Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Becoming Angry And Nervous  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2557 times:

The strategy was

- Quick & high tech clean war
- Saddam is impressed
- Army collapses
- Population revolts
- Liberators are greeted by cheers & flowers
- Go home and have a Victory Parade
- Make a laugh about France & forgive Russia, Germany & China
- Democracy has won & God continues to bless America.

Happening now :
- Islamic world is deeply pissed off, one of their biggest city's is bombed by a far away country as a pre-emptive measurement, live on TV.
- Saddam is on the TV accusing US/UK & preaching Jihad
- Army is not collapsed & puts up serious battles
- Population is scared & careful. In 1991 60.000 were murdered in the streets while Schwartzkopf was parading Victory in NY & CNN wasnt interested no more.. F16/F18s were flying overhead while hospitals were cleaned of wounded youngster by the Rev guards.
- Baghdad is an enormous city full of potential resistance. Getting in means man to man fights.

The world knew this wasnt going to be easy or clean. US population is silently starting asking themselves if they were misleaded by Government & Press.

Lets hope the war gets over quickly or there will only be loosers ....

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/liberation.html

Will public support be 70% in 2 weeks ? Want to put your own money on it ?



61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2515 times:

More Anti-War sh*t coming out of your mouth..

How about a few things that should be enough to warrant war..

1.) iraqi's mining their port, dont want humanitarian aid

2.) Oil for food program, the benefits are kept by the Senior leadership of Iraqi military

3.) Iraq has chemical weapons, what else explaisn the 30000 chemical suits and anti-dotes.

Maybe you dont remember 09/11.. maybe you'd like to take on the CIA, which has credible reason to believe, that giving these weapons in the hands of terrorist, WILL ultimately lead to the death of million of Americans/Canadians etc.

You dont see the need for war, but who said you were informed. You know 0.00000001% of what the CIA knows..... so you should shut your mouth.

The coalition troops after 7 days (7 days G*damit), the troops are literally occupying the better portion of Iraq. They are 70 miles out of Baghdad....

Watch Iraqi TV, and watch the propaganda coming out of their mouthes.... Ill bet you my left arm it was they who bombed a baghdad market.... its the not hte first time they do gruesome things..

Watch the tapes of the planes go into the WTC.... and then watch CNN last night, in a Iraqi palace they found a picture of two Iraqi's Airways planes going into buildings...

NO link with terrorism eh?

Gimme a break..

Mark


User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2515 times:

Lets hope the war gets over quickly or there will only be loosers ....
********************

Hmmmmmm......I would say that war itself only creates loosing sides, just some more than others since everyone looses in a war.

As for the link, I love that site.........he has a great sense of black humor.



Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
User currently offlineVoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2502 times:

`You dont see the need for war, but who said you were informed. You know 0.00000001% of what the CIA knows..... so you should shut your mouth.'
---------
Uhhh... CIA analysts have basically been against this war at this time...see this weeks New Yorker mag. Rumsfeld steamrollered this war into being against the advice of many.



` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
User currently offlineHomer71 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2254 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

I don't remember the US government saying they expect a quick clean war. I hear the media saying it...


"On spaceship earth there are no passengers...only crew."
User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2475 times:

"Uhhh... CIA analysts have basically been against this war at this time...see this weeks New Yorker mag. Rumsfeld steamrollered this war into being against the advice of many."

-Right.. thats why you see Tenet everyday in intelligence meetings..

ANd with these meetings in mind, there surely is very good reason to be concerned between the link Iraq/Al Qaeda... and if you still dont believe it, thats fine.... your simply in denial of what poses as potential serious consequences.

But your in Europe... you dont need to worry about it.

Mark


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2456 times:

Ill bet you my left arm it was they who bombed a baghdad market.... its the not hte first time they do gruesome things..

Right, even though the US military has admitted "it is a possibility" that friendly fire caused it?

Watch the tapes of the planes go into the WTC.... and then watch CNN last night, in a Iraqi palace they found a picture of two Iraqi's Airways planes going into buildings...

So, the only evidence they've come up with is.......a picture. That's it?


User currently offlineJetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

Right, even though the US military has admitted "it is a possibility" that friendly fire caused it?

777236ER, what does that have to do with anything? What he says is a possibility, too. What's your guess?

- Islamic world is deeply pissed off, one of their biggest city's is bombed by a far away country as a pre-emptive measurement, live on TV.

Is Kuwait not part of the Islamic world? What about Iraqi citizens? Hmmmm



"Shaddap you!"
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13767 posts, RR: 61
Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2426 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Fact: the U.S. is not acting alone, but in a coalition of over 30 nations.

Fact: the coalition did NOT need U.N. "permission" to act.

Fact: over 75% of Iraq is now occupied by coalition forces.

Fact: the coalition is taking great care to avoid civilian casualties.

Fact: the coalition is attempting to provide humanitarian aid.

Fact: the coalition is not "carpet-bombing," which is more effective in eradicating targets.

Fact: the coalition has no plans to "colonize" Iraq like an imperial power.

Fact: the coalition has taken great pains to save Iraqi oil fields for use by the Iraqi people.

Fact: evidence shows that Iraq had banned missiles, and probably has banned chemical weaponry.

Fact: the Iraqis are in violation of the Geneva Convention regarding treatment of prisoners of war

Fact: the coalition will either take Baghdad by force or lay siege to it until the government capitulates.

The coalition is committed to victory.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2404 times:

Is Kuwait not part of the Islamic world? joking right ? size/population ?

What about Iraqi citizens scared & careful

CIA was against war before it started, because they knew. Now they are doing their duty.


the troops are literally occupying the better portion of Iraq the desert.

Watch the tapes of the planes go into the WTC.... and then watch CNN last night, in a Iraqi palace they found a picture of two Iraqis Airways planes going into buildings... NO link with terrorism eh? Islamic children all over the world were drawing them. Were the f.ck have you been since 9-11 ?

CNN .. they do their patriotic duty these days.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/360530/

30 nations support
- pls take a good look at the list & see who is in & who is missing ..
- find out what this support means : basically not opposing openly, in many cases the population is against this war.


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2392 times:

"Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgement" - Michael Corleone

Dubya forget that one awhile ago.


User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

Fact: You did not post any facts  Smile




Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

FLYYUL:

"1.) iraqi's mining their port, dont want humanitarian aid.."

Well what would you do when your country is about to be invaded by foreign military? Place a big sign with 'Welcome American & British Invasion Forces; Stay As Long As You Like'?

"2.) Oil for food program, the benefits are kept by the Senior leadership of Iraqi military"

It is the UN that controls the revenues from the "Oil-For-Food" Program and it was the UN that decided how much of these revenues could be spend by Iraq on each item (humanitarian aid, compensation claims regarding Gulf War 1, UN Programme in Kurdish region and "UN administrative expenses).

"3.) Iraq has chemical weapons, what else explaisn the 30000 chemical suits and anti-dotes."

Your profile states you are a student. I sure hope you not taking a Law Degree, as your argumentation method is very poor, to say the least.

"Maybe you dont remember 09/11.. maybe you'd like to take on the CIA, which has credible reason to believe, that giving these weapons in the hands of terrorist, WILL ultimately lead to the death of million of Americans/Canadians etc."

'Maybe' you don't remember from whom Saddam obtained his Anthrax? 'Maybe' you don't remember where Osama bin Laden (remember him?) got his training? 'Maybe' you don't remember that the CIA's credibility regarding terrorism hasn't been to good, as they never saw 9/11 coming.

"You dont see the need for war, but who said you were informed. You know 0.00000001% of what the CIA knows..... so you should shut your mouth."

Ahh, the remarkable and ever so effective CIA! Tell me, how is it possible that the CIA, that according to you knows so much, never ever saw 9/11 coming, while other foreign security services, including the French, did know something major was about to happen? And how on earth is it possible that the director of the CIA on 9/11, Tenet, has not resigned over that 'misconception' nor has he been made to do so?

"The coalition troops after 7 days (7 days G*damit), the troops are literally occupying the better portion of Iraq. They are 70 miles out of Baghdad...."

The better portion of Iraq? It's a G*ddamn desert!

"Watch Iraqi TV, and watch the propaganda coming out of their mouthes...."

Of course, the US and Canadian media are 'completely different'!

"Ill bet you my left arm it was they who bombed a baghdad market.."

And how would you like your arm to be removed in case you lose your bet? By a cruise-missile?

"its the not hte first time they do gruesome things..."

Well, at least in that department the US and Iraq are equal.

"Watch the tapes of the planes go into the WTC..."

You actually have this on tape?

"...and then watch CNN last night, in a Iraqi palace they found a picture of two Iraqi's Airways planes going into buildings...

NO link with terrorism eh?

Gimme a break..
"

Like a said above, you would make a terrible lawyer.



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2369 times:

EA CO AS:

"Fact: the U.S. is not acting alone, but in a coalition of over 30 nations."

But it was the US, UK and Spain that were making the War on Iraq case at the UN Security Council.

"Fact: the coalition did NOT need U.N. "permission" to act."

It DID and it still DOES. Actually, it WILL need the UN Security Council, to rebuild Iraq, or do you want the US to pay for it all by itself?

"Fact: over 75% of Iraq is now occupied by coalition forces."

Of which about 95% is desert.

"Fact: the coalition is taking great care to avoid civilian casualties."

True, yet not starting this war in the first place would have given a much lower civilian death toll.

"Fact: the coalition is attempting to provide humanitarian aid."

Your argumentation is weird. To you, its a FACT they are ATTEMPTING to provide humanitarian aide. Anyway, they have been ATTEMPTING over the past couple of days. And as things look now, the must urgent aide needed is water as heavy battles have cut-off watersupply. IMO, the port on Umm Qasr is more of a military logistic interest, then to get humanitarian aide through. If the coalition is really that interested in getting the aide through, call for a cease fire and drop from the air.

"Fact: the coalition is not "carpet-bombing," which is more effective in eradicating targets."

Nuclear bombs are also very effective. It also solves the 'humanitarian aide' issue.

"Fact: the coalition has no plans to "colonize" Iraq like an imperial power."

Well, then why the heck did Tony Blair see Bush today? The US wants to establish a long term government in Iraq with an US assigned leader and does not want to involve the UN in this, something Blair is in favour of.

"Fact: the coalition has taken great pains to save Iraqi oil fields for use by the Iraqi people."

.... and to be sold by the Iraqi people to the US at a very attractive price for the US.

"Fact: evidence shows that Iraq had banned missiles, and probably has banned chemical weaponry."

How can you base a FACT on an ASSUMPTION? As a 'Standup philosopher' you state you are, my guess is your adiences are always very small. The FACT is, that up until today, no banned missiles have been used in this war, nor has any chemical or biological weaponry been found.

"Fact: the Iraqis are in violation of the Geneva Convention regarding treatment of prisoners of war"

And the Coalition Forces are not? And the US is not regarding Guantanamo?

"Fact: the coalition will either take Baghdad by force or lay siege to it until the government capitulates."

How can you base a fact on something that hasn't happened yet? Do you have a crystal ball?

"The coalition is committed to victory."

Well that's the whole point of this war isn't it? Why else even begin a war if you're not committed to victory. It's a nice sounding phrase, but it doesn't say anything.



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineVafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2356 times:

Baghdad-A city which has stood ground for well over 20 centuries (I don't know EXACTLY how long it's been there for) yet, it's been mentioned in the Bible and is a VERY important Arab City, and look what the US and the Coalition which is really only 4 Nations because they are the ones sending troops to aimlessly bomb the great city.

This is the bit of info I know many of your heads will not absorb: Iraqi civillians AND SOLDIERS are against Sadaam's rule and yet are agains a foreign country telling them what to do or how to act and what kind of Government to put up.

Also, we ARE taking over the country, conquering it; while just the other day a US soldier took down an Iraqi Flag (I think it might have been in Basra) on a Government building that has just been *Liberated* and put up the Marines Flag and the USA flag.

How is that not saying that this is our country now?



I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13767 posts, RR: 61
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2354 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Fact: You did not post any facts

Is that the best you could come up with, Marcus?  Insane

Then again, it's hard to deny factual information though...so I guess your reply is the best anyone could possibly muster.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2354 times:

But it was the US, UK and Spain that were making the War on Iraq case at the UN Security Council.

What's your point? It was the US, UK, and Spain physically present at the UN, but with many countries supporting us.

It DID and it still DOES.

Oh really? Then why are we already a week into the war?

Of which about 95% is desert.

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

True, yet not starting this war in the first place would have given a much lower civilian death toll.

How did you come to that? You're not ignoring over 2 million civilians that have died under Saddam, are you? Leaving Saddam in for another 1/2 a year would cost a lot more civilian deaths then the effort to stop the murdering would.

Those people are starving, and Saddam doesn't care. If anyone revolts against him, that means death or gassing to their town.

Do you really think that the US and UK are not doing their very best to stop civilian casualties?

Like I've said before:

What do you think everything going on in Iraq is? That's right, the whole strategy on this war is to save civilians from their terrorist leader. Think about it, we could have Baghdad layered in about an hour with several bombers just completely carpet bombing the city and so forth, instead of almost completely using smart bombs. We are evening using smart bombs on our B52s. Actually, all we would have to do if we didn't in fact care about civilians, is press one button, and the whole thing would be over in less than a minute............without a single US or Allied Soldier lost.

So, go ahead again and tell me that leaving Saddam in power would cause less civilian deaths than this war. Ignore the facts Saddam lover.  Insane




-NWA742


User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2349 times:

just the other day a US soldier took down an Iraqi Flag (I think it might have been in Basra) on a Government building that has just been *Liberated* and put up the Marines Flag and the USA flag.

Vafi, if you would've read the whole story about that, you might not be so worked up about it.

As it turns how, some guy did pull down the Iraqi flag, and put a US flag in place of it, but less than a minute later, everyone else in that squad came up to the guy, explained that they were there to liberate the people, not to annex the country, and they immediately put the Iraqi flag back up.




-NWA742


User currently offlineErj190 From Portugal, joined Dec 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2336 times:

I usually don't do this. But this post was so sickening that I really had to do it.
Sorry for the inconvenience. Post got too long.

"...Fact: the U.S. is not acting alone, but in a coalition of over 30 nations..."
It's just a pity than on those nations the public opinions are against war. From the 30 nations only the UK, the Czech Republic and Poland have ground troops. Poland has 200 and the Czechs some 40.

I suppose Bessarabia Transilvania count as allies. The powerful armies of Salvador, Eritrea, Tonga and Where-the-heck-is-that Republic are also valuable assets for the coalition ... Give me a break.  Smile

"...Fact: the coalition did NOT need U.N. "Permission" to act..."
Of course not. A murderer does not need the law to allow him to kill does he?

"...Fact: over 75% of Iraq is now occupied by coalition forces..."
That one must come from FOX. The US controls 100% of the air space.
The US controls about 12% to 15% of the territory and from 2 to 3% of the population. Important to say that the Iraqi government controls roughly 30% of the territory, and some 75% of the population. The remaining being deserts and the Kurdistan areas. Please look at the maps.


"...Fact: the coalition is taking great care to avoid civilian casualties..."
That is something of a discussion. The last time I heard they were targeting civilians taking their hearts "literally" 17 where "Liberated" yesterday.

"...Fact: the coalition is attempting to provide humanitarian aid..."
Up to now, it was propaganda, but even that propaganda was a disaster. They were so efficient that the whole world saw a riot, where the strong got all the food. (suppose that's the American way)

"...Fact: the coalition is not "carpet-bombing," which is more effective in eradicating targets..."
This is true (at least until now) because if things go wrong for the Nazi-like guys in Washington, they will find some credible reason to nuke Iraq if needed.


"...Fact: the coalition has no plans to "colonize" Iraq like an imperial power..."
L.O.L. Ask the vice president what he thinks about all the contracts signed even before September 11. The American Nazi-like elements want Iraq BAD!!!
And BTW, you seem to be very well informed about the US plans of colonization - I don't think Heirich Rumsfeld is going to like that. You'd better be carefully. They are going to start making you offers you can't refuse.

"...Fact: the coalition has taken great pains to save Iraqi oil fields for use by the Iraqi people..."
OHHHH I AM SURE THEY WILL they will take far greater pain to save the oil fields than to save lives, after all, those Muslims are just stealing American oil which just spilled to under their deserts.

"...Fact: evidence shows that Iraq had banned missiles, and probably has banned chemical weaponry..."
You may believe it. But I don't think anybody believes that.



"...Fact: the Iraqis are in violation of the Geneva Convention regarding treatment of prisoners of war..."
AS the Americans, which where the first to show war prisoners being humiliated, with guns pointed to their heads, forced to hit the dirt and beaten LIVE on American TV - But of course Arabs are just scum, they can be humiliated, after all, the show must go on and six o'clock news needs those pictures. Double standards again and again, it's sickening.


"...Fact: the coalition will either take Baghdad by force or lay siege to it until the government capitulates..."
that's true, no matter how many Iraqis are killed (I mean LIBERATED)


"The coalition is committed to victory."
Sure it is, As much committed to victory as Mr. Bush is committed to win a re-election, Mr. Cheney is committed to squeeze everything he can from Iraq, and Mr. Rumsfeld is commited to killed as many Iraqis as needed to help his sick Ego.


[Edited 2003-03-28 02:36:40]

User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

NWA742:

"What's your point? It was the US, UK, and Spain physically present at the UN, but with many countries supporting us."

But many of those countries were not represented at the UNSC and could therefore not support a 2nd resolution.

"Oh really? Then why are we already a week into the war?"

Because the US, UK and Spain said: "fuck the UN, fuck the rest of the World, we're gonna' do it anyway".

"What the hell does that have to do with anything?"

You stated the Coalition Forces have already occupied 75% of Iraq. 95% of that portion is desert. If you want a regime change, even occupying 99% will not achieve your goal as long as you haven't occupied Baghdad.

"How did you come to that? You're not ignoring over 2 million civilians that have died under Saddam, are you? Leaving Saddam in for another 1/2 a year would cost a lot more civilian deaths then the effort to stop the murdering would."

No, I am not ignoring the Iraqi people. In fact, neither has the UN Security Council over these past 12 years, as many members such as France and Russia tried over and over again to change the sanctions to something less hard on the Iraqi people, but the US and the UK, over and over again, opposed. Why do you think the Iraqis are not receiving the Coalition Forces as Liberators? They know very well it was the US and the UK that always pressed hard at the UNSC for maintaining the sanctions. And don't give me any bullsh!t saying Saddam is to blame for the sanctions, as Saddam had proven well before the santions he didn't give a shit about his own people. If you want to place sanctions on a regime, place it on the regime, not on the people the regime oppreses!

"Do you really think that the US and UK are not doing their very best to stop civilian casualties?"

The ONLY way to avoid civilian casualties, or ANY casualties, either Iraqi or Coalition Forces, would have been NOT starting this war.

"That's right, the whole strategy on this war is to save civilians from their terrorist leader."

Do you work for Fox News, or what? Terrorist leader you state, while I am still waiting to see ANY direct link between ANY terrorist organization and Saddam Hussein.

"So, go ahead again and tell me that leaving Saddam in power would cause less civilian deaths than this war. Ignore the facts Saddam lover."

Oh my God, here we go again. The FACT that I am AGAINST this war does NOT mean I am a 'Saddam lover'. Maybe in your simplistic way of thinking it does, but normal people in the rest of the world have actually achieved 'logical thinking' ages ago and have overcome making 'stone-age' assumptions like yours.



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2316 times:

But many of those countries were not represented at the UNSC and could therefore not support a 2nd resolution.

True, but what's your point?

Because the US, UK and Spain said: "fuck the UN, fuck the rest of the World, we're gonna' do it anyway".

Bullshit. The US, UK, and Spain said: "fine, you guys still can't agree that Saddam is a lunatic who needs to be removed from power, that's ok, we'll do it ourselves, without your help, be that way."

Also "the rest of the world", how do you figure that?

You stated the Coalition Forces have already occupied 75% of Iraq. 95% of that portion is desert. If you want a regime change, even occupying 99% will not achieve your goal as long as you haven't occupied Baghdad.

It doesn't matter if it's all almost desert, it's still a part of Iraq in which they tried to hold us back, and failed miserably, that's the whole point.

No, I am not ignoring the Iraqi people. In fact, neither has the UN Security Council over these past 12 years, as many members such as France and Russia tried over and over again to change the sanctions to something less hard on the Iraqi people, but the US and the UK, over and over again, opposed. Why do you think the Iraqis are not receiving the Coalition Forces as Liberators? They know very well it was the US and the UK that always pressed hard at the UNSC for maintaining the sanctions. And don't give me any bullsh!t saying Saddam is to blame for the sanctions, as Saddam had proven well before the santions he didn't give a shit about his own people. If you want to place sanctions on a regime, place it on the regime, not on the people the regime oppreses!

Yes, you are ignoring the Iraqi people. By saying that less civlians would die by leaving Saddam in power proves that.

Also, you just contradicted yourself. You say that war is not the right choice, even when EVERYONE has been trying to help the Iraqi people without military force, for 12 years!

The ONLY way to avoid civilian casualties, or ANY casualties, either Iraqi or Coalition Forces, would have been NOT starting this war.

COMPLETE BULLSHIT Schoenorama! Even in the few weeks before this war started, Iraqi people were still being slaughtered for opposing Saddam, and while others weren't opposing, they were starving anyways! Would you guess that, had this war not started, that Saddam would suddenly stop the murdering, and resign? Bullshit and nothing else

You really think that leaving Saddam in power will prevent civilian casualties? What the hell is the matter with you? Open your eyes and use your head!

Terrorist leader you state, while I am still waiting to see ANY direct link between ANY terrorist organization and Saddam Hussein.

You don't remember when Saddam was bragging about paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers?

Also, it's been confirmed that some Al Qaeda soldiers FIGHTING FOR SADDAM were captured by British troops.

Oh my God, here we go again. The FACT that I am AGAINST this war does NOT mean I am a 'Saddam lover'.

I'm not saying that you're a Saddam because you simply oppose the war. It's for a number of reasons; you refuse to face facts about this war, you say that civilian casualties would be prevented by leaving Saddam in power, and you continuously stab at the US/UK instead of Saddam, who is the real cause of this war.




-NWA742


User currently offline9V-SVE From Singapore, joined Nov 2001, 2066 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2309 times:

"Also, it's been confirmed that some Al Qaeda soldiers FIGHTING FOR SADDAM were captured by British troops."

Well, were they fighting on their own free will or were they ordered by Bin Laden?


User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2306 times:

Well, were they fighting on their own free will or were they ordered by Bin Laden?

I don't know that.

But I think the thing that matters most on this subject of war with Iraq is that these terrorists were fighting FOR SADDAM in the first place.

If they were ordered by OBL, then that could mean he has ties with Saddam. If they are acting at their own will, they're still fighting under Saddam. I don't see why they would fight for someone who wouldn't be an ally to them.




-NWA742


User currently offline9V-SVE From Singapore, joined Nov 2001, 2066 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2305 times:

"If they were ordered by OBL, then that could mean he has ties with Saddam. If they are acting at their own will, they're still fighting under Saddam. I don't see why they would fight for someone who wouldn't be an ally to them."

Doesn't have to be. OBL & SH are enemies, but OBL loves fighting the US, so he dispatches troops to fight the US. Doesnt matter if its in Saddam-land.


User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2299 times:

OBL & SH are enemies

How the heck would you know that, 9V-SVA?

but OBL loves fighting the US, so he dispatches troops to fight the US. Doesnt matter if its in Saddam-land.

I see where you're coming from. He could simply dispatch troops to fight for the US, but these guys were fighting under Saddam. They weren't "doing their own thing", so to speak.



-NWA742


25 Airplay : 3.) Iraq has chemical weapons, what else explaisn the 30000 chemical suits and anti-dotes. What a silly statement. The US troops have defenses against
26 9V-SVA : How the heck would you know that, 9V-SVA? I know because it has been reported in the press that OBL hates SH as he does not like SH's extravagant life
27 9V-SVE : "I see where you're coming from. He could simply dispatch troops to fight for the US, but these guys were fighting under Saddam. They weren't "doing t
28 Schoenorama : "OBL & SH are enemies How the heck would you know that, 9V-SVA? " Because HISTORY has told us. Saddam is a dictator that wants all the power for himse
29 Post contains images NWA742 : I know because it has been reported in the press that OBL hates SH as he does not like SH's extravagant lifestyle. Do you have any sources or proof of
30 NWA742 : Because HISTORY has told us. Wait a minute, history tells you all that, but it doesn't tell you that leaving Saddam in power would cost more civlian l
31 9V-SVE : "Oh really? So I guess that's why they were in Iraq fighting with Iraqi troops." And...whats your point?
32 NWA742 : And...whats your point? Truely sad.............yet not surprising. You still don't get my point? These AL-QAEDA soldiers were fighting ALONG SIDE the
33 9V-SVA : Do you have any sources or proof of this? Also, are you going actually to believe Saddam? As long as I read it in the press and have heard about it, t
34 9V-SVE : "Truely sad.............yet not surprising. You still don't get my point? These AL-QAEDA soldiers were fighting ALONG SIDE the IRAQI troops. Let's mak
35 Post contains images NWA742 : As long as I read it in the press and have heard about it, that is SUFFICE. Here's a small bit of advice for a young man like you, don't believe every
36 9V-SVA : Come on guys, one more chance for you to come up with any logical arguments, or I'm simply ignoring this thread. By all means, NWA742. Noone asked you
37 NWA742 : By all means, NWA742. Noone asked you to put your foot into this thread in the first place. Noone can stop you. Don't read this if you don't want to.
38 Schoenorama : NWA742: "Wait a minute, history tells you all that, but it doesn't tell you that leaving Saddam in power would cost more civlian lives than this war w
39 Alpha 1 : OBL is an Islamic Fundamentalist that wants a better world for his people. One of the most ignorant, assinine statements EVER put on Non-Av. Schoenera
40 Thumper : Because the US, UK and Spain said: "fuck the UN, fuck the rest of the World, we're gonna' do it anyway". My,My,My, Schoenorama such language."No, actu
41 Post contains images FLYYUL : Schoenorama, So im a student, who is many social/current affairs club, taken many political science classes.. The facts are the facts... what you may
42 Yyz717 : The problem with the UN, is that they talk, talk, talk, then they talk some more, they talk again.. We live in a world, where diplomacy almost gets no
43 Post contains images FLYYUL : Absolutely.. And how can one deny such a thing? 14 resolutions/12 years... the situation remains, and in any minute, some fundamentalist can bomb down
44 Post contains images FLYYUL : Another point.. What is the point of the hundred's on palaces Saddam built in the last 10 years? Latest news suggest many civilians have been shot by
45 NormalSpeed : Looks like another hockey game broke out, Alpha! Anyway, just for the record, Bush is becoming neither angry nor nervous. If there was any expectation
46 FLYYUL : Hey I take Hockey over Baseball anyday... Seriously while I love baseball (I go to at least 20 Expos games a year).. it is nowhere near as exciting as
47 Yyz717 : While the UN talked and talked.......genocide was happening in Rwanda. While the UN talked and talked.......ethnic cleansing was happening in Kosovo.
48 Post contains images EA CO AS : OBL is an Islamic Fundamentalist that wants a better world for his people. Which is like saying Hitler was a wacky guy with nutty ideas. While the UN
49 Schoenorama : Alpha 1: "One of the most ignorant, assinine statements EVER put on Non-Av. Schoenerama, where do you come up with garbage like this?" You once again
50 Krushny : And the fact that still today, 8 days in the Iraq war, there STILL is NO EVIDENCE Iraq has links with ANY terrorist organization, doesn't bother you?
51 Post contains images FLYYUL : "Don't you agree that the CIA has lost much of its credibility when prior to 9/11 it completely failed to see a major attack on US soil was about to h
52 Thumper : "Humanitarian aid was coming into the country but it sure wasn't going to the people. Saddam was taking it ,building his military and feeding his goon
53 Schoenorama : FLYYUL: "Don't you agree that the CIA has lost much of its credibility when prior to 9/11 it completely failed to see a major attack on US soil was ab
54 FLYYUL : THEY WERE DOING THEIR JOB. Like everybody else, the level to which they thoughtthat they could inflict harm on the United States homeland, was downpla
55 Schoenorama : FLYYUL: "THEY WERE DOING THEIR JOB. Like everybody else, the level to which they thoughtthat they could inflict harm on the United States homeland, wa
56 Airplay : While the UN talked and talked.......genocide was happening in Rwanda. While the UN talked and talked.......ethnic cleansing was happening in Kosovo.
57 Yyz717 : So why didn't anyone just bypass the UN and go save those people? NATO bombed Serbia to stop the ethnic cleansing. This did not have UN support and ap
58 Post contains links Schoenorama : Airplay: "While the UN talked and talked.......genocide was happening in Rwanda. While the UN talked and talked.......ethnic cleansing was happening i
59 Post contains links Aerosol : well, here is site that offers some interesting stuff about this war. It tries to highlight manipulation and false information issued by the governmen
60 Yyz717 : Don't get smug Schoenarama with the above evidence. ALL permanent members of the Security Council have used their veto liberally. ....and whatever the
61 Schoenorama : "Don't get smug Schoenarama with the above evidence. ALL permanent members of the Security Council have used their veto liberally." But don't you thin
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Bush Poll/Then And Now posted Fri Aug 12 2005 00:35:25 by Blackbird1331
Is Bush Becoming A Lame Duck President? posted Fri Jun 24 2005 05:52:24 by Alberchico
Bush And Blair Needs Ahmadinejad posted Thu Nov 16 2006 14:51:00 by Cedars747
President Bush's Speech On Saddam And Iraq posted Sun Nov 5 2006 17:12:01 by AerospaceFan
Help: Scrambled Words And Getting Nervous Easily posted Mon Jul 3 2006 16:40:11 by KLM672
Who Are USA And Bush Closest Allies In Europe? posted Sat Jun 24 2006 01:54:39 by Koper
Bush And Rove's Pathetic Maneuver posted Tue Jun 6 2006 01:15:24 by Texdravid
President Bush And J-Mac posted Wed Mar 15 2006 03:00:51 by LHMARK
Bush and news regarding Katrina posted Thu Mar 2 2006 00:11:39 by BN747
G. Bush, Bono And The Pope Sing U2... Hilarious! posted Mon Dec 5 2005 13:15:20 by Birdwatching