|
Do you support a war with iraq?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Tsunami One |
| Does anyone see that this is so pointless? and there im thinking that the world has changed. |
|
|
| escee |
| I do with or with out un support. |
|
|
| Romp |
| I dont. I bet most people here agree with me, I hope! |
|
|
| radicool |
yeah I agree...war is bull..
I think that all the leaders (esp. mister bushes and mister howey) want to go to war only because they can just send people to do it for them. imagine if they have to wear those tight army pants and don the army boots and pick up mp5, m16 or ak then i bet you any money they will think about it. look at our mates howey for example, he sent like 5000 troops over to iraq, and the next minutes he'll open a can of VB and buy a piece of pie, sit and watch TV. Look, it's not that I hate howey, it's just that we don't need to lick yankie bush's arse and pretend to support them, while all we want is better relationship.
war is bad...innocence life will be lost...and imagine the soldier's wife and children...government only pay them $36,000 compensation if their husband is dead. is life really = $36,000 i don't en think so.
please...say no to war...it's bad....mmkaayyy.. |
|
|
| Euphorica@AUS |
meh :/
Politics is bad and im going to avoid stating my opinion so i dont tread any toes.:o |
|
|
| Tsunami One |
why not state your opinion? this isnt stalins russia.
oh and the reason whe are sucking yanki doodle is because we want a free trade agreement |
|
|
| Dj_Psygnosis |
I don't, i support Iraq and Korea in this war more...
don't tell me why. |
|
|
| DJ Dowlz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Tsunami One
oh and the reason whe are sucking yanki doodle is because we want a free trade agreement |
Point taken, but there is a far greater reason for sucking yankie cock. Basically, without the yanks we would be completely screwed left right and centre. Just look at us? Pissy little island. Small population. Even smaller military force. There is no way we would ever be able to defend ourselves if it wasn't for the yanks. You know how close we came to being completely overrun in WWII? My grandmother was General MacArthur's private secretary (if you don't know who he was, he was Supreme Allied Commander of the South Pacific), and trust me, we came *this* close to being invaded. And that was *WITH* the yanks. Without the yanks, in a nutshell, we'd be completely ed. Now you'd have to be a fool to think that there was still a threat from Japan (I mean Japan depends on the west to fund its economy), but I'm certain there are still potential threats throughout the region. North Korea, Indonesia come to mind. It's nice to know we'd have the peace of mind that should we ever come under threat again, we'd have the world's most powerful military on our doorstep within a couple of days, kicking some serious ass.
So essentially, we owe a lot to those yanks. We might hate them. We might think they have a stupid accent and can't speak English. We might think they have a crazy president, who's war hungry, needs oil and wants to win votes for the coming up next election, but essentially, John "W" Howard giving Bushy his daily dose of fellatio is a very good thing for us. We send over 60 SAS, a couple of intelligence people, a couple of thousand ground troups. If we ever get threatened, US sends back the world's most powerful army. It's a very uneven relationship. One that works, extremely well for ourselves.
So, essentially that is an argument for why we should support Bushy, no matter what path he chooses.
Now on to the issue of whether or not the US should have a war with Iraq.
We all know that "Saddam is insane" has chemical weapons. After months of asking "where's the evidence", Collin Powell went yas all and handed over the most frightening evidence that Iraq does in fact have a fully operating chemical weapons industry. He also provided some evidence that Saddam has been backing Osama and his holy war against the west. Now we know all about this Holy war. Remember Bali? Just to let you know, a friend of a friend of mine died there (remember the football team from Adelaide). That was frightening. Islamic groups, funded by $25,000 from Osama, killed hundreds of Australians in Bali. Now look at this.
That is a picture of a person infected with smallpox. That is what Suddam is producing. That is what Suddam will undoubtedly be giving to the similiar "Jihads" that bombed Bali. It is a thousands times more frightening than anything that ever happened in the world trade centre, or Bali. All it takes is one crazy islamic extremist to inject himself with this, take a flight to Australia and he could potentially infect literally thousands of people before dying himself. That's ing scary. And that's why we need to disarm this crazy mother f*cker dictator.
So basically, I think that Iraq should and must be disarmed of its chemical weapons. This should happen, with or without UN support. And I think Australia should back whatever decision the US makes, simply for strategic allegiance reasons. |
|
|
| Trancey Ash |
Well Dowlz
I agree that we need America, Australia doesn;t have the best relationship with Indonesia and the likes, and we arte absolute sitting ducks. I think we kind of have to support America (only with UN backing) to cover our own asses. I hate saying this cause I hate America, and what Bush stands form but I think it's a catch 22. We have no choise, just to protect our own safety.
Howver Dowlz, you say that Suddam is producing this stuff. Where is the evidence? He didn;t say "we are producing smallpox" or anything. This is just American War Mongering, and Bush's Jingoistic attitude.
Havent ypu learnt.
The first casualty of War is the truth!
In other words, do not ever blindly beilve what , especialy America is telling you. There are 2 sides to every story, you cant take one or the other without hearing them both, and we never get to hear Iraq'a side. Another way of trying to convince us to dive into war. Cencorship.
But for now I say War with Jugde Jules @ Two Tribes. :nervous: |
|
|
| DynaFire |
| I could try to place a neutral opinion in the face of such blinding hysteria on both sides but i don't think i can. When hunting a monster it is important not to become one ourselves. Saddam is not a nice person, and i don't think he should be allowed to hurt his own people or anyone else for that matter. However i think Bush is on a very similar footing. He has already commited many horrible war crimes. This is not conjeture this is fact. The willfull mass murder of the civilian population of afganistan cannot be tolorated, nor can the constant threat of mass destruction by the country with the most horific weapons (I'm talking about the US here). How come it is amazingly bad for iraq to have scary weapons but fine for the US? The US are just as likely to use them. They used nuclear agents in the gulf war (first bush) ie depleated uranium. We also have to look at who is the alternative for iraq? A US puppet? The US won't support the only real alternative to saddam, the iraq communist party because well, they are communist and the US haven't quite got over the last pet hate they had. Has any one else seen the scary cycle here? The US always need someone to hate, to beat to be scared of and to dominate. They suggest no other option just anger. Choose peace. |
|
|
| DJ Dowlz |
Haha :) War on Judge Jules. I'm up for that! I reckon I'd get English backing too!
Trancey Ash, actually there is now declassified info which Colin Powell presented to the UN security council which shows the scope of the chemical weapons program and the links to Al-Qaeda.
Checkout the key points of Colin Powell's speech here:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sp....txt/index.html
BBC, have the full text here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2729525.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2730855.stm
Some highlights include this...
"Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax, a little bit, about this amount - this is just about the amount of a teaspoon - less than a teaspoon full of dry anthrax in an envelope shut down the United States Senate in the fall of 2001.
This forced several hundred people to undergo emergency medical treatment and killed two postal workers just from an amount just about this quantity that was inside of an envelope.
Iraq declared 8,500 litres of anthrax, but Unscom estimates that Saddam Hussein could have produced 25,000 litres."
and this...
"Iraq today harbours a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda lieutenants.
Zarqawi, a Palestinian born in Jordan, fought in the Afghan war more than a decade ago. Returning to Afghanistan in 2000, he oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of his specialities and one of the specialties of this camp is poisons.
When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped establish another poison and explosives training centre camp. And this camp is located in north-eastern Iraq. You see a picture of this camp.
The network is teaching its operatives how to produce ricin and other poisons. Let me remind you how ricin works. Less than a pinch - imagine a pinch of salt - less than a pinch of ricin, eating just this amount in your food, would cause shock followed by circulatory failure. Death comes within 72 hours and there is no antidote, there is no cure. It is fatal.
...
In 2000 this agent offered al-Qaeda safe haven in the region. After we swept al-Qaeda from Afghanistan, some of its members accepted this safe haven. They remain there today" |
|
|
| Romp |
the US were the ones that actually sent Iraq the Anthrax in the first place
In any case even if it is in Australia's interest to go along with the US for a free trade agreement or whatever (which we are unlikely to get because the agricultural lobbies in the US are way too strong) what kind of country are we to advocate killing thousands of innocent people so we can get a free trade agreement? |
|
|
|
|
