TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- And yet Another Bush & Saddam Thread..
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

And yet Another Bush & Saddam Thread..

From
Yahoo News

...

Speaking to hundreds of flag-waving supporters in the eastern U.S. state of New Hampshire, Bush said delay was not an option in keeping Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein ( news - web sites) from inflicting "massive and sudden horror" with weapons of mass destruction.

The danger to Americans "is grave and growing," he said.

"There's no negotiations; there's nothing to talk about. We don't want you to have weapons of mass destruction," Bush said in a speech previewing a planned prime-time television address next Tuesday to tell Americans why Washington should be prepared to take military action.

Bush said Saddam had agreed to open his country to inspection by U.N. arms experts to prove he did not have chemical, biological and nuclear weaponry.

"You agreed to that, you said you would agree to that. Now you've got to show the world you don't have them. It's up to you, Mr. Hussein," Bush added.

In a weekly radio address aired on Saturday, Bush said: "If...the Iraqi regime persists in its defiance, the use of force may become unavoidable."


Ok, Maybe I don't get this, but if Evil Saddam agreed to show he doesn't has weapons of mass distruction, and reached an agreement with the UN, and inspectors are ready to return, then uhm wtf does Bush wants'!??!?!?!



Ps: If someone tries to turn this thread into an Israel vs Palestine thread I SWEAR I'll flame you to death
Ps2: Don't close this. Thanks.

Saddam is just as worse as Hitler, Milosevic, Stalin and Hitler.
Removing his ass from the face of this planet is one thing we all will benefit from.

Although we can have doubts about the real intensions of the US government, I still believe they should endanger the lives of both US/UK soldiers and the innocent civilians.

Imagine how it feels to risk being tortured, let alone the idea of a biological bomb exploding in Israel or Saoudi-Arabia!

USA will get rid of Saddam because he's the only arab leader who doesn't SUCK UP TO THEM , they will put instead someone they like who's gonna SUCK UP TO THEM just like the rest of arab countries ... sad world

He's not worried about Iraqi weaponry, these are just lame excuses to kick Saddam's arse... I mean, Iraqi army has been closer to its nuclear bomb in the past, while it was being supported by the US, since they wanted Iraq to help them overthrow the Iranian government. Now they're saying he's evil. What changed? September 11? Sincerely, I think that bombinb Afghanistan was rather an economic strategy than a counter attack against the sad event that took place in NYC last year.

In my humble opinion, Bush is the wrong man in the wrong place in the worts time possible. I don't think American people deserve such leader.... the same for Iraqi though.

Swamper should rule both countries

I heard on the radio today that saddam has challeneged bush to a duel or a fight you could say. Wouldnt that be just a riot
"Tonight on FOX Presidential boxing, The most hated dictator since hitler saddam challenges the leader of the free world in a death match winner takes all"
Sorry to say friends to the south i think saddam would kick bushs ass.

LMAO about the fight


but i think there were worst dictators than saddam ... mubutu , pot pol , the guy in north korea , etc ...

Sadamm agreed to allow U.N inspectors into the country, however he said they would not allow them into certain palaces and or bases. His actions sugest that he most definatly has weapons of mass destruction, and he's seeing if he can convince people otherwise.

With that said, I do think that Bush needs to let weapon inspectors do there thing, and consult the U.N before he authorizes any military activity. And until he has some hard facts he should just shut up. Same goes to all the senators and congressmen kissing up to him.

Bush just wants to finish what his father couldn't do. It's more family pride than national pride.

quote:

Originally posted by fastmp3 USA will get rid of Saddam because he's the only arab leader who doesn't SUCK UP TO THEM , they will put instead someone they like who's gonna SUCK UP TO THEM just like the rest of arab countries ... sad world

Wrong. Hardly any, if any, Middle-eastern countries suck up to the USA. USA will get rid of Saddam because they CAN. He's a leader they can get. A battle they can win.

Going after someone else isn't an option at this point, but I'm sure Bush will find a way to go after someone else afterwards.

quote:

Originally posted by Essential1 Bush just wants to finish what his father couldn't do. It's more family pride than national pride.

This definitely has something to do with it. In front of the UN, Bush mentioned that Iraq made an assassination attempt on a former president. He somehow forgot to mention that the former president was his father. Also, many members of the cabinet were around back in the early 90s when the first Bush was president.

Let's also think of this.. Iraq is the second largest oil supplying country in the world... hmm, if we took over and placed our own government in there, who would stand to make the most from the situation.... people involved in energy... I can't think of anyone *cough the president cough* who has any history in energy companies/oil business.

i think its sad that a large number of people are too ignorant to acknowledge the fact that saddam is a threat, and that other people have to suffer, before they realise he should be removed.

Re: And yet Another Bush & Saddam Thread..

quote:

Originally posted by zzleeper Ps: If someone tries to turn this thread into an Israel vs Palestine thread I SWEAR I'll flame you to death Ps2: Don't close this. Thanks.

haha, funny how these things always happen, eventually it'll turn into a debate about religion. but anyways, back to the topic...

quote:

Originally posted by phyrest0rm Wrong. Hardly any, if any, Middle-eastern countries suck up to the USA. USA will get rid of Saddam because they CAN. He's a leader they can get. A battle they can win. Going after someone else isn't an option at this point, but I'm sure Bush will find a way to go after someone else afterwards.

dude , i'm talking about arab leaders , not arab people ...

i repeat it once again : ALL ARAB LEADERS ARE SUCKING UP TO THE US except saddam , other arabs from this board can confirm you this , it's a known fact

quote:

Originally posted by phyrest0rm Wrong. Hardly any, if any, Middle-eastern countries suck up to the USA.

Well, i disagree, Saudi Arabia is one perfect example, they are allowing the US to put it's solidier on a military base there, even though they don't support war with iraq. Many arab and muslim nations bow to the will of the USA.

quote:

Originally posted by phyrest0rm USA will get rid of Saddam because they CAN. He's a leader they can get. A battle they can win. Going after someone else isn't an option at this point, but I'm sure Bush will find a way to go after someone else afterwards.

Just curious, who do you think that the US couldn't go after if they wanted to?

BTW, i completely agree with your opinions about oil and bush's motivations in the middle east.

Time for George Bush quotes folks!

I got a good one.

Groege Bush on the subject of the french
"The trouble with those guys is that they just don't have a word for entrepreneur!"

you know what really bothers me? is that a lot of you just like to go off what you hear and what others say. instead of criticizing bush just b/c its cool, why don't you look at why we are pressuring iraq. do i need to create a list of rules this man has broken? or can you just accept the fact that he is a bad man?

when the US finally joined WWII in europe to help the english and french fight germany, people did not defend Hitler and criticize Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Nadi explained it best previously in this thread... something i already tried to touch on the other thread about this.... Saddam has moved all his weaponry into other facilities - facilities that he is still making "off limits" to the UN inspectors... i have happened upon some of these places and i know what he's hiding. Its jacked up, and the sad part is, most of you are so pre-occupied with George Bush that you aren't even watching the REAL criminal here...

-ABT-

The USA simply cannot replace every bad-man around the world with their own. And the risk to start a mess there is much bigger than the possible success of overthrowing one of many badman.

As as said before, first finish your business with Afghanistan and Osama&fellas before you start another war.

quote:

Originally posted by jploveparade Saddam is just as worse as Hitler, Milosevic, Stalin and Hitler. Removing his ass from the face of this planet is one thing we all will benefit from. Although we can have doubts about the real intensions of the US government, I still believe they should endanger the lives of both US/UK soldiers and the innocent civilians. Imagine how it feels to risk being tortured, let alone the idea of a biological bomb exploding in Israel or Saoudi-Arabia!

where do you come up with that stuff?!?!?

We all know that saddam is a criminal (bad man), i doubt anyone thinks otherwise. But the US can't attack every threat. Sure Defend yourself, but don't change the world to fit your needs.
First the threat was 'communism', and now it's 'terrorism'.

You know what. Despite of all the things that might make it right, you can't deny the fact that oil is a 'MAIN' reason.
There's always a bigger picture.

quote:

Originally posted by Tranex02 We all know that saddam is a criminal (bad man), i doubt anyone thinks otherwise. But the US can't attack every threat. Sure Defend yourself, but don't change the world to fit your needs. First the threat was 'communism', and now it's 'terrorism'. You know what. Despite of all the things that might make it right, you can't deny the fact that oil is a 'MAIN' reason. There's always a bigger picture.

I disagree with you in 2 ways. First of all removal of sadam isn't a matter of fitting american needs, it's a matter of him being a large threat.

Secondly I don't think wanting there oil can be too large of a motivation. If they go to war with iraq they most certantly will stop buying from iraqi suppliers, and during the course of a potential war it's very possible that many oil feilds will be destroyed.

quote:

Originally posted by Nadi I disagree with you in 2 ways. First of all removal of sadam isn't a matter of fitting american needs, it's a matter of him being a large threat. Secondly I don't think wanting there oil can be too large of a motivation. If they go to war with iraq they most certantly will stop buying from iraqi suppliers, and during the course of a potential war it's very possible that many oil feilds will be destroyed.

Ok.... so all of a sudden he's a threat! ???? Just now he became a threat? That doesn't make sense.

You might not think that oil is a great motivation, but it is. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If it's about nukes,etc. then why would they want to destroy oil fields.... I promise you, they won't. The US economy is in a horrible condition. If the US can drop the price of oil to around $10, that will greatly benifit the economy. anyway, that's another issue. Again, not only refering to the US's war on iraq, There's always a bigger picture. I can list several expamples.

No, he's not a threat "all of a sudden", he has been one for years, and its amazing how long the international community has gone without taking any sort of action. And yes oil is a factor, but one that could deter people from war. You can't go and start fighting someone and continue to do buisness with them. It doesnt make sense. And by destroying oil feilds I didnt mean intentionally, I meant if there is air strikes there will probably be some in area's near the feilds that could slow down the production of oil at the very least.

quote:

Originally posted by Tranex02 We all know that saddam is a criminal (bad man), i doubt anyone thinks otherwise. But the US can't attack every threat. Sure Defend yourself, but don't change the world to fit your needs. First the threat was 'communism', and now it's 'terrorism'. You know what. Despite of all the things that might make it right, you can't deny the fact that oil is a 'MAIN' reason. There's always a bigger picture.

man, listen to yourself. who's side are you on? and tell me, how does what the US government is doing make YOUR life worse? give me a specific reference. FYI the US does not get oil from Iraq as of present. i can guarantee you, if it is a reason, it is NOT one of the main reasons. (I.E. if saddam wasn't in power and violating a shitload of rules and treatises, we would not be attacking them "just for oil.")

when did it become so damn vogue to criticize the US government. Just b/c you don't like it when the US government "sticks its nose in everyone's business"??? well, if the US didn't do it, nobody would. We play the role of the world-police, so what? we are not using our power to corrupt this world. All we have been focusing our efforts on is eliminating threats. Corruption of the world via domination is something that Hitler was trying to do. Draw a line of difference, develop your own opinions instead of drawing off everyone else's, maybe even watch CNN once or twice, THEN post intelligent comments about these topics.

and what is this "attack one bad-guy at a time" bullshit? If you are walking down an alley and attacked from both sides by muggers, aren't you going to try to take care of both of them? or are you going to politely ask one to wait while you "deal" with the first one. Think logically man....

Yes, the war in afghanastan isn't over yet, but it doesn't require virtually any manpower... you don't realize how minimal of a military force the US is keeping over there.... its pretty much reduced to scout parties in the hills.... there is no serious ground war, etc.... this will most likely go on till they find bin laden. IMO its not even a war, more like a search.

The activities that have been brewing in Saudi on the other hand have always had more action and has been "more eventful" if you will in the confines of military activity. After Desert Storm, we never left. We still have many bases open and have been active since...

And for those of you "angry arabs" that think we are invading Saudi for being there, let me explain to you how it works. We offer to protect Saudi Arabia from Iraq in exchange for land to have airbases and forts. they agree, BECAUSE, if you remember it was Saudi Arabia that INITIALLY asked for our help in intervening after Iraq attacked Kuwait and Saudi Arabia was next.
We asked Saudi for some land, they happily agreed, and haven't politically through their government voiced any problems since. We don't tell them how to run their government, and we haven't threatened them as a country... i don't understand where all this animosity comes from. When i was there, out in the town the Saudis seem to love the US soldiers... i never once encountered a person with a problem. They seemed to love to have us in their country.
Now, if i wanted to use your non-understandable logic, i could complain b/c Saudi Arabia has an embassy on MY land. Gee, who should i go complain to? Whats that? its "different" you say? how is it different? Its just a chunk of land, and on that chunk of land, no ill-plotting against the hosting country is being done, so WHAT is the problem?

so not to point any fingers, i don't know why you-know-who has serious beef about the US occupying Saudi "against their will."




But yeah, stick to ONE ENEMY AT A TIME. LoL, man thats some funny shit....

sheesh.

quote:

Originally posted by Nadi No, he's not a threat "all of a sudden", he has been one for years, and its amazing how long the international community has gone without taking any sort of action.

Ok, so if he's been a threat for years, why is there all the sudden an uprise for the need to go after him, and why is it that the UN doesn't support the US in going after him right now?

quote:

Originally posted by Nadi And yes oil is a factor, but one that could deter people from war. You can't go and start fighting someone and continue to do buisness with them. It doesnt make sense. And by destroying oil feilds I didnt mean intentionally, I meant if there is air strikes there will probably be some in area's near the feilds that could slow down the production of oil at the very least.

Very true that it will cut our access to their oil DURING the war, but think about wars in the past where the US was involved in overthrows? Who decides the successor of the dictator that is overthrown? He who overthrows, in this case, the US, or UN in general, if they go in as well. They will obviously stir up propaganda in the country in order to get the people to back the person that they want/put in power. In the end, there's a new guy in charge of Iraq, and we're getting our oil for half the price we're paying now.

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