France and China have expressed relief that
Iraq is cooperating. :roll: Heh heh.

Iraq has clarified its inspection offer. The
unrestricted inspections are for military bases.

The game continues . . .

“The democratic theory is that if you accumulate
enough ignorance at the polls, you produce
intelligence.” - (Philo Vance, character),
S. S. Van Dine as W. H. Wright

Hence, the Democrat Party’s efforts to register
convicts and immigrants as voters. - Xi

“Tha’s a fac’, Jack!” - the movie ‘Stripes’, Bill Murray

When this thread first started, someone said that the U.S. would get no backing for an attack into Iraq.
Then Britain stated that it would stand with the U.S.
The U.S. tells the UN that it will act with or without its approval.
Russia has slacked its resolve too.
Then today in the paper I read that our Canadian Prime Minister says that will we send soldiers into Iraq if asked too.
I said somewhere earlier on this thread Canada would back the states and now its official.
Bush apparently convinced Chretien (Canadian Prime Minister) the need for action with proof that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is producing weapons of mass destruction.

Anyway I’m for an attack on Iraq, they should have done this during the Gulf war.
I could really care less if the they sweep Iraq from the map.

William Jefferson Clinton said the words (1998) and laid the
ground work, but never did the action. Now he’s saying, “We
almost got him (Osama).”

“It is the spring of 1942. The world is at war. Three world
powers are struggling for supremacy in the field of atomic
weapons. Adolf says, “Blitzkreig it!” Hirohito says, Banzai it!”
Yanny, the leader of the USA says, “Let’s wait until they
atomize London, Moscow, Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh,
and Kuwait. Then, I’ll have some cross words for them.”
:oops: wrong war, SAME POINT though.

Y, The world is not as it was in WWI, WWII, the Korean War,
or the Viet Nam police action. If you have all the answers
you want, then Saddam has all the warning he needs to
use or diburse the weapons he has to the terrorists, before
the military makes its move.
You can bet GWB will give the needed info to the key leaders
of the free world. That way he’ll have an okay from leaders
(who will then share the info with other legislators and peoples,
at/near the same time as GWB is tellin’ us and sendin’ in the
military to save the world from a family of NUTS.

I’d back any president who was leading the way to a safer world…
even William Jefferson Clinton. Though he used his power
decisively on two days that leave his presidency in question.
First, he used cruise missiles on the day Monica Lewinski testified
before the Senate. Guess which item was the headline in every
paper in America? Second, he used cruise missiles the day that
the House of Representatives was to vote on his impeachment.
In both situations (I believe one was the destruction of an aspirin
factory and the othe was the start of the attack on Milosevik in
Yugoslavia.

I heard on the news today that the Ukrainian president said
his country had 2400 nuke warheads at the end of the USSR.
He stated that 2200 of them were dismantled, but that 200 of
the nuclear warheads were unaccounted for. Hmm. I wonder what the generals
or Russian mafia could do for themselves or the destitute people
of the Ukraine. it is estimated tha tthey might get anywhere from
$100,000 to $1,000,000 for each missile.
WHO DO YOU THINK IS IN THE MARKET for fissionable materials?

“Children will not remember you for the material things you provided,
but for the feeling that you cherished them.” - Richard L. Evans
–----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A moderate is a liberal who hasn’t made up his mind yet. - Xi

Iraq has clarified its inspection offer. The
unrestricted inspections are for military bases.

Yeah, after I read this special “clause” make by Iraqi Officals, I could already tell they were going back on their word. Where do you think Saddam is going to hide his NBC’s now? In civilian locations of course. Tsk… tsk… this is a repeat of pre-1998 all over again. Saddam cannot be trusted.

@Yanny:

To compare this to WWII is pathetic.

Heres a fact, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians will die when we attack Iraq. You warmongers are so quick to kill these people. You people only care about Americans. There are other people out in the world. We are at the top, and we should help, not hurt, the people at the bottom. We should not selfishly bully every country in the world like every other superpower has in history.

I charge Americans to break the chain of history. I charge America to be the first Superpower to do good in the world. This won’t happen by going to war so idiotically.

Iraq has a high quality of life compared to 75% of the world. This means people live happier than 75% of the people in the world. I want to go on a humanitarian mission, I really do, but lets go somewhere that we need to help out. Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Saudi Arabia. All have people much worse off than Iraq.

Saddam Hussein is a bad person. But you shouldn’t punish the Iraq people for that! We all know Bagdag will be leveled to the ground if we go to war. We’re talking Battle of Berlin destruction. Do you want to stop and think about the people living in that city?

Saddam Hussein is not a dangerous person. He’s not crazy like Hitler, he’s not surrounded by a fanatical Muslim Population like the Ayatollah. He doesn’t have any long range missles. He isn’t going to commit virtual suicide by attack us or Israel.

Why are we attacking him? We’re attacking him for Oil and votes. The Republicans don’t want to talk about their failing economy, they want to talk about their idiotic war. President Bush is using the emotions of the American people left over from 9/11 to keep himself in power.

Go into Iraq, there will be long term consequences, death, and a happy Republican party. In the long term, it will cause more death than 9/11 did. Far more.

You can not claim 1000s of civilians causalities as fact.
How many civilians died in the Gulf war?
And your right, I dont really care about it.

Its funny, as soon as an American soldiers touches ground in a foreign country there is an out cry for the poor people there.
The same people who are burning America flags and the same people who celebrated 9/11.
No one gives a shit before the soldiers arrive.

How about taking care of the poor homeless at the end of your street.
Do you have the same passion for them?
Or do you resevre it for non- Americans?

Heres a fact, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians will die when we attack Iraq

It is impossible to tell what will happen. To make that statement is as wrong as if I said, “no civilians will die.” Major flaws.

You warmongers are so quick to kill these people. You people only care about Americans.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You say we are quick to kill these people? Than why have plans been drawn up to avoid the least amount of civilian causalities? It would seem the the surefire step would be to plaster Baghdad with bombs, making to inflict the most amount of damage possible. Then how come this isn’t very likely? How come we want to avoid the least amount of fighting on both sides. I do care about American soldiers, but if I could save Iraqi lives in the same time, I would do it. To say we are warmongers would be to say you are a serial killer. After all, Saddam was responsible for gassing 50,000-100,000 Kurds and killing another 1.2-1.5 million Muslims.

We are at the top, and we should help, not hurt, the people at the bottom.

Explain to me how we are trying to hurt people. Is our main mission to kill the highest number of Iraqi civilians or remove Saddam and his miscreants from power? We are talking about the same Saddam that straves his own people to feed his military.

I charge America to be the first Superpower to do good in the world.

Hahaha this line reminds me so much of Monty Python and the Life of Brian. Sure the Romans bring us the aqueducts, trade, paved roads, ect. but… they’re still evil!

means people live happier than 75% of the people in the world.

Wealth and standard of living do not determine happiness.

We all know Bagdag will be leveled to the ground if we go to war. We’re talking Battle of Berlin destruction. Do you want to stop and think about the people living in that city?

Again, I would like you to challenge where are you get this from. I have seen no possible strategies for use of what you have stated - quite the opposite actually. If there’s anything to avoid, it is city combat and massive leveling.

Saddam Hussein is not a dangerous person. He’s not crazy like Hitler, he’s not surrounded by a fanatical Muslim Population like the Ayatollah.

Saddam not crazy? Would a sane person ever gass his own, defenseless people?

Why are we attacking him? We’re attacking him for Oil and votes. The Republicans don’t want to talk about their failing economy, they want to talk about their idiotic war. President Bush is using the emotions of the American people left over from 9/11 to keep himself in power.

And to protect us and others from him using weapons of mass destruction maybe?

@Yanny:

There are no figures about how many civilians died during the Gulf War, but the median estimates stats 5,000 by Amnesty International.

They did not celebrate 9/11. Show me proof of anyone who did. And I think you’d celebrate the death of someone who killed 5,000 of your civilians, like say Osama Bin Ladin? I’m sure as hell going to celebrate his death.

You don’t care about these people, your a heartless American. No wonder half the world wants us dead.

I’m Canadian.

The proof was on the news.
No, you have never seen a Iraqi burn an American flag.

Yanni, what do you suggest we do about Saddam?

Do you honestly think it’s in everyone’s best interest (and safety) to let Saddam freely develop any weapons he wants? Or how about the citizens of Iraq? Should we let them live in oppression? What about the POW’s that are still in Iraq from the Gulf War? Do we just abandon them? How about generations from now? Do you want to explain to our grand-kids who are facing nuclear war, why you put your trust into Saddam?

You’re right, we could go do humanitarian missions in Somalia and other such countries, but look at the crap that we went through there. Look at the miserable failure that Clinton put onto the American citizens’ shoulders as he embarked on so-called “humanitarian” missions around the world. T_6 is right, we give tons of money to foreign countries, much of it to combat the poverty there, does that really have anything to do with Iraq posing a threat to us?

UN Weapons inspectors are nothing but a GAME. I’m confident that Saddam is all ready moving chemical and biological weapons AS WE SPEAK. You liberals are joking yourselves if you think that weapons inspectors are going to solve the crisis in Iraq.

@Yanny:

To compare this to WWII is pathetic.

Not comparison . . an example of choices. Another example . . .
Yanny = Neville Chamberlain…or Russia (in a RR game) waiting til R2
to make any noncombat movement.
@Yanny:

…thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians will die when we attack Iraq…I charge Americans to break the chain of history. I charge America to be the first Superpower to do good in the world.
Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Saudi Arabia.

Millions of citizens of many countries will die if we
don’t do something. America will do something different. Bush will not
respond with nukes. Most likely he will repond or better yet, once
proof is laid out, initiate, with surgical incision of strike units. The
neighboring countries will be asked to help Iraqis to restructure their
government. The USA is not capable of doing that as we have a different
mindset(yes, this is an admission of American weakness, but we see it.)
If Saddam is permitted to build, use, and/or distribute biological,
neurological, and/or weapons of mass destruction millions of
citizens of many technologically advanced non-Islamic countries
will die. This will leave little help for the Third(or Second, depending on
your view of divisions) World countries.
America has done more to rebuild and help the world than any other
country. Most people quote the Charity statistics, but that is a drop in
the bucket. The US saved Europes’ sas in WWI and WWII. That’s why
Americans love to play these games(it makes them feel better about
their incosequential existence.) The US bailed out G.B., France, and
the U.S.S.R.(and dropped the debt). The US rebuilt Japan and Germany
so that WWIII would not resemble WWII. We founded the Red Cross
which helps all over the world and Caused the Muslim countries to found
the RED Crescent. We have defended pockets of democracy
(West Berlin, Taiwan, South Korea) which have helped strain and change
China, North Korea, the U.S.S.R.and Soviet satellites.
@Yanny:

Saddam Hussein is a bad person. But you shouldn’t punish the Iraq people for that! We all know Bagdag will be leveled to the ground if we go to war.
Saddam Hussein is not a dangerous person. He’s not crazy like Hitler, He isn’t going to commit virtual suicide by attack us or Israel.
Why are we attacking him?.

Sadie and his sons are sickos. Saddam has lackies poor gasoline down
the throats of suspected traitors, watches them suffer a couple of hours,
and then has one lacky light a match, play with it, and then torch the
suspect. Saddam would watch films of himself torturing suspected
traitors before having sex with his mistress(her testimony). His oldest
son learned to take hours to disembowel human prisoners by practicing
on sheep. I forget his second son’s perversions as I was distracted.
You think the worst of what will happen. That is your imagination
and indoctrination. Watch the Middle East join against Saddam
as they have experienced his dreams of grandeur. But, they will not lead.
They and the rest of the world need a point man. Someone and some
country taking the most risk. That is the Pesident Bush and USA. We
have the most to lose as we are the greatest power, target, and obstacle
that any warped country, religious figures, or anyone has to overcome.
Yes, we must be cautious to not overstep our limits, but that is why GWB
goes to Congress and the UN.
@Yanny:

We’re attacking him for Oil and votes…

Look at history. When EVIL Bush41 went into Iraq in 1991 the price
of oil dropped to $10 a barrel. The price of gas dropped to below $0.80
per gallon. This did not help the businesses that are accused of profits.
Remember, Chaney was part of the Bush41 admin. and didn’t run
Halibertin(sp.?) until later! It helped vacationers for a short time, but
that didn’t win EVIL Bush41 re-election,now, did it?
@Yanny:

…there will be long term consequences, death, and a happy Republican party.

Yes, the Republicans will be ALMOST as happy as when they took food
out of the mouths of starving elementary school students and
made senior citizens eat dog food by cutting programs.
I wouldn’t even accuse Clinton of murder for the aspirin factory or
Yugoslavia, which is where it looks like you might be headed with
EVIL Bush43 on your mind.

Another moderate reads verbatum from the LIBERAL Democrat
playbook. - Xi

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to
the death your right to say it.” - Francis M. Voltaire

However, I reserve the right to call a pile of lfye a fecalith. - Xi

The European news media said they showed the celebrations in the
streets of Europe and the Middle East. However, the American news
media neglected to show it to us for some UNKNOWN reason. - Xi

The original estimates for the 1991 Persian Gulf War were
100,000 killed, mostly by B-52s plastering the desert. But,
of course, reality set in and the # was lowered to 5,000.
I paid attention because I had friends and relatives in it! - Xi

“The easiest thing to find is fault.” - Anonymous
–-----------------------------------------------------
Yeah, you are all at fault! :wink: - Xi

Yanny:

You don’t care about these people, your a heartless American. No wonder half the world wants us dead.

Well i tell ya Yanny, thanks for clearing that one up for me. I had no idea why 50% of the world hated us. But now we can all blame him for it :)

Would it be stupid to ask for numbers to back up the whole “50% of the world hates us…” or could I just assume that someone was, shall we say, grasping at straws.

Yanny:

You warmongers are so quick to kill these people. You people only care about Americans.

We only care about Americans… yea that makes alot of sence. That whole Somolia (sp?) that was all about helping Americans. We didn’t go to that country to help people, cause we only care about us.

And when we dropped food in Afganistan. That was all about the Americans. Had nothing to do with feeding civilians, it was all about saving Americans.

Well congrats Yanny. Ya figured us evil warmongers out.

I am just glad Yanny has not started talking about “the Man” keeping him down.

J-Z,
Shhh! The Man will here you.
WHAT WAS THAT?
Did you hear something?
It sounded like chains and duct tape.
Nevermind, I guess it was nothing.
–--------------------------------------
Now I’ve got myself all excited! - Xi

“Fifty percent of the citizens of this country have a
below average understanding of statistics.” - Anonymous

Sadistics? Yeah, I doan unnerstan um. - Xi

@Yanny:

To compare this to WWII is pathetic. …

I agree with most of it, and wholeheartedly!

@TG:

Heres a fact, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians will die when we attack Iraq

It is impossible to tell what will happen. To make that statement is as wrong as if I said, “no civilians will die.” Major flaws.

You warmongers are so quick to kill these people. You people only care about Americans.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You say we are quick to kill these people? Than why have plans been drawn up to avoid the least amount of civilian causalities?

avoid the least amount :) … i know what oyu wanted to say though. THe problem is that “least amount” never is “none”.

After all, Saddam was responsible for gassing 50,000-100,000 Kurds and killing another 1.2-1.5 million Muslims.

That’s true, but why did “the world” watch at that times? He had weapons of mass destruction since then, why is it suddenly that important to go in right now? What was the reason not to step in 15 or more years ago?

Is our main mission to kill the highest number of Iraqi civilians or remove Saddam and his miscreants from power? We are talking about the same Saddam that straves his own people to feed his military.

True for the second, and from any dictators point of view totally understandable. For the first: Why should the mission be “remove him from power”? That’s something that must be started from the arabian world/iraqi opposition (the bits that exist). Going into a country for no other reason than “we don’t like their boss” is total crap. If the US does that, then you agree with the the rest of the world combining their economic/military/poilical power against you, if we don’t like one of your presidents. What about Zimbawe, what about any other dictator? Will you “go and get them all”, because they were not elected in a “proper american-democratic” way?
Going for a head of a state just for the one reason to go for the head of the head of the state is stupid, arrogant, and in retro-respect does make any terrorsit attacks on the US look justified (as they were “pre-emptive” strikes…. see the logic why i hate pre-emptives strikes? Starting a war always creates teh reaction of the attacked fighting back. Therefore, the attacked “proves” that he wanted to fight… flawed logic, isn’t it?)

I charge America to be the first Superpower to do good in the world.

Hahaha this line reminds me so much of Monty Python and the Life of Brian. Sure the Romans bring us the aqueducts, trade, paved roads, ect. but… they’re still evil!

you are right in a sense with that, but did you ask to build the aqueduct? Do you know how much cultural knwoledge and riches have been destroyed by the US-american culture-imperialism?
You need sensitive fingertips when installing new things somewhere else, and that’s not something the US are famous for.

means people live happier than 75% of the people in the world.

Wealth and standard of living do not determine happiness.

That contradicts your last line, you brought wealth and standard of living to a lot of countries (“trade, paved roads, aqueducts”…), and now that isn’t such important anymore?

Why are we attacking him? We’re attacking him for Oil and votes. The Republicans don’t want to talk about their failing economy, they want to talk about their idiotic war. President Bush is using the emotions of the American people left over from 9/11 to keep himself in power.

And to protect us and others from him using weapons of mass destruction maybe?

Well, that could and should have been done long ago then.
I love how GWB threatens the irque that they are not allowed to threaten the US or one of its allies. Different rights for different people? The US being “More equal”?

@Deviant:Scripter:

Do you honestly think it’s in everyone’s best interest (and safety) to let Saddam freely develop any weapons he wants? Or how about the citizens of Iraq? Should we let them live in oppression? What about the POW’s that are still in Iraq from the Gulf War? Do we just abandon them? How about generations from now? Do you want to explain to our grand-kids who are facing nuclear war, why you put your trust into Saddam?

Whebn our grandchildren are grown up, then someone else will rule in the Iraque. You would have bombed the USSR as soon as you could as well, wouldn’t you? They possessed nuclear weapons as well, they “threatened” the US as well.
Unfortunately, they (Chrustchev) were the sensible part in the Cuba crisis, and withdrew to de-escalate. You will call it victory, but being the victor doesn’t mean you are sensible. Germany overran a lot of countries in WWII, does that make us more sensible than the ones we conquered?

I put my trust in Saddam because i know he wants to stay in power.
Therefore, together with Quwait-adventure he lost, he will not dare to do more than saber-rattling. Look at Lybia: in the 80’s it had the role that the Iraque has now, the evil arab terrorist host. Lybia was shown its limits, and it sticked to it.
I see no reason why Saddam would be such a fool and not do the same.
If he does, we (the world) still have enough time to annihilate him and anybody who fights on his side.

UN Weapons inspectors are nothing but a GAME. I’m confident that Saddam is all ready moving chemical and biological weapons AS WE SPEAK. You liberals are joking yourselves if you think that weapons inspectors are going to solve the crisis in Iraq.

The cuba crisis was just a GAME, called “chicken race” in game theory.
Nature often behaves like “it’s just a game”.
Weapon inspctors will not solve the PROBLEMS we have with the Iraque, but they will add to keep Saddam “in bounds”.
The only crisis that exists with the Iraque is that nutcase on the presidents seat on a superpower wants him dead. That’s more a crisis the world has with the superpower.

@Jazz:

Would it be stupid to ask for numbers to back up the whole “50% of the world hates us…” or could I just assume that someone was, shall we say, grasping at straws.

just go out and look around. If you substract the ppl form the US from the count, i would say that way less than 5% of the world “love” or “like you very much”. And saying that 50% hate you (to a higher or lower degree) doesn’t sound that irrational to me.

We only care about Americans… yea that makes alot of sence. That whole Somolia (sp?) that was all about helping Americans. We didn’t go to that country to help people, cause we only care about us.

And when we dropped food in Afganistan. That was all about the Americans. Had nothing to do with feeding civilians, it was all about saving Americans.

….SIGH…

that’s too stupid ot even comment.

just go out and look around. If you substract the ppl form the US from the count, i would say that way less than 5% of the world “love” or “like you very much”. And saying that 50% hate you (to a higher or lower degree) doesn’t sound that irrational to me.

Jealously and animosity run rampant – deal with it. But ask yourself this, and truthfully, would the average spewer of hate not jump at the opportunity to live an American life – would countries of hate resist for one moment to trade their holdings for the wealth of the States?

Weapon inspctors will not solve the PROBLEMS we have with the Iraque, but they will add to keep Saddam “in bounds”.

Ask yourself this, is the access to Iraq unrestricted? Is it possible that Saddam has/already has moved his NBC facilities to sites that UN peacekeepers cannot access? Is it likely that Saddam will continue producing weapons of mass destruction, using the UN as a clever guise to hide his true agendas? How much good did weapon inspectors due to a rapidly mobilizing Germany pre-WWII?

The only crisis that exists with the Iraque is that nutcase on the presidents seat on a superpower wants him dead.

So except for Saddam preaching the destruction of the US, Iraq is perfectly fine? Sure… :roll:

Whebn our grandchildren are grown up, then someone else will rule in the Iraque.

I would rather have the new generation of Americans grow in a Iraq that doesn’t harbor terrorist, that hasn’t invaded neighboring countries, that doesn’t gass their own people.

You would have bombed the USSR as soon as you could as well, wouldn’t you? They possessed nuclear weapons as well, they “threatened” the US as well.

If they were in any ways harboring and aiding terrorist that slammed airplanes into our buildings - I would not hesistate to do so.

Unfortunately, they (Chrustchev) were the sensible part in the Cuba crisis, and withdrew to de-escalate. You will call it victory, but being the victor doesn’t mean you are sensible.

Let’s see, and the moral of the story: we should let Russia build missile silos in Cuba pointed directly at the United States. Right… :roll: