TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Bombing Iraq
Pages (6): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »

Re: Bombing Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by fastmp3 anyway my questions are : -if america/bush wants really to get rid of saddam and his regime cuz they are "evil" then why don't he send some mega-marshal-sniper-pyroman from hollywood to get rid of him and install at least some democracy there ? and why instead of that america/bush want to bomb the whooooooole country from north to south using a fake and stupid reason called "weapon manufactures" ?

Because the United States constitution says that we can't promote, follow, or do terrorist acts such as assisination. Assisination is not a proper way to solve problems and sets a bad example.

quote:

-why american call themselves "peaceful people" when 60% of people asked in polls agree to bomb iraq ? don't you think it's gonna create more hatred towards the USA again ?

I think many people are scarred by history. Many times has history repeated itself with a millitant ruler killing millions because he wasn't stopped at the beginning. We want to PREVENT killings and MAJOR wars in the future by taking the actions now to prevent them. Nobody questions that Saddam Husein's regime is an Evil regime that would take over the world if he had the chance. Just like Afganistan, we aren't there to "get back" at the terrorists. We are there for self protection from future terror attacks. So with this thinking, we are one of the most peacefull countries in the world.

quote:

-why is tony blair/england following the USA like a little puppy when it comes to attack someone ?

We are alies, the UK and the US are great friends and protectors of each other. Kinda like your best friend, if you saw him getting pushed around by some small punk kid, wouldn't you stand behind him and support him? Rememeber, this is your best friend, that you grew up with, that got you a job and saved you from a very big bully (that nearly killed you) in the past.

quote:

this is not a "let's bash america and americans" thread , i'm just asking these questions and seeking for answers.

Thanks, I hope my answers help you out.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith hmm. what is your source for this information?

Yeah your right, just because he has absolute power (military and political) over a oil producing country who's income per year is in the billions if not trillions of dollars, why does everyone think he's rich a lives an extravagant life style.

*writes Sadam a check and puts it in the mail*

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 no u said it to him as if you where QUESTIONING him on what he said.....and why do you need sources for soemthing that is common knowledge?...

i don't believe hearsay. I need to hear it from a news network, usually several before i will even think of believing it. Even better is to see for yourself, unfortunately, i live a long way from iraq, and so do you. fortunately, we have the internet, which can be a useful source of info (but can also be lies, or misdirections, especially at CNN)

Now, does that mean i am calling him a liar? no. I want to look into it a little more.

now, I do know saddamn hussein is rich, and also not a good man.

But, i've never heard of him sitting by the pool getting fresh shrimp and fine wines flown in daily though. I'd be interested to hear where this information was obtained.

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 and i dont watch TV...i find it very boring and is usually a brain dead experience....

i'll just hold my tongue on that one.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow Yeah your right, just because he has absolute power (military and political) over a oil producing country who's income per year is in the billions if not trillions of dollars, why does everyone think he's rich a lives an extravagant life style. *writes Sadam a check and puts it in the mail*

u mean its true?...LOL...i always thought Hussein lived in a dusty tent near a runway and was on welfare.....


i still find it funny that someone needed SOURCES to proove that...lol..Hussein only spent millions upon millions trying to obtain nuclear supplies and bio/chem weapons from Korea and Russia and even China.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith But, i've never heard of him sitting by the pool getting fresh shrimp and fine wines flown in daily though. I'd be interested to hear where this information was obtained.

lol he was over emphasizing that part...but how could you not know Hussein was rich...what planet have you been living on?...

your a joke dude...and u prooved it


i mean how can you argue about a war effort when you don't even know common knowledge on the leader of one of the sides?...

thats liek argueing about cars then asking if its true that cars run on gasoline..LOL...common-sense

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 lol he was over emphasizing that part...but how could you not know Hussein was rich...what planet have you been living on?... i mean how can you argue about a war effort when you don't even know common knowledge on the leader of one of the sides?... thats liek argueing about cars then asking if its true that cars run on gasoline..LOL...common-sense

LMAO, i couldnt have said it better myself. Some of the opinions posted on serious poltical issues are simply hilarious, because they're illustrate such an ignorance i just dont know where to begin.

uh... what part of:

"now, I do know saddamn hussein is rich"

did you not understand? i cannot be clearer. i'm done with you.

Here, go read a bit, and come back maybe you will be worthy of talking to then.

Overview of Iraq Crisis
Last updated February 2002

What is the Crisis?
The Persian Gulf War in 1991 ended in a stalemate between Iraq and the international forces led by the United States and the first President George Bush. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was driven out of Kuwait, the country he had invaded six months earlier. The peace agreement called for Iraq to destroy any chemical or biological weapons, and a team of United Nations inspectors regularly searched the country to make sure this was happening. A strict embargo kept Iraq from selling oil or buying weapons on the international markets until the United Nations would rule it in full compliance with the terms of the peace treaty. The United States kept Iraqi aircraft from flying in the southern or northern part of the country.

This situation continued through the 1990s, with continual blustering between Hussein and Bush's successor, U.S. President Bill Clinton, over the role of inspectors. Hussein claimed to have the entire country open to the inspectors and demanded that the embargoes be lifted immediately. Clinton claimed that inspectors were being blocked and that sanctions should continue indefinitely.

Iraq is one of the world's biggest oil producers, and U.S. and Saudi tycoons made billions of dollars a year while its oil was blocked. Hussein had originally invaded Kuwait because of an oil dispute. President Bush had made his millions of dollars as an oil man. The politics of the region are the politics of oil and there is big money to be made and lost by the winners and losers of international conflicts there. Many came to believe that Iraq would continue to be punished indefinitely so that it's oil would remain off the market. The U.S. and British wanted the oil embargo to continue, while the Russians and French (who wanted to profit by buying and distribute Iraqi oil) wanted them lifted. As the 1990s progressed, the international front against Iraq was cracking, with each country in the coalition adopting positions that would give it the greatest oil profits.

By mid-1990s, Iraq and the United States were constantly claiming that the other was lying. Iraq would periodically block the teams of inspectors from certain sites, especially when they contained U.S. experts, declaring these teams to be fake excuses to continue sanctions. The United States would periodically threaten to restart the war if the teams weren't allowed everywhere, saying there were still some weapons hidden anywhere. Both sides were almost certainly lying and both were making self-serving claims about the other.

In 1998, President Clinton seemed about to actually start a war and he started a military and propaganda buildup against Saddam Hussein. Grassroots peace groups sprung up everywhere almost overnight and flyered and witnessed even though they were virtually ignored by the mainstream news media. That changed when some of these activists got into a CNN-sponsored "Town Hall" meeting broadcast live around the world. These activists asked sharp questions of the Clinton Administration officials onstage. The next day the news media started asking those same questions, breaking the consensus for war. That weekend, the United Nations Secretary General announced a truce that looked just like the offer Iraq had been making for months. It later came out that the Clinton Administration was behind the U.N. agreement and announcement. They realized that the American people were going to ask too many questions about Iraq and weren't going to support a second war against the country. Sometimes good questions and the truth can stop a war!

Back in 1991, there were many in President Bush's Administration who wished a peace treaty had not been signed. They had wanted U.S. forces to continue all the way to Baghdad and oust Saddam Hussein. They had wanted to install a U.S. government in Iraq. Many of these "hawks" were also involved in the oil business. Through the 1990s, they were out of office and relatively powerless. They wrote papers about what would have happened if the war had continued to Baghdad but no one cared. Then in 2000, the son of George Bush, also named George Bush, was elected President of the United States (everyone calls this new one George W. Bush to avoid confusion). Most of the people in his Cabinet and Administration were his father's friends and included those who had wanted to continue the war.

The horrible events of September 11, 2001, shocked everyone. Everyone knew that something must be done to stop international terrorism. With the support of many Americans, President Bush started a war in Afghanistan, against the Taliban government there.

Many of President Bush's advisors had hoped that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had been behind the terrorism. They've been obsessing over him for over a decade and wanted an excuse to re-start the Persian Gulf War. But there is no link Iraq with Osama bin Laden. But in 2002, the American people are still rattled by the destruction of the World Trade Center towers and part of the Pentagon. They are afraid that the U.S. still hasn't found Osama bin Laden.

There are many in the Bush Administration who want to use this fear to start a war against Iraq anyway. Remember: there is absolutely no connection between Iraq and the September 11th terrorists and absolutely nothing has changed between Iraq and the United States for years. But Bush is apparently planning a war anyway. Troop buildups are starting and a war could start later this year. To do so will require that he come up with reasons for a war, and so we can expect to see him provoke Hussein. President George W. Bush will also need to convince the rest of the world that another war is needed, and this will be tough.


What Else is Going On?
Saddam Hussein is not the only world leader with weapons of mass destruction. There are plenty of countries with even more lethal nuclear weapons including the U.S., Russian, the Ukraine, China, France, Britain, South Africa, India, and Pakistan. Most notably, Israel has also undertaken a nuclear program and they certainly have a small arsenal with missiles capable of reaching Iraq. It is arguable that their development of atomic weapons upped the ante in the Middle East Arms race and helped fuel Hussein's development of chemical and biological weapons, the "poor man's nuclear weapon." Yet the United Nations and U.S. Presidents have never proposed bombing Israel or any of the other countries for their weapons of mass destruction. There is very much a double-standard going on with regards to Iraq.


Isn't Hussein Crazy?
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is certainly no sweetheart. He has used chemical weapons against his own people. He started and fought a long, brutal war with Iran, before invading Kuwait and prompting the U.S.-led Persian Gulf War of 1991. But Hussein's actions are on par with those of other violent world leaders (for example Indonesia's in East Timor) and his moves have been motivated less by insanity than by the geopolitical and economic situation of Iraq and by historical regional antagonisms. This is not to say it would not be better for Iraq and the rest of the world if he were out of power. But two incredibly bloody wars have failed to oust him, indeed have only strengthened his hold on power, and it is quite doubtful that further military action will create a real peace for Iraq, the Middle East, or the planet.


Won't a War Change Things?
The U.S. military doesn't seem to think so. Here are some facts from Pentagon and Clinton Administration officials as reported in the February 21st, 1999 New York Times: U.N. inspection teams have destroyed many times more chemical and biological weapons than the 1991 Gulf War; a new war wouldn't even target weapon stockpiles since they're nearly impossible to locate. The likeliest targets of a U.S. air strike are those facilities already under U.N. inspection and the bombing would most likely destroy the monitoring equipment now in place. Pentagon officials do not suspect that any biological or chemical weapons are being stored in Hussein's presidential palaces; Iraq's refusal to open these palaces to inspectors is the supposed raison d'�tre of this war. Pentagon officials think it's unlikely that Hussein will launch any chemical or biological weapons in response to a U.S. attack. Iraq's Scud missiles are actually not very good at delivering chemical or biological weapons. The Iraqi military is a shambles: it is a "shadow" of the army that invaded Kuwait in 1990 and is so weakened that it does not pose a threat to neighboring countries.

A war won't reduce Hussein's weapons stockpiles, and it probably won't drive him from power. The Pentagon acknowledges all this. It will make a few rich people even richer, especially the stockholders of military equipment manufacturers and Arab sheiks who gain the longer Iraqi oil is kept from the world market.

source: Reader's Digest, August 2002

quote:

lol he was over emphasizing that part

tiesto14, i wasn't over emphasizing shit, saddam swims laps every morning to keep in shape. he has ENORMOUS palaces...notice palaceS. do some research on his lifestyle, you'll be mighty surprised.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith uh... what part of: "now, I do know saddamn hussein is rich" did you not understand? i cannot be clearer.

YA AFTER u questioned him with asking him to provide sources...lol


and that article u posted..wheres that from?..give us a link so we can see if its even creditble...i guarantee its from a DOT COM site...lol...

quote:

Originally posted by BluNine source: Reader's Digest, August 2002 tiesto14, i wasn't over emphasizing shit, saddam swims laps every morning to keep in shape. he has ENORMOUS palaces...notice palaceS. do some research on his lifestyle, you'll be mighty surprised.

noooo...i KNOW he is insanely wealthy.....i wasnt doubting u one bit...i jus thought u where over emphasizing some of the things he does with his money.,..i guess not....


still cracks me up that someone argue over a war yet doesnt know the first thing about the leader of one side...JOhnSMITH...lol

Only reason Bush is in office is so he can finish the job that his daddy didn't when he was President. I was LMAO when I was listening to the news the one night...they were talking about this guy that was MIA and they updated him to POW or something like that and said that he was being held in Iraq and that gives us more reason to attack them. Now they were only assuming this...they weren't sure if Iraq has him captive or not.

quote:

Originally posted by BluNine source: Reader's Digest, August 2002

Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith Thank you.

hhhhmmm still waiting for you to provide the source and link of that essay you posted...why havent you?...u beg for sources yet wont provide yours...

edited: I wouldnt recommend you basing your view on a reader's digest article.

I have time to take issue with one point:

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith ...Saddam Hussein is not the only world leader with weapons of mass destruction. There are plenty of countries with even more lethal nuclear weapons including the U.S., Russian, the Ukraine, China, France, Britain, South Africa, India, and Pakistan....There is very much a double-standard going on with regards to Iraq.

The thing that sets Iraq apart from the other countries is its poor track record when it comes to using weapons responsibly. The Geneva convetions prohibts using chemical weapons. Iraq has violated the rules using chemical weapons against Iran and its own civilians. During the Gulf war they fired conventional missles at Isreal (a country who wasnt even involved in the conflict!)

That's why we dont want them to have nukes. make sense?

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 and that article u posted..wheres that from?..give us a link so we can see if its even creditble...i guarantee its from a DOT COM site...lol...

well, if you were paying attention you would have noticed the huge banner i posted in the FIRST PAGE of this thread. you might even have clicked on it, or on the text below it.

here it is again though, just for you:


http://www.nonviolence.org/iraq/

and, no, it's not a .com, it's a .org

maybe you are aware that .org is only for non-profit organization? they made this site on their own time, and don't get any money from it, because they care about stopping wars worldwide.

where do you get your information from? cnn.com, i saw you post a link from there already once today.

you make me laugh.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow edited: I wouldnt recommend you basing your view on a reader's digest article.

I don't, thank you. you are correct this is a biased viewpoint. I get my information from all over the place though.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow The thing that sets Iraq apart from the other countries is its poor track record when it comes to using weapons responsibly. The Geneva convetions prohibts using chemical weapons. Iraq has violated the rules using chemical weapons against Iran and its own civilians. During the Gulf war they fired conventional missles at Isreal (a country who wasnt even involved in the conflict!)

yep. The US has also violated the Geneva Conventions, several times, here is a link to just one such incident.

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/pow-bck.htm

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith maybe you are aware that .org is only for non-profit organization? they made this site on their own time, and don't get any money from it, because they care about stopping wars worldwide.

yes thats why i asked if it was from a dot com..

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith where do you get your information from? cnn.com, i saw you post a link from there already once today. you make me laugh.

and the ONLY reason i posted that CNN link was because it dirfectley QUOTED Tony Blair on the matter...and i wanted people to see that it's not just Bush. but that Blair also agrees on ridding Hussein...

so it was a direct quote from Tony Blair..not a CNN story...but i guess your too cool to understand the difference in that.

oh no wait lemme guess..CNN goes around quoting world leaders with false statements...right...lol...they may give bias information but they do not do that...

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith http://www.nonviolence.org/iraq/ and, no, it's not a .com, it's a .org maybe you are aware that .org is only for non-profit organization?

dude the article is from an anti-war site thats putting on a spin for their cause. How does .org give it creditablity?

Here go to this .org site http://www.duke.org/ its David Duke the leader of the KKK

if you still think .org = good i'll eat my hat.

quote:

edited: I wouldnt recommend you basing your view on a reader's digest article.

i am not basing my view on that article, i'm providing facts via it. and if you tell me that RD doesn't provide good solid facts or isn't an informative source, then that is an ignorant statement. i am not saying it is a good source of world news, but the articles are very well informed and as accurate as you would find in any news periodical.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith yep. The US has also violated the Geneva Conventions, several times, here is a link to just one such incident. http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/pow-bck.htm

how can u compare dispute over Al Queda POW status to using chemical weapons to kill tens of thousands of ppl? btw, since the Al Queda isnt country they dont get same protection under the geneva convention, besides they're getting treated better than the ppl who died in the jet planes and twin towers.

u know i think it funny that anybody who bitches about the decisions of the u.s. because i cant wait till sadam or osama decides to launch terriorist attacks against their country then u will be changing your mind with the quickness and saying BOMB THAT ******
sadam is evil and he does not even fuckin care about his own people
he is just another hitler and serves no good
i wish somone would slap those who make studip remarks

Righty

I have no beef with the American people, but frankly ppl your president is a fucking prick! he's a modern day Genghis Khan if you ask me, want to argue with me Yankee's? you lot ain't in the firing range if he fires a nuke, so can you can sit there saying this saying fucking that.

Whats the point yeah Saddams an evil bastard, but he hasn't invaded Kuwait again what reason have you to attack him? Weapons yes at first he didn't want weapon inspectors in, but then he made an offer to let them back in, but old fuckface retard inbred redneck **** Bush won't have it, and of course Bush has to say Saddam is dangerous, well Iraq hhhhmmmm hardly a very rich country Gulf War would of been what 12 years ago odd, then the air strikes again in the late 90s, the Gulf war was not only fought in Kuwait but Iraq too, and the country is still crippled, what the fuck are they going to do throw some Rugs or something at us? a member of Black September killed himself in Iraq and in his documents it included bank statements and details of a country that supports Terrorism (paid this terrorist), the Iraqi government have the documents if they were that hell bent on destroying the west they wouldn't of said they had documents or destroyed them?

It makes me laugh after Saddam who's next Gadaffi? HAHA and the worst fucking thing is that posh bastard Blair is supporting him. I have 5 good friends in the Army if one of them comes home in a body bag from the desert if a war breaks out, I will personally travel to Texas and shoot that fucking redneck **** YEAH FUCKING SEND THAT TO THE FBI, SECRET SERVICE OR CIA, I threatened the president now does that make me a terrorist.

Wars good for a countries pride and industry, the UK backs every single one of Bushs moves If a war breaks out it will probably end quick but who knows, could turn into the next Vietnam, also I wonder what countries like Russia and China think of Bushes decisions, and what of all the countries that hate America? wouldn't isn't this just giving them reasons to want to harm the USA, cos I tell you what from what I've seen they can probably create powerful properganda with this Iraq business.

Remember don't fucking flame me this isn't an attack on Americans, its an attack on that fucking shit for brains wanker Bush, also please please please don't vote Republicans next election

i'm fucking disgusted after reading some of your answers (not pointing at someone in particular tho) ... CNN is doing a great job apparently

no more posts for me in this thread unless i feel the necesity to answer , thank you

quote:

Originally posted by neo geo u know i think it funny that anybody who bitches about the decisions of the u.s. because i cant wait till sadam or osama decides to launch terriorist attacks against their country then u will be changing your mind with the quickness and saying BOMB THAT ****** sadam is evil and he does not even fuckin care about his own people he is just another hitler and serves no good i wish somone would slap those who make studip remarks

Can be true, but I think that its also IMPORTANT to look at whats going on his OWN nation, that little bush **** is just leaving a messy nation behind, all he cares about is not caring about environment, wasting money with his petroleum people, abusing HUMAN CIVIL RIGHTS, and just wasting the money on stupid imigration agencies attacking those inocent imigrants instead of looking for BAD TERRORISTS..

We cant just kill saddam. Killing Saddam would make him a martyr in the middle east. With all the chemical warfare and nuclear missiles going around, a third world country is no longer a third world country when it comes to war. I see no shame in bombing the hell out of Iraq if they harbor terrorism. As far as killing innocent citizens . . . . .thats a sensitive subject because we all know the citizens are as dangerous as the Iraquis soldiers themselves. And who knows . . . .i still believe the Iraqis make false civilian casualty counts and on top of that, they probably use their own civilians as shields to protect US military targets.
War is war, and anyone that supports the idea of flying two commercial airplanes into two buildings, should get shot.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.