame em. "IF" we start it we need to finish it.
A. We do not look near as aggressive.
B. Other countries can not say we went it alone
C. Maybe? Their own people will aid in ousting him if they see it as not a Western invasion.
also after he is gone I think the ME should play biggest part in reorganization.
a little on N Korea: Bobby I don't disagree with you often but do on fact that N Korea is making us look foolish-on the contrary. I have been following Chinese,Korean and other foreign papers and this has been a huge game of chicken throughout. This is how I see it.
You have NKorea whose country is on verge of total economical collapse. Reason is it is ran by mad man who has spent almost entire GNP on weapons and military leaving common man to starve and freeze.
He has been able to do this because countries have been pouring in econmic aid for years (the U.S. in particular) enabling
to continue to use all their resources for military. WE have contributed to putting their military where it now stands( pretty damn powerful.Why do you think NK only wants to negotiate with us??--and China and Russia agreeing? Now his meal ticket is cut off and he is grasping at straws as his own people are trying to leave in droves which brings us to China--
China: They have had to double forces on their border to stop droves of NKoreans trying to cross.They and Russia no more want NK to increase nuclear capabilities than we do: HOWEVER they do not want to have to foot the bill on economic aid and along with Russia are staying on the fence in hopes we will continue past efforts of aid there which is totally what enabled them to build their arsenal to begin with by freeing up their GNP for military. There is a lot of gray areas in Iraq situation but I think this is CRYSTAL CLEAR and I have to back Bush 100% by not giving in and going back to past errors. I don't care if he backs out of Iraq issue but if he budges off this stance he would not get my vote.In the end I think China and Russia will have to put their foot down once they see we will not contribute to enabling them to build war machine at our expense as past adminstration did. NK is MUCH more a threat to them than us.
South Korea: The worm is turning!! I made note in another thread while you only see anti U.S. in most press here country is really divided 50/50 with the older generation pro US (from experience) and younger anti US(they have known nothing but prosperity and are clueless how it come about).
The young are starting to get a clue as possibilty of shit hitting the fan is more of a reality now.
Here is a reading you won't find in US liberal press or is buried so don't be misled.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/030302/1/38f47.html
P.S. If you want to read news from other countries in asia you might find this link of interest.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/asia/kr.html
One added note.What really pisses me off on Iraq affair is Bush senior not completeing job back then. I have read on many forums with ties to Iraq that while we had many iraqi citizens to over throw Hussein then,we left and hung em out to dry(or I should say die) We made promises we didn't keep and many died and were tortured as result and they are leary same shit will go down this time--and I can't blame em. "IF" we start it we need to finish it.
Last edited:
Hey guys wheres the VP been hiding. Last time we saw him was at some dinner about two weeks back. And before that had been at least a nother two weeks. Any truth to the fact with his week heart he cant take the heat. Or do any of you believe as some do the VP is running the country from his hiding place. We worry more about him getting shot then the President or C Powell.
DTB yes I believe we could get this guy with out all out war. But if we dont go in to Iraq then we cant nation build Iraq the way we think it should be. And of course we wont get are share of the say about the oil.
DTB yes I believe we could get this guy with out all out war. But if we dont go in to Iraq then we cant nation build Iraq the way we think it should be. And of course we wont get are share of the say about the oil.
kosar
kosar
my point is that hussein is very unpredictable....we engage him in war in the early 90`s and what does he do?...he lobs scuds into israel...i am aware of the palestinian situation,but why lob scuds into israel?...isn`t it obvious that we are joined at the hip with israel?....that a very large group of powerful,wealthy people in this country are jewish and have much influence regarding u.s. policy...don`t you think that our allegiance with israel has much to do with our terrorist problems?...we can debate that,but,it`s true....if we changed our policy,withdrew all our aid from israel and took a hardline stance favoring withdrawal of israeli settlements in the west bank and basically allied ourselves with the palestininian cause,i think terrorism would not be the problem it is today....if these arab madmen got their hands on a nuclear weapon,how far-fetched a scenario would it be to see one them end up obliterating israel?....obviously,when considering a man that gasses his own people and invades other countries on a regular basis,all bets are off.... anything is possible...
and,you have to look hard at the north korean issue to understand why we have to draw the line in iraq....we are pretty much hamstrung regarding north korea`s proliferation of nuclear weapons....why?....because they already have them....they now have leverage that saddaam doesn`t have...we can negotiate and hope...we can restrict or embargo goods coming to and from n korea....but,again we have the france`s of the world undermining us at every turn(yes,they are the ones that supplied iraq with the technology to build their first nuclear reactor that thankfully was destroyed) .....and thanks to the france`s and the germany`s,every despot in the world sees how toothless the u.n. is....
the cat`s out of the bag in north korea....do you plug the leak before it becomes a flood?....or do you sit by with your finger up ass and wait until someone obliterates our closest ally israel and we get drawn into a potential global conflict in which me might HAVE to go to war........oil isn`t the issue now,regardless of what some say....but in the scenario i laid out,oil might become the issue...
it`s a tough call....it`s a pay me now or pay me later scenario....nobody likes war....nobody knows how it will play out...or what the aftermath will yield...the world sat on their hands prior to world war 2.....now we are talking nuclear weapons......we aren`t war mongers....but our asses are in a sling....you saw what clinton`s treaty with n. korea yielded...they lied...now they have nuclear weapons...that`s what happens when you have a "pass the buck" president in the white house....i respect bush for hitting this thing head on...it has to be addressed in some manner...
if the troops weren`t there,would these missiles (that they allegedly did not have) be getting destroyed?.....hussein,by destroying these missiles,is caught in a lie... do you trust him?....we trusted n korea.....can the inspectors really cover a country the size of texas?....not likely....i admit,it`s a tough call...i`m glad i`m not making the decision....
i do know that sticking your head in the sand never solved any problems...
kosar
my point is that hussein is very unpredictable....we engage him in war in the early 90`s and what does he do?...he lobs scuds into israel...i am aware of the palestinian situation,but why lob scuds into israel?...isn`t it obvious that we are joined at the hip with israel?....that a very large group of powerful,wealthy people in this country are jewish and have much influence regarding u.s. policy...don`t you think that our allegiance with israel has much to do with our terrorist problems?...we can debate that,but,it`s true....if we changed our policy,withdrew all our aid from israel and took a hardline stance favoring withdrawal of israeli settlements in the west bank and basically allied ourselves with the palestininian cause,i think terrorism would not be the problem it is today....if these arab madmen got their hands on a nuclear weapon,how far-fetched a scenario would it be to see one them end up obliterating israel?....obviously,when considering a man that gasses his own people and invades other countries on a regular basis,all bets are off.... anything is possible...
and,you have to look hard at the north korean issue to understand why we have to draw the line in iraq....we are pretty much hamstrung regarding north korea`s proliferation of nuclear weapons....why?....because they already have them....they now have leverage that saddaam doesn`t have...we can negotiate and hope...we can restrict or embargo goods coming to and from n korea....but,again we have the france`s of the world undermining us at every turn(yes,they are the ones that supplied iraq with the technology to build their first nuclear reactor that thankfully was destroyed) .....and thanks to the france`s and the germany`s,every despot in the world sees how toothless the u.n. is....
the cat`s out of the bag in north korea....do you plug the leak before it becomes a flood?....or do you sit by with your finger up ass and wait until someone obliterates our closest ally israel and we get drawn into a potential global conflict in which me might HAVE to go to war........oil isn`t the issue now,regardless of what some say....but in the scenario i laid out,oil might become the issue...
it`s a tough call....it`s a pay me now or pay me later scenario....nobody likes war....nobody knows how it will play out...or what the aftermath will yield...the world sat on their hands prior to world war 2.....now we are talking nuclear weapons......we aren`t war mongers....but our asses are in a sling....you saw what clinton`s treaty with n. korea yielded...they lied...now they have nuclear weapons...that`s what happens when you have a "pass the buck" president in the white house....i respect bush for hitting this thing head on...it has to be addressed in some manner...
if the troops weren`t there,would these missiles (that they allegedly did not have) be getting destroyed?.....hussein,by destroying these missiles,is caught in a lie... do you trust him?....we trusted n korea.....can the inspectors really cover a country the size of texas?....not likely....i admit,it`s a tough call...i`m glad i`m not making the decision....
i do know that sticking your head in the sand never solved any problems...
kosar said:
Removal of one of the biggest threats to world peace.
Removal of one of the largest financiers of terorism.
Elimination of evil dictatorship that tortures, starves, gases and murders hundreds of thousands of his own prople.
Liberation of the Iraqi people.
other then that, no much.
interesting posts from forums abroad:
Buy Iraq/Short Turkey
http://sg.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?ac...wargetridofbushorsaddam&sid=380539427&mid=754
Another one bites the dust.
http://sg.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?ac...wargetridofbushorsaddam&sid=380539427&mid=745
Buy Iraq/Short Turkey
http://sg.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?ac...wargetridofbushorsaddam&sid=380539427&mid=754
Another one bites the dust.
http://sg.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?ac...wargetridofbushorsaddam&sid=380539427&mid=745
Controlled media
Controlled media
Good post Gardenweasle..
I am not anti -jewish nor anti-palestinian..however there has never been an even-handed approach to that problem.....therein
lies a great deal of the problem.
Rarely a day goes by in the news media, papers, radio, idiot box,
that there is not mention of problems in Israel...bombing, killing,
riots, protests......what about the slaughters by rebels in Africa?
Phillipines? barely a ripple...who owns the media?? I mean who
really owns the media and controls what the american populace
is fed? It is almost a given that all reporting is horribly slanted
favorably to one group.....he who controls the media....
Controlled media
Good post Gardenweasle..
I am not anti -jewish nor anti-palestinian..however there has never been an even-handed approach to that problem.....therein
lies a great deal of the problem.
Rarely a day goes by in the news media, papers, radio, idiot box,
that there is not mention of problems in Israel...bombing, killing,
riots, protests......what about the slaughters by rebels in Africa?
Phillipines? barely a ripple...who owns the media?? I mean who
really owns the media and controls what the american populace
is fed? It is almost a given that all reporting is horribly slanted
favorably to one group.....he who controls the media....
aldabra what get's my A// with the media is the half truths we get. The other thing is there are many wonderful stories about people everday. Folks doing good things for others. We dont see much at all of this. They dont get the rating like war and killing, robbery, and so on. We must all like to sit around and watch the terror and killing. It gets best rating so it must be what our peace loving nation likes the most. We must be gulity its all they show us and no one complains. It's like those who go to the car race. They can't wait for the crash.
