Don’t worry, they’ll get theirs. However Bush said he won’t invade unless Saddam does something stupid (like invade Kuwait [sp]), meaning there might never be an invasion.
Bush will invade, are you kidding me? He’s practically told Congress he doesnt care what they think, and he’s said outright we’ll gone in alone if no other countries will help us.
Seriously? Nah, I don’t think Bush has become that much a of little dictator yet. (Well unless he even wants to go against his own cabinet and chiefs of staff)
THE Geneva Convention can suck my Co** :)
Yeah, try saying that when your country is invaded, and you have to undergo brutal treatment by the occupants. Better yet, try saying that to the US Marines in the Pacific that did not have the Geneva Convention to save them from the merciless Japanese.
u bet ;)
I hope that was not some sort of joke, for I would hate to see the disastrous consequences of what would happen if we did throw out the Geneva Convention. Or worst yet, I have seen them… :(
u are a very nice person ;) i just wanteed to say that
Why thank you, Sir DasEwokSS :) :D
You are too for a Ewok :wink:
o ur Welcome :) and thanku aswell. and most Ewoks are very nice, u just have to get to know them. they just chose the wrong side in RotJ but they are nice once u get 2 know them ;)
I’m not so sure about Ewoks, it seemed like all they wanted to do was get drunk and sing forest chanties. Sounds like my kind of life! :wink:
Dont ever underestimate the Ewoks. cus the forces of good did and evil triumped cus of it ;)
People in the Middle East (which is what I assume your refering to) care if they die. But, they are willing to throw their lives away to fight us. Doesn’t that tell you something? Americans can’t even begin to understand the real problem.
No, actually I was referring to the Japanese during WW2. But now that you mention it, do Palestinian suicide bombers count? BTW…what is the REAL problem that American’s can’t understand??
When we invade Iraq, we are going to make innocent people suffer because Bush want’s to get reelected.
It’s not a re-election issue.
The Real problem is our treatment of the innocent people, for two things, Oil and Votes.
Name for me a Strategic Objective outside of oil that our nation solves by attacking Iraq. Don’t mention a Humanitarian Issue, there are far worse places. Don’t mention Israel, they can take care of themselves.
It won’t be a perfect victory with little loss of life this time. We aren’t as militarily strong as we were at the start of the Gulf War. We don’t have the scores of nations backing us up. Thousands will die, to help Bush’s 2004 campaign.
The Real problem is our treatment of the innocent people, for two things, Oil and Votes.
Name for me a Strategic Objective outside of oil that our nation solves by attacking Iraq. Don’t mention a Humanitarian Issue, there are far worse places. Don’t mention Israel, they can take care of themselves.
It won’t be a perfect victory with little loss of life this time. We aren’t as militarily strong as we were at the start of the Gulf War. We don’t have the scores of nations backing us up. Thousands will die, to help Bush’s 2004 campaign.
First, there is a strategic objective to taking out the chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear threat that Saddam possesses. There is proof that he has distributed these weapons to any terrorist group that has the cash.
Secondly, I only agree with the second part of your comments about our military. Yes, Clinton screwed America over when he cut our military so much. (He wouldn’t have been able to launch a Gulf War type campaign if he wanted too.) Militarily wise, we don’t need the scores of nations backing us up. I do think that our military is perfectly strong enough to combat the brittle army that Saddam possesses.
Currently, there are only 2 middle eastern nations saying we can use their bases. Bahrain and Kuwait. This is not enough. We will not be able to bring in the resources we need with only those two countries. We don’t have the political backing that is needed for this type of operation.
Russia has been proven to of sold Uranium to third world nations, should we attack them for it? And there still is zero proof of Saddam doing any of that. It is all speculation.
Again, Saddam will only use his weapons of mass destruction if he feels he is about to be overthrown.
Whats he going to do with a nuclear weapon? He’ll have 1 bomb. He hits Israel, Israel responds with 20. He hits us, we respond with 30.
He is no where near a nuclear weapon. he doesn’t have the Uranium
And there still is zero proof of Saddam doing any of that. It is all speculation.
It is NOT speculation! Have you heard what the chief UN weapons inspector said as he was coming out of Iraq?
He said Iraq had Biological and Chemical weapons. He didn’t say he gave them to terrorists.
Yea, and the German’s weren’t killing Jews during World War II…:roll: Look how many lives were lost when we waited for die-hard proof on that…
Ok, prove to me Iraq has given Chemical and Biological weapons to terrorists.
Or, I’ll give you a choice. You can either prove it to me, or tell me you will shoot yourself, with your own gun, every single innocent that dies when we attack Iraq.
