|
Gulf War II - 24 Hours Countdown (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DaveC |
| 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.
|
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| 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, , 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 Bull from them. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| 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 out of it, killed thousands of helpless civilians and "rebuilt" it
2. Afghanistan. Bombed the 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 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. |
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| 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. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
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. |
|
|
| Robert |
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. |
|
|
| AussieTrance |
| 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 bull 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. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| 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. |
|
|
| AussieTrance |
| 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. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| I know they might still have them. But it's easier to prove they do have them then to prove they don't. |
|
|
| Robert |
| 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. |
|
|
| Ze TranceLover |
Bush / Hussein / Blair
are the crappiest guys I ever see! THEM TO DIE they made a ing big on the planet.
I THEM ALL TO DIE:whip: |
|
|
|
|
