TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Gulf War II - 24 Hours Countdown
Pages (7): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »

quote:

Originally posted by DaveC We are civilized enough, but saddam isnt. All these people against war. I wonder if they would change their mind if a terrorist bomb was detonated in their garden. Saddam murders his own people and fucks with neighbouring countries and he will do so untill he is blown up.

I agree with that. Most of people sit at home in our lifes where everyday, u are not faced with the fact of being killed for no reason in a civilised world. He has killed his own people for decades! Sending them out against usa in war is murder!
Its ok to say that we should negotiate with him, but that has been happening for 12 years, and it has still come to nothing. If we leave him he'll keep developing weapons, and soon enough he'll have distances to reach england, and then when we, or indeed usa, are attacked, we'll all look back and think that we should have done something!

war is the only way out. iraq had fuckin 12 years to disarm and they never bothered doing it. they deceived the inspectors, didnt comply with any orders and lied shamelessly. if the un council would still negotiate to pass a fuckin resolution, this thing would drag forever. and its not like us is doing this by themselves. they have support of over 30 countries. and like stated before, france will join if iraq uses chemical weopons, which they will. so there is a great hope that other allies might join too.

i was watching a tv program yesterday about the iraq crisis . and this guy named paul wolfowitz, who's a deputy secretary of defence wrote a doctrine 12 years ago, expressing that the us will democratize the middle east, starting with iraq, then moving on to north korea, iran and other islam countries,. the doctrine was unsupported and not popular with the george bush administration at that time, because they didnt want to take this matter alone on their shoulders and were scared that they wouldn't have the world's confidence to back that idea up. and it never gained any interest and was thrown away. although it was a very ambitious one. however after september 11th, the george w bush administration turned back to that doctrine and made it clear that they would follow that policy stated there. i added this is cuz i thought it was interesting.

May the lives of the men who fight for our freedom be spared @ the hands of god when judgement time comes...

The news coverage on the war is similar to the hype of some tune (i.e. ligaya)

quote:

Originally posted by raver31 war is the only way out. iraq had fuckin 12 years to disarm and they never bothered doing it. they deceived the inspectors, didnt comply with any orders and lied shamelessly. if the un council would still negotiate to pass a fuckin resolution, this thing would drag forever. and its not like us is doing this by themselves. they have support of over 30 countries. and like stated before, france will join if iraq uses chemical weopons, which they will. so there is a great hope that other allies might join too. i was watching a tv program yesterday about the iraq crisis . and this guy named paul wolfowitz, who's a deputy secretary of defence wrote a doctrine 12 years ago, expressing that the us will democratize the middle east, starting with iraq, then moving on to north korea, iran and other islam countries,. the doctrine was unsupported and not popular with the george bush administration at that time, because they didnt want to take this matter alone on their shoulders and were scared that they wouldn't have the world's confidence to back that idea up. and it never gained any interest and was thrown away. although it was a very ambitious one. however after september 11th, the george w bush administration turned back to that doctrine and made it clear that they would follow that policy stated there. i added this is cuz i thought it was interesting.

ok here are a couple of questions...

1. Why should Iraq disarm??what about USA???why can only USA have nukes and other weapons of mass destruction?
2. Wheres the proof that Iraq has violated the UN resolution 1441?
3. What makes America think they should interfere in the politics of any other country? who interferes in USA's politics?

quote:

Originally posted by raver31 war is the only way out. iraq had fuckin 12 years to disarm and they never bothered doing it. they deceived the inspectors, didnt comply with any orders and lied shamelessly. if the un council would still negotiate to pass a fuckin resolution, this thing would drag forever. and its not like us is doing this by themselves. they have support of over 30 countries. and like stated before, france will join if iraq uses chemical weopons, which they will. so there is a great hope that other allies might join too. i was watching a tv program yesterday about the iraq crisis . and this guy named paul wolfowitz, who's a deputy secretary of defence wrote a doctrine 12 years ago, expressing that the us will democratize the middle east, starting with iraq, then moving on to north korea, iran and other islam countries,. the doctrine was unsupported and not popular with the george bush administration at that time, because they didnt want to take this matter alone on their shoulders and were scared that they wouldn't have the world's confidence to back that idea up. and it never gained any interest and was thrown away. although it was a very ambitious one. however after september 11th, the george w bush administration turned back to that doctrine and made it clear that they would follow that policy stated there. i added this is cuz i thought it was interesting.

Yes I saw that same documentary. It was two camps within Bush's administration. The "Hawk's" ie Wolfowitz who were more Regan like in terms of how they would try and change the world through its policies and then there is the other side of things, ie Powell who takes more of a management roll in the world and try to better guide certain countries toward a specific path, instead of trying to CHANGE IT (ie making assumptions of what is right/wrong in terms of Governments). I would take Powells side...managing the world is better than going and trying to outright change it.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee ok here are a couple of questions... 1. Why should Iraq disarm??what about USA???why can only USA have nukes and other weapons of mass destruction? 2. Wheres the proof that Iraq has violated the UN resolution 1441? 3. What makes America think they should interfere in the politics of any other country? who interferes in USA's politics?

1) the US is not a threat to its neighboring countries
2) He was suposed to allow inspectors in at their convience instead he made them wait till either he wanted them in. Or it was convient for them..
3) Saddam harbors terrorist and they are a direct threat to the US if he wishes to support terrorism, he will pay the price...

On another note i was just thinking about this if the US were to shut down trade with all the other countries of the world, im sure most of the world would sink into a depression...I think a lot of people dont realize how many american good are exported and how man goods are imported into the country and with out these trades which most countries rely on...they would have nothing.....

quote:

Originally posted by fr0st On another note i was just thinking about this if the US were to shut down trade with all the other countries of the world, im sure most of the world would sink into a depression...I think a lot of people dont realize how many american good are exported and how man goods are imported into the country and with out these trades which most countries rely on...they would have nothing.....

well IMO, USA would "sink" as bad....as it is, we all know that USA is in severe debts right now (from what i heard several diplomats say recently in interviews)

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee well IMO, USA would "sink" as bad....as it is, we all know that USA is in severe debts right now (from what i heard several diplomats say recently in interviews)

WE ARE IN DEBT BECAUSE WE HAVE LENDED ALL OUR FUCKING CASH TO EVERY ONE IN THE WORLD AND NO ONE HAS PAID US BACK!!!!!!

We owe the money to ourselves... nt any othe country... if you CAN READ why dont you look it up on the net and it will tell you where the money comes from and where it is spent....! THINK god damn it.... THINK!!!!!!

quote:

STRIKES TARGET SADDAM War in the Gulf began today with pre-emptive missile strikes targeted at Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi leaders.

It would be cool if they killed saddam and most of the leaders last night, then the war would be pretty much over in less than a day.

quote:

Originally posted by whiskers i saw a part of bush's speech on tv today and he sounded totally like that guy from CJ Bolland - The Prophet. he was like "i have the keys and I decide who wins the war..." really cocky and really fake... and there was some anti-french propaganda too. they were making fun of the french website, bretzelforbush.com or something. you pay them 7.50 and they send a pretzel to the white house, hoping that bush chokes on it and dies. it was so hilarious to watch the supposedly educated newsmen bash france... they were like "bretzel... pretzel was probably taken.. no, it's just that they can't spell... they're FRENCH! they CAN'T SPELL!!!" i was like, wtf are you talking about, asshole, americans are AMERICAN and their spelling is even worse! mind me, that was FOX news channel, btw so this whole news thing was a lame joke, imho. i wash my hands. �Mystiq� GOD DAMNIT, EVERY TIME I SEE A NEW PICTURE OF BUSH I WANT TO GIVE HIM A BANANA

Dude fox news is in kahoots (spelling?) with Rush LImbaugh and Dubya...I'd expect that kind of Bullshit from them.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee wow..i feel sorry for most of u who have posted here....how naive can u people be??? i would love to hear a justification for Bush's actions over the past decade,asfar as my brain remembers, the US has done the following: 1. Kosovo. bombed the fuck out of it, killed thousands of helpless civilians and "rebuilt" it 2. Afghanistan. Bombed the fuck out of that too, killed thousansd of civilians and some canadian privates and "rebuilt" it 3. Now Iraq. same strategy.(only predictions here however) hmm whats common in all these scenarios?? 1. each of the locations are in prime locations in each continent. -Kosovo is close to turkey, Poland, Greece, and pretty close to russia -Afghanistan is neighboring pakistan and is close to India -Iraq...take a wild guess....the heart of the middle east 2. milions spent on bombing the fuck out of it, other countries feel sorry and help in rebuilding the bombed land thanks to the humanitarian state US puts it in. 3. US comes on top showing that they have rebuilt a better place when in reality, there is NO difference 4. Puppets of the US put in leadership of the country 5. US army bases set up in those locations for easier access to other countries that may spark an uproar agaisnt them. heres the final question. If an army is labeled "country X"'s army, why should there be bases set up in other countries??

If you're going to make things up, then at least make up the names of some sources too...
If you're from the middle east then you are probably Muslim correct??
I guess you have never seen pics from the Balkins of the concentration camps full of walking skeleton Muslims???? Or perhaps you have never read the accounts of how Milocevic's soldiers rounded up Albanians from their houses, separated the men of fighting age from the women and children, and shot the men to death. I have a "pen pall" from Holland whose brother in law is in Kosovo now trying to keep the Muslims and Serbs from killing each other. It's an international effort, so don't use it to spread your anti-U.S. hatred.

quote:

Originally posted by HardTrance81 Hey, can you post your sources on how we killed thousands in kosovo and in the afghanistan? And if you can post some info on how other countries feel bad for places we have attacked and helped.... last i knew it was U.S. Policy to rebuild any country that we attacked..... this has been since at least world war two..... and no one ever helps except for the British. by the way, are you french-canadian? any how..... u.s. claims these places are better but in reality there are no diffrent? since when have you been in afghanistan, or Kosovo? Did you take pictures? if so why don't you post a few....... here's alittle Kosovo timeline: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/10/kosovo/timeline/ Kosovo death toll: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/515350.stm i could be blind... maybe i can't read between the lines, but let me know if you find thousands of the dead killed by the americans.....

Thanx man. YOu said it better than I could have, and provided real sources. U.S. had INt. support on both Kosovo and AFghanistan....
The support is more limited for the war on Iraq because there is no clear link between Saddam and terrorists.

Prior to 1998 the UN inspectors did destroy large amounts of chemical/biological weapons. Then they were ordered out of Iraq by Bill Clinton. Since they came in again, Iraq agreed to unconditionally allow their operations, and Hans Blix said that although they were making progress, it would take about a year or two to completely examine every facility with the current amount of inspectors. France and Germany wanted to triple the number of inspectors, but the US halted that initiative in the security council (which it btw, uses only when it suits american interests). No evidence so far has been found of WOMDs. The only Iraqi breach of UN regulations was Al-Salamoud (or whatever it's spelled) missile that could travel 80 kilometers longer than was allowed. Half of those missiles were destroyed in few days prior to the attack.

Also, let's see this disarmament from the Iraqi perspective. On one side, they are told to disarm, while on the other, they are bombed every single day by the American and British forces in the no-fly zone. Then they're threatened by war, and at the same time must allow spy planes to fly over Iraq and get clear pictures of their military facilities. Bush claimed Saddam has chemical and biological weapons, but so far has not given any evidence of those existing, nor has he helped the UN inspectors in locating the whereabouts of those weapons he is so certain Saddam has. He attacked regardless of having no evidence, regardless of the fact Hans Blix said Iraqi disarmament was progressing in a good way, and regardless of the UN security council. He didn't even try to present his case to the UN. It's funny how Bush is on one side attacking to protect the interests of the UN, while on the other breaching the UN resolution on the very same matter.

Saddam has been messing around down there for years now. He has had plenty of time to cooperate, unfortunately he chooses not to, or does the bare minimum at the last minute.

It�s not just about the minor details in all these UN reports. He tries to take too much advantage of these little points. He knew the consequences if he failed to cooperate. All the deadlines have been postponed time and time again. Eventually, one must see this isn't going to work.

To put it simple:
He has had plenty of time to cooperate, but fails to do so and now he must pay the price.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee ok here are a couple of questions... 1. Why should Iraq disarm??what about USA???why can only USA have nukes and other weapons of mass destruction? 2. Wheres the proof that Iraq has violated the UN resolution 1441? 3. What makes America think they should interfere in the politics of any other country? who interferes in USA's politics?

1. Because it's usually believed that having such a huge country with such weapons can be seen as a deterant to rogue coutries, who would love nothing more than sending a few nukes for the sheer hell of doing it. That and the fact that most of these "rouge" countries have no respect for human life

2.IRAQ hasnt disarmed - they can get rid of all the small range missiles they want, they know its a bullshit method of "complying" with the UN. America and Britain have the receipts for some of the weapons wanted in question, IRAQ has no proof the got rid of them, so they havent complied.

3.Iraq is seen as a threat to the US, and Sadamn is a dictator beyond belief, hence, get rid of him.

quote:

He has had plenty of time to cooperate, but fails to do so and now he must pay the price.

It's only been about two months or so since the inspectors are in Iraq and so far they haven't found anything. But have you for one second considered the possibility that Saddam indeed doesn't have any of those weapons? So how is he going to prove he doesn't have them unless he lets the UN inspectors in and lets them see for themselves, and that's exactly what he did.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 It's only been about two months or so since the inspectors are in Iraq and so far they haven't found anything. But have you for one second considered the possibility that Saddam indeed doesn't have any of those weapons? So how is he going to prove he doesn't have them unless he lets the UN inspectors in and lets them see for themselves, and that's exactly what he did.

1. Iraq scientists have said UN will never find them, no matter how hard they look
2. Iraq cant prove that the weapons they did have no longer exist
3. They've lied before, they'll do it again.

Dont get me wrong, I wish they didnt have any, but I dont believe them for a second.

I know they might still have them. But it's easier to prove they do have them then to prove they don't.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 It's only been about two months or so since the inspectors are in Iraq and so far they haven't found anything. But have you for one second considered the possibility that Saddam indeed doesn't have any of those weapons? So how is he going to prove he doesn't have them unless he lets the UN inspectors in and lets them see for themselves, and that's exactly what he did.

it's been 12 years.

Bush / Hussein / Blair

are the crappiest guys I ever see! FUCK THEM TO DIE they made a fucking big shit on the planet.

I FUCK THEM ALL TO DIE

quote:

Originally posted by Ze TranceLover Bush / Hussein / Blair are the crappiest guys I ever see! FUCK THEM TO DIE they made a fucking big shit on the planet. I FUCK THEM ALL TO DIE

go back to school.

quote:

go back to school

if you die, that will be their fault! we all have the risk to have terrorists acts EVERYWHERE in the world now. They (some crazy terrorists) said at tv that they are ready to die...

BUSH need to return at school and learn the definition of this word :

PEACE.

but unfortunately, for him it's too hard to understand this word.

quote:

if you die, that will be their fault!

right.. so if i get hit by a bus tomorrow it will be their fault..

quote:

BUSH need to return at school and learn the definition of this word : PEACE. but unfortunately, for him it's too hard to understand this word.

you wish death upon someone and then you say HE should learn the the value of peace... ??

LOL Ze TranceLover you have no idea what youre talking about , so you know shite about policits and you want peace but you can't do peace with people like saddam

YOUR COUNTRY IS THE BITCHEST COUNTRY EVER.
How dare you do a VETO to usa afet what they done to you all over the years, when ever you need help you got , and you didn't pay the money back after WWI.

Look saddam had 12 years , game over now

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