|
yo guys, in case you did not realise considering you've been wasting the time of your life concentrating on this game, accepting it as YOUR sole purpose in life.. (knock knock) :buttrock:
but we have a problem intensifying on this planet which will decide your fate! ok world hysteria has begun.. the war on iraq is definite and drawing near! millions of innocent people will die.. not just in iraq but also in america! pretty soon, the whole world and since there are many parts of the world of tremendous rows over land and fighting between creeds.. the world has changed and its time we prepare for this ugly change! whats your opinion about this world disorder? how do you propose to support the prevention of this war if you want to prevent it. seeya guys! |
um.......... u got issues..we know about that already.....anyway.....
|
lol i dont mean to be a preacher hear but this wuz all prophosized in the bible.... ;)
|
[quote:post_uid0="akuma_forever"]lol i dont mean to be a preacher hear but this wuz all prophosized in the bible.... ;)[/quote]
Um...no it wasnt. People also thought that the bible predicted 9/11. People also thought the bible predicted the assassination of JFK. It's a bunch of faulty statements which are misinterpreted and altered to fit the context of the moment. They did the same thing with 9/11 and the bible, they did it with 9/11 and Nostradamas, and they're doing the same thing here. The bible is nothing but a 2000-year-old fairytale. And Americans will only die if we don't nuke Sadaam first. Just recently UN weapons inspectors discovered eleven empty warhead casings for chemical bombs. My question is if the warheads are empty, where are the goddamn chemicals?! Also, chemcial and biological warfare is far deadlier than any nuke we can develop. A nuke only affects a specific area: i THINK it's a blast diameter of about a mile in diameter, and the radiation and fallout goes for many miles past that. Biological and chemical weapons can release substances that can kill off my entire tri-state area and be spread via wind, water, and other elements across the entire country. Let's face it, boys and girls: World War III is upon us. I hate to be the harbinger of doom, but I seriously doubt that the world will live another fifty years, max. All thanks to that frigging psycho bastard Sadaam Hussein |
this is all because of bush. he's just getting on saddam case cause daddy couldnt finish his work. i starting to think that the election was rigged, gore should of been pres. i just hope someone or something could end this dispute.
|
You guys do realize why the US is chosing to go after Iraq and not North Korea don't you?
Lets see here... a supposed war on terrorism to stop nations that might be supplying terrorist with weapons... Here's what we know: - Iraq might be giving their weapons away to terrorists - North Korea is giving their weapons away to terrorists - Iraq might have a nuclear weapons facility - North Korea already started up their nuclear weapons facilities a while ago - Iraq has no ability for long-distance attacks - North Korea is predicted to be able to hit California, and a possibility of a global nuclear-launching ability So in other words... - Iraq is NOT a threat - North Korea is a big threat Why is the US negotiating with North Korea and not with Iraq? Well... it's because of one simple fact... The US can get away with it. Wheras with North Korea... they've got a million troops and missles a little more far advanced then scud missles. Bottom line.. if/when the US goes to war with Sadaam Hussein, Iraq won't be the real danger. (and the US is avoiding any and all possibilities of a real war). |
[quote:post_uid0="SolidSnake76"]this is all because of bush. he's just getting on saddam case cause daddy couldnt finish his work. i starting to think that the election was rigged, gore should of been pres. i just hope someone or something could end this dispute.[/quote]
Gore? You gotta be $hitting me. Gore wouldn't do jack $hit. He'd ask Sadaam to apologize and send him a copy of his book on how to save trees. And he's not getting on Saddam's case becasue "daddy couldn't finish his job." He's getting Saddam's case because Saddam is acting up again. Look at it this way: Back in '91, Saddam signed a treaty that would allow UN inspectors into Iraq. Suddenly, he won't let them in. This is a clear violation if the treaty, and it obviously means he's got something hidden that he doesn't want the UN to find. He's obviously hiding weapons...and the discovery of the warheads further suggests this. The fcuking bastard is up to something, and if we don't strike first, he will. It's that simple. We shoulda killed the fcuking cuntrag back in '91 |
Ahh, I thought this was a game when I clicked on the topic. Oh well..
|
EVERYBODY PANIK!!!!!!!!!!
|
coolplayer. this is NOT the sort of topic to joke in... :plain:
i'm actully becomeing a bit scared. cause i live in england, and america and england are allies. so if you involved, were involved. and i wish i could go to war, but i'm still to young... (you think i'm joking about that? no i'm not. i'm willing to risk my life for my family and country, cause i got relatives in florida... and they are close to the coast... :() |
[quote:post_uid0="Nantuko Joe"]Back in '91, Saddam signed a treaty that would allow UN inspectors into Iraq. Suddenly, he won't let them in. This is a clear violation if the treaty, and it obviously means he's got something hidden that he doesn't want the UN to find. He's obviously hiding weapons...and the discovery of the warheads further suggests this.
The fcuking bastard is up to something, and if we don't strike first, he will. It's that simple. We shoulda killed the fcuking cuntrag back in '91[/quote] You really buy that ####? Lol... Bush's reasons for doing this? I dunno... probably oil and/or to look good in the media. But make no mistake, politicians (including Bush), do not act upon their moral obligations (ie: "war on terrorism bs"). Nor do they give a #### if people break treaties... The only reason they'd care about that is if they had a damn good reason for wanting them to comply with these old terms.. in this case, to look good in the media and possibly oil. If you remember, oil was the reason the US defended Kuaite. You know Saadam allowed UN inspectors into the country and "complied" with US demand, right? That proves one simple thing... he's not going to strike first, and never intends to. He's in power because he wasn't stupid enough to go all out on the US in '91, and in fact wouldn't have invaded Kuaite if he'd known the US would retaliate. Right now, he's been trying to talk his way out of it... because he doesn't want to fight the US. Saadam's not stupid, he wants to stay in power. |
[quote:post_uid0="2000warrior"][quote:post_uid0="Nantuko Joe"]Back in '91, Saddam signed a treaty that would allow UN inspectors into Iraq. Suddenly, he won't let them in. This is a clear violation if the treaty, and it obviously means he's got something hidden that he doesn't want the UN to find. He's obviously hiding weapons...and the discovery of the warheads further suggests this.
The fcuking bastard is up to something, and if we don't strike first, he will. It's that simple. We shoulda killed the fcuking cuntrag back in '91[/quote] You really buy that ####? Lol... Bush's reasons for doing this? I dunno... probably oil and/or to look good in the media. But make no mistake, politicians (including Bush), do not act upon their moral obligations (ie: "war on terrorism bs"). Nor do they give a #### if people break treaties... The only reason they'd care about that is if they had a damn good reason for wanting them to comply with these old terms.. in this case, to look good in the media and possibly oil. If you remember, oil was the reason the US defended Kuaite. You know Saadam allowed UN inspectors into the country and "complied" with US demand, right? That proves one simple thing... he's not going to strike first, and never intends to. He's in power because he wasn't stupid enough to go all out on the US in '91, and in fact wouldn't have invaded Kuaite if he'd known the US would retaliate. Right now, he's been trying to talk his way out of it... because he doesn't want to fight the US. Saadam's not stupid, he wants to stay in power.[/quote] When the bastard's breaking of treaties threatens America and its allies..then yes, he DOES care about breaking treaties. And you seriously think they're doing this for oil or media popularity? You make me sick. WE'VE GOT A PSYCHOTIC DICTATOR WITH CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS WHO CAN THREATEN THE WORLD, AND YOU THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF "MEDIA"? and what the hell do you mean "war on terrorism bs"? IT'S NOT BS! The motherfcukers attacked our country, and you think that he's not seriously trying to get back at them? dubya tee eff is with that? And the US defended Kuwait because of oil...BECAUSE THE PSYCHO FCUKER SADDAM SET THE FIELDS ON FIRE!! BECAUSE THE MIDEAST IS PRETTY MUCH THE WORLD'S ONLY SUPPLIER FOR OIL, AND IF HE CONTROLLED THE WORLD'S OIL SUPPLY, HE'D PRETTY MUCH BE CONTROLLING THE WORLD ITSELF! And yer right about one thing...he doesn't want to "fight' the US. He wants to bomb us so we don't have a chance to strike back with full force. For nine years the bastard complied with UN officials. Why suddenly deny them access to Iraq? He's OBVIOUSLY hiding something in the country...someting he doesn't want us to discover. He only "let" us back in when he had cleaned it up...or thought he did...which is why we found the warheads. But to think our government is pulling this "act" for money or media...is just plain fcuked up. Sure, the US government is corrupt, and fcuked up, but it's not THAT fcuked up. Yer post makes me sick...it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. How could you say that about the US? |
#### this war. #### president bush.
Why the #### does america always gotta be involved in something? I dont support this or any war. All this war is about is controling the oil fields in iraq. Bush doesnt give a #### about any of us. If we get attacked, he gets to safely be up in air force one or some high security base while everyone is getting killed. I think this is gonna start up world war 3 or some ####. F U C K WHAT YOU HEARD |
stupid americans, the recent crap just pisses me off more.
why the #### do you think almost every part of the world is protesting against war? you think they're retards? they all know exactly the kind of fliped up game that U.S. is playing. and #### it man, if U.S. had proof that iraq had weapons of mass destruction why haven't they let it out yet? protect their sources? if the proof were good enough in the first place, then their sources wouldn't need protecting. americans(mainly that retard named bush)=igonorant bastards who are worse than the iraqis. because they just don't care about "peace". they only care about the oil from iraq. why the #### do you think the U.S. doesn't attack North Korea for having all this nuclear ####? why do you think the U.S. is ignoring them while they talk all this #### about the U.S.? it's cause the U.S. would gain NOTHING from attacking north korea. no oil, no resources, no power, no nothing. and the U.S. has to sacrifice more resources for a war on North Korea because they have an obligation to supply the ppl in North Korea with food. it's good for their image. bullpoop americans, die die die :angryfire: :angryfire: :angryfire: |
and now he's starting to raise suspicsions on saudi arabia. such a jackass.
the US is very friendly with saudi arabia. why? its is the country with the most oil. if we go to war against them, i dont know what congress is gonna do but we cant afford it. and dont say 'we can just drill in alaska'. those environmentalist are trying to stop congress from doing so. and if we go to war with iraq and take over, he will level his oil fields as an act of vengance. then what? problem is the US gets into too many global affairs. |
[quote:post_uid0="princevegetam"]stupid americans, the recent crap just pisses me off more.
why the #### do you think almost every part of the world is protesting against war? you think they're retards? they all know exactly the kind of fliped up game that U.S. is playing. and #### it man, if U.S. had proof that iraq had weapons of mass destruction why haven't they let it out yet? protect their sources? if the proof were good enough in the first place, then their sources wouldn't need protecting. americans(mainly that retard named bush)=igonorant bastards who are worse than the iraqis. because they just don't care about "peace". they only care about the oil from iraq. why the #### do you think the U.S. doesn't attack North Korea for having all this nuclear ####? why do you think the U.S. is ignoring them while they talk all this #### about the U.S.? it's cause the U.S. would gain NOTHING from attacking north korea. no oil, no resources, no power, no nothing. and the U.S. has to sacrifice more resources for a war on North Korea because they have an obligation to supply the ppl in North Korea with food. it's good for their image. bullpoop americans, die die die :angryfire: :angryfire: :angryfire:[/quote] whoa whoa whoa. its not all of us..... Its these faggots that are currently in power. There is no minority that i know of that supports this war. |
That is enough! We don't need a war inside the forums, Nantuko, Vegetam, 2000warrior.
|
[quote:post_uid6="Yasback"][/quote:post_uid6]
craza...... |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
just read the bible for goodness sake ??? all of us are going to hell anyway :angryfire:
and for me........im going to hell with gasoline in my draws :angryfire: :laughlong: :laughlong: |
you are a true american.
the US aint the bad guys, but what i saying is that they should let the UN handle their business unless they ask for help. the US may be trying to keep world peace but like a bunch of countries around the world hates the US. with that incident in china involving the spy plane and fighter jet, china probaly hates the US too. |
:( Yes the bible prophoseis r coming true as we speak for instance examples:
1.first clone baby was born 2.euro money had already started 3.666 type of coding has been ilustrated on dogs @the stated (or some parts) 4.were gonna have a big ass war soon (world war3 posibily) 5.And te fact that some states r actually trying to take the( in god we trust) sign off the dollars and cions. e.t.c ps:i sugest u shouid read the bible more often maybe the last chapter of the bible which will tell u wut is going to happn real soon!! |
Ok children you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. I have researched this topic for over a year now, and have written several papers on it. The fact of the matter is all you peaceniks are hypocrites because Saddam is the antithesis of peace. He has slaughtered over 1.5 million of his own people(women and children included), some of which he tested his chem and bio weapons. He sponsors terrorism much like the Taliban did and openly praised the Sept 11 attacks. He is a terrorist, we suspect ties to 9/11 and the recent Ricin arrests in England. He tried to assassinate President Bush Sr. in 1993, this is a fact and Clinton bombed his ass for it, we should have gone back to war with him then.
Now back to the matter at hand. Weapon inspections are a friggin joke and Saddam knows it. How can you expect a few people driving around in SUVs in a country the size of California to find chemicals that can fit in a shoebox. The concept is ridiculous. We KNOW he has weapons. We KNEW in 1998. We SAW them in 1998 and we're about to dismantle them when he kicked us out violating a UN treaty. Clinton did nothing except launch 70 or so tomahawks. Saddam laughed again. Now what happened to these weapons we SAW in 1998? Well if he destroyed them he could show us remnants. If he sold them he could show us transaction papers. They sure as hell didn't magically disappear. So the conclusion is he has them. Now you may ask WHY attack Saddam? Well we would be helping the Iraqi people first off. Also to protect the region and Western civilation. He sponsors terrorism against the US, Engliand, Israel and more. He was and probably still is paying Palestinian families 25,000$ to sucide bomb Israel. Once he gets nukes he will hold the region hostage and claim all the oil for himself. He will threaten to nuke Israel or Kuwait if his demands aren't met. He will sell weapons to bin Laden. He will slaughter the Kurds up north and the Shi'ites down south, performing an ethnic cleansing of his country as it were, probably with nukes. He willa lmost definately invade Kuwait for its oil and possibly Iran. He is a mad man and must be removed to ensure the saftey of the free world and stabilit in the region. If we don't act now thousands, maybe millions, more lives will be lost in the future. |
Also I'm not saying peace is a bad thing but realistically speaking peace is a fairy tale. As long as two people disagree there will be discord and strife. And sometimes you have to make war to make better peace in the long run.
Also this whole matter does effect me DIRECTLY. I am enlisted in the Army so I of all people do want a peaceful solution but it doesn't look like that is going to happen. I am looking at the matter realistically, and I would be willing to fight in Iraq to remove Saddam if it comes down to that. I remember Sept 11 all too well. |
Well said, Finn...well said...
|
[quote:post_uid0="Nantuko Joe"]Um...no it wasnt. People also thought that the bible predicted 9/11. People also thought the bible predicted the assassination of JFK. It's a bunch of faulty statements which are misinterpreted and altered to fit the context of the moment. They did the same thing with 9/11 and the bible, they did it with 9/11 and Nostradamas, and they're doing the same thing here. The bible is nothing but a 2000-year-old fairytale.[/quote]
Well, it isn't specifically WRONG, either. Think Nostradamus. He made enough predictions that he had to get a few right. The bible also VAGUELY describes events before the Apocalypse (book of Revalations if I'm not mistakened). Oh, and the world won't end. If Saddam uses chemical weapons or nukes on any of our troops, the entire world'll look away if we drop a couple of hydrogen bombs on Baghdad. Also, Iraq's weapons aren't exactly ICBMs. They don't have intercontinental range. Hell, he has trouble hitting our ships out in the ocean, and they aren't that far away. The world isn't going to end. Perhaps just a small part of it will be annihilated, but it won't end. |
BE REALISTIC... WORLD WAR III !?!
no way... why ? because us CANADADIAN are refusing right now ! the US have been asked us and try to make us ENTER in the war just because we are allied with them ! first minister CHRETIEN said... :"i refuse to let my country enter into war just because were allied, its unconcievable !" so knowing that... canada won't go in war ! second: the big bad FRENCH country's did the very same and refuse to get involve in this stupid war. you see, a WORLD WAR II is possible only if about all countries are involved which is definetely not the case right now. to be honest... only the AMERICAN BASTARD wants the war just to show they got better weapons. sorry for the word bastard but you know i'm talking about the president ok... come on, saddam had been doing that kind of #### for almost 10 years... so come on, what makes you think he can really do what he's suppose to do ? when the war will be upon me, i'll be glad to say you were right... but until the SUPPOSED WAR begin, there is nothing to fear from anyone ! you something that's called BLUFFING, yes he got the WEAPONS, but every other countries has them too and saddam know that if he strike then everyone, and i say it, everyone will be against him ! don't you think it would be stupid of him to go into war knowing that... NO ! he'll try something like 9/11 who couldn't be prevented because it was a COWARDLY attempt which is the only way to attack the US without being discovered ! surely this war is going to happen... but it is definitely not a WW3 because only the USA wants that stupid war to happen ! |
Why didn't you guys listen to me... why? Is it because you have such an ego that you have to prove to each other that you are right? Is it because you try to find out what is really true? What is it? Tell me. All you people have done in this thread so far (besides a few) is argue about something that hasn't happened yet. You can't predict what will happen in such a diverse realm... at least not accurately. If and when the war happens, then it happens, and we'll all go our seperate ways. If it doesn't happen, we'll all go our seperate ways anyway. But until that war ever happens, please don't go off and blow your heads over this! It isn't right, it isn't healthy, and is definitely not needed!
<span style='font-size:4pt;line-height:100%'>besides... I want to keep whatever peace I can in this world...</span> Edited By Roll on Jan. 20 2003 at 02:55 |
Quote:
Let's all get scared ppl...a 2,000 year-old book is predicting our doom...woe is me...pfft And the world would most definately end. We would use nukes. Iraq (and its allies) would use nukes. Any of our allies that decides to help us would use nukes. Take nuclear winter, add a few plagues (from the chemcial and biological weapons), and the world is pretty much done for. Quote:
Secondly, you saying that it's not a WW3 just because Canada and France won't get involved is BS. You say "for it to be a WW3, every country needs to be involved?" <span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%'>EVERY</span> single country wasn't involved in WWI. <span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%'>EVERY</span> single country wasn't involved in WWII. Yet because karma said so, and because Canada and France won't fight, it won't make it a World War. Pfft... RIGHT NOW not all countries are involved...but if ANYTHING happens, in an instant, it will become a full-out war. |
[quote:post_uid0="akuma_forever"]lol i dont mean to be a preacher hear but this wuz all prophosized in the bible.... ;)[/quote]
ummm..then why mention it?...I'll not "let loose" into ya about this one...( no has the time to read the amount of insane ramblings I could spew about alla that....thats also same reason I didnt post in the "creation of the universe" topic ) Back on topic...The War....ppft political B.S. crappola! Yasback your over melodramatic ramblings either speak volumes of your own fears of death...or you are one of those kinda people that either intentionaly or un-intentionaly create "the maddness" of the mass's,by becoming to involved,or easily blinded what you see,hear, and are informed by the public,and are probably just another "blind sheep". By the way you made your post....you sound like a "doom sayer"...Take that crap else where. War is war...it happens every day and every where....I have seen like 4 or 5 of them my self...ja know what happens? The bad guys pay for their infractions of justice. And a "handfull" of guilty,heroic,and inoccents die. NOT the millions upons millions of deaths as you seem to fortell and see in YOUR own narrow and limited view of the world and how "the machine" works. Ja know what...the United Nations have enough "fire power" to turn ALL their enemies home lands into glass parking lots...there would be no war. The U.N. could just pass it off as a "large scale" nuclear testing....that just so happen to eliminate a few "#### heads" as well. They would worry about the repercussion afterwards and deal with them as neccessary. Watch and see...this "war" is just another 'flash in the pan of history'....NOT Armagedeon. The fortellings of the Bible ARE NOT happening. 30 years ago a sequence of event happened...all the religous people cried "It's the end of the world!" 10 years ago another sequence of events happened,every one cried "It's the end of the world!" 5 years ago an Asteriod was mistakenly predicted to come within the "danger zone" of Earth, everyone cried "It's the end of the world!" Look around people...were still here. We've been here for a couple 100 thousand years...and we arent going any where all to soon. So just sit back,shut up,and watch the show. Besides.....If your religous...and DO die by the hand of another mans actions. Then fear not little one...your going to the right place. And if in MY narrow view of things on a cosmic scale that encompassing everything is wrong...well..."See ya on the flip side!" Edited By nosoul4evr on Jan. 21 2003 at 14:33 |
Did anyone even read my reply? I guess its kind of hard to argue with a bunch of 13 year olds who don't even take the time to read a valid response.
|
YES! and I am not 13 ( just in case ya didnt know )
You make valid points that can not be argued...the solution is very simple..bring the standard of living up in Iraq/Isriel so the people arent so desperate. IE: The 'free world' needs to just start taking control of deffient nations, and force free law into those lands...It truly is that simple...idealy Terrorism takes place everyday...it is...'natural' to terrorise...it is...animalistic....primal. I know that sounds a little strange...but it's true. Humans like to think we are "above" these subconcious animal behavours..but we arent. These traits are just exposed in a much more technical manner...because we are a much more evolved animal with a way more elaborate social structure...as well as being the ultimate tool users. wich allows us the ability to express these animal behavours in a much different and larger scale than our lesser evolved cousins.....essestialy...there are base desires that push us to do the things we do...and we do these things just to fullfill these desires so we may put to rest these feelings and to be at ease with our selves. some of us "just cant control our selves"....and it just so happens to be that people like this are in positions of power in the world...and they fail to see how fullfilling their own desires effect the realm around them in the long run....they "see their ultimate goal" achive it,but fail to see how it will effect the realm after ther passing...All they care about is the "now" and the "me" of fullfiling their desires "there way" wich is the only way to complete fullfill the desire "the way it was meant to be"...wich is the way that "feels right"....even if it does mean the death and destruction of "things that are irrelivent" to that person fullfilling their dream.... (....Bah screw it..im done..i hate getting political,religous,and philisophical on the net...i can go on and on for hours.) Let the drivel continue..... Edited By nosoul4evr on Jan. 21 2003 at 11:16 |
[quote:post_uid0="Finnegan"]Did anyone even read my reply? I guess its kind of hard to argue with a bunch of 13 year olds who don't even take the time to read a valid response.[/quote]
It's not that, dude. It's that some of these ppl (not referrinig to ya, nosoul) don't want to be proven wrong, and therefore when they see the possibility that they're as wrong as they can be, they ignore it. |
Nantuko: Yes.. it is was a clear violation of the treaty... and well, is that really a just cause for war? Look back 100 years ago, when America was first emerging as a world power. The United States goes to war to defend "oppressed" Cubans from their Spanish rulers. A few months later, a peace treaty is signed, but no Cubans are even allowed to have a say in the provisions. Even during the war, the Cubans are kept from fighting. And because of that great Platt Amendment that the Americans forced Cuba to sign, the US was given a free ticket to re-invade and force their own whims upon Cuba whenever necessary. Another instance in New Granada (Columbia), where New Granada wouldn't sell land for 20 mil. for a canal to be built across the North/South American connector, the US began a "revolution" in without a single cassualty, the New Granada's army was bribed, and Panama was formed and sold the land... and all this in violation of of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, in which the US and Britain promised neither country would maintain control of an intercontinental canal in the Americas (such as Panama Canal). Or if you want something a little more recent, how about that Treaty of Versailles that insisted that WWI was all Germany's fault, completly neglecting the fact that all of the European powers allowed the disaster to come about, and maintaining that Germany could only have a small standing force, scarcely the size of a militia, as well as pay enourmous amounts of money to the Allies, resulting in nearly a world-wide depression.
*And as a side note, the Allies were responsible for the complete destruction of the Ottoman Empire (insited rebellions), creating much of the chaos you see today. Anyways, my point is this: Treatys are broken all the time, they're an impermanent thing to "keep the peace" for a while. The winning countrys (such as the Allies in WWI), determine the treaties, and decide the provisions to be as unfair at whim. The Pursian Gulf treaty proves all of this by showing not only the point made by Finnegan, that it is impossible for a band of inspectors to actually find these weapons, but also outragous that one country (the US) would violate another country's soverienty by enforcing such an idiotic act for the sheer reason that "we won, therefore we can do whatever the #### we feel like." my second point: The idea of the US, or any country being able to police the world is ridiculous. Saadam is brutal, a dictator, and by all means, psycotic. And where does the US fall into this? Aside from keeping out cars going... no where. Some sort of "world council", such as the UN? The best thing you've got... but no mater what you chose (abstinance, interferrence, some "world court"), unpredictable #### can and will happen in any case, and the best approach should try to be as unbiased as possible. my third point: Helping people? Give me a break... I know sending food and radios via air droop may sound good and all... but what people in Afaghanastan, Iraq, and the ###### places of the world need is commerce. Fix that, and at least they've got a chance at not ending up with 6 million people starving during the winter. But why doesn't the US do that? As big and down on monopolys as the US is, it's just being a hypocrit. By this constant policing the world, it is the world monopoly, and doublessly will do everything in its power to keep it that way. If other countrys are all of a sudden making their own cloths and soda factories, then the US commerce goes way down the #### hole. I don't expect you to believe anything I've said here today, just try and interpret it without being clouded by all those years of propaganda. :biggrin: Finnegan: Yes... all good points. Don't be fooled by what I've been saying in this topic... by all means, he does deserve to be removed, I have made no opposition to that. Everything I have problems with is US policy. Just one question though... how would ousting him actually help the Iraqi people? Usually when one facist dictator is taken out of power, (and perhaps even a provisional government put in place), history has shown that these don't tend to last in economically poor countries, and soon another military leader rises and takes over (such as what happened with Germany following WWI). The successes that we have had turn into places like Japan and South Korea... economically benefiting, but still under US "guidance" and protection, completly succeptible to outside attacks (North Korea for one). Edited By 2000warrior on Jan. 21 2003 at 20:59 |
OH MAN!!!!!!!!!!!
look at all the iraq war debating ive been missing :laugh: tupac feels really happy know. ill debate when i come back from mexico, i havent been keeping track of US politics since i left. i think most people that are in favor of going to war with iraq dont have a firm grasp of both sides of the war. most people are just one sided and wont even consider knowing the other side of the story. i think this whole war is drivin by oil. just look at redneck bush, you cant just look at his face and not say hes an oil tycon. This whole world is driven by money $$$$$$$ the US is on top and wants to stay on top. ill dabate later............ i got tired and i dont think ill have enought money to stay in this cyber cafe for another hour :laugh: when i come back from mexico its on!!!!!!! |
well..........since ya know so much............i gonna let ya.......keep hacking in the CIA files.........and.........debate.
al i know, is that: -some countries are ready for war. -emtpy warheads found in iraq. -bush is urging the UN and UN weapon inspectors to..do stuff. -bush was already ready for war. -bush is raising concerns on saudi arabia. -saddam really needs to be killed. -saddam could destroy his oil fields as an act of vengance. -if iraq dont disarm, US will strike like the klumps at a buffet table. |
We could easily appease Saddam and get all the oil we wanted form him, this isn't about oil. This is about terrorism and a psycho with nuke who will sell them to terrorists. Remember Sept 11 people? We have to strike first from now one. And yes when you win a war you get to tell the losing to country to do whatever the hell you want, they lost, tough #### for them. And thirdly we would be helping the people we wouldnt just remove Saddam and leave we would install some form of democratic government and monitor it for years later.
|
i know this isnt about oil but still. beside, the US gets most of the oil from the mid-east.
|
Let me propose this analogy about why Treaties must be adhered too.
After WWI Germany was in ecnomic and political shambles. The country was ruined, people had no money, no jobs. That is when the Nazis rose to power and began violating the Treaty of Versalles (sp), which was passed at the end of the first world war. No one payed any mind, the world watched idlly, "condemning" but not rising to action. Germany built up their army, paying no heed to the Treaty they said they would follow. The army built up and one thing led to another and the Germans invaded Poland. The entire second world war could have been avoided if we had just done something other than sit with our thumbs up our asses while Germany piled up weapons much like Saddam is doing today. Fight a small war now or a big war later, the choice is upon us today. |
[quote:post_uid0="SolidSnake76"]i know this isnt about oil but still. beside, the US gets most of the oil from the mid-east.[/quote]
As does the rest of the world. If Saddam controls the oil, he controls who gets oil, which would basically be controlling the world. But if you read Finnigan's posts, you'd realize that oil has about .5%-1% to do with this current conflict. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 0%