Iraq Attack-for or against?

The Gopher

Do you think Pres Bushs plans on Iraq are justified?Its a thorny issue.On one hand Saddam Hussein is building weapons of mass destruction,but I actually doubt he ever planned to use them except in a no win war situation.Hussein isnt in the mood for starting wars-he realises that he got off the hook by the skin of his teeth in 1991.But there is a danger that if he knew he was screwed he would use the weapons-in the sort of manner that a wounded man who knows hes about to die would try to kill his attacker with a last revenge in mind.IMHO there would have been no Iraq attack if 9/11 hadnt happened.But the handy thing about war is that it masks problems at home-because most american news is still dominated by terror/Afghan related events most Americans probably dont have a clue whether the Bush government is doing well in health,crime,unemployment etc.

bugler

Done to death.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61297

TwoShedsJackson

Pressing the Enter key - can it cause Repetitive Strain Injury??

Venom

I vote yes - sure there is fúck all on telly at the moment.

phoenix2181

I agree with venom, there's bugger all on telly at the moment, & sitting on the couch with a six pack of beer with a large steak with chips watching cnn as the war unfolds before you as some sort of manly feel to it. why don't they also go back to vietnam for a suprise attack just for the crack

Venom

I wouldnt be surprised if they did go back to Vietnam.

Baby Bush is a fúcking grade A nutcase and the only reasion they are even talking about going after Saddam again is to divert attention away from the fact that the US econamy is going down the tubes fast. A little war, in which the USA has no fear of losing, will divert the attention of the slack jawed yokels of America away from there own crappy lives, and will make them all think there "number one".

Wasnt it not to long ago in Europe, where another little gobshíte called Adolf, started blowing the crap out of his neighbours all in the name of protecting his people's way of life, but more importantly to stop them thinking about how crap their lives were. And we all know how that ended up.

popinfresh

I always knew Bush was bad news... He is exactly like Hitler in his mentality . He speaks of America as if they're a superior race,and if anyone seems like a threat to them, they will **** them over good. Cmon, they couldnt get al Quaieda so they got the Taliban. And now they haveve 't been getting results lately so they're attacking Saddame. This is serious S)hit. Judging from the surrounding arab country's attitudes, we are possibly about to witness a 3rd world war. The thing that gets to me is that it's still fixable.. Just send in the weapons inspectors. Bush doesn't even seem to be trying to do this. Even if Saddame did get nukes, he'd probably just treaten to use it, that's what Bush doesn't want. Bush will be viewed in the history books as an even bigger wanker than Hitler.

JustHalf

I doubt Bush will systematically hunt down and murder any and all dissent (and Jews). 6 million, eh? And that was only in his own country.

Seriously, compare Bush to Hitler and I'll want to hit you. Would you also compare Blair to Poyl Pot (sp?) ?

Venom

Hitler's reign is finished where Bush's is not. The weapons at Bush's disposal are alot greater that what the Germans had in WW2 and the Americans have used mass destruction weapons before and have stated they will use them again. How many people have died due to the trade embargo that the American's enforce on Iraq? How many people have died due to American influience in the various middle east countries and Vietnam?

Hitler was insane but he was the leader of Germany during WW2 where's Bush is a stupid little man and nothing more that a puppet for his Father,his fathers old cabinate and his rich industrial buddies.

I wonder if you add up the number of deaths from dropping the 2 atomic bombs on Japan, Vietnam, the setting up of various dictators in area's of the world like the middle east and latin America, Irag, Afganistan and possably Iraq II how the Americans death would stack up against the Germans during WW2?

Tony Blair seems to be going out of his way to make Britain another State of America. Maybe he likes the term Governer better than Prime Minister.

JustHalf

FFS man, get some sense. Don't blame Bush for any crimes of previous presidents -- which you are doing here:

I wonder if you add up the number of deaths from dropping the 2 atomic bombs on Japan, Vietnam, the setting up of various dictators in area's of the world like the middle east and latin America, Irag, Afganistan and possably Iraq II how the Americans death would stack up against the Germans during WW2?

Thanx 4 The Fish

Perfectly good way to boost a flagging economy, doing just like his Daddy did. Bill Hicks had a very interesting take on this.


"We hope you enjoyed your fireworks show. It was so pretty, and it took our mind off of domestic issues! The Persian Gulf Distraction."

Truer today than it ever was.

Venom

Well Thanx 4 The Fish it has worked a treat for the Americans before and Im sure it will again. Sure even the Brits got in on the act during the darker parts of the Thacher years went they went to war over a rock with a few sheep on it. Sure there's nothing like blowing a retreating ship full of wounded teenagers out of the water to boost national pride.

Turnip

Originally posted by Venom

I wonder if you add up the number of deaths from dropping the 2 atomic bombs on Japan, Vietnam, the setting up of various dictators in area's of the world like the middle east and latin America, Irag, Afganistan and possably Iraq II how the Americans death would stack up against the Germans during WW2?

I for one am not particularly bothered about Japanese German and Vietnamese civilian deaths in those wars. The Japs were utterly barbaric in their imperialist campaign and they didn't sign the Geneva convention which allowed them to treat POWs worse than animals. The Germans allowed themselves to be pushed around by a pathetic bunch of retards. They enjoyed it in fact. They handed over the Jews then pleaded innocent. The Vietnamese and people of various latin american states were communists. Good riddance.

I would rather have america (western civilisation) in control of the earth's economically vital regions than have a bunch of crazy medieval dictators, communists and inbred monarchists getting more powerful and threatening anyday.

Venom

I see that Turnip da Troll is back.

Turnip

Originally posted by Venom
I see that Turnip da Troll is back.

I'm a realist and a pragmatist. If we in the west want to preserve our high standard of living and security, threats must be neutralized by either economic or military means. I look forward to the day when the people of the middle east, third world and asia enjoy the same freedoms and level of material comfort that we do. That won't come about by wishy washy liberal idealism and optimism.

popinfresh

QUOTE]I for one am not particularly bothered about Japanese German and Vietnamese civilian deaths in those wars[/QUOTE]
That's just unintelegent..

daveg

First of all do I agree with an attck on Iraq. I didn't until I read
this I have no doubt that if Saddam Hussain got his hands on a nuke he would use it. Perhaps on Isreal to destabilise the middle east even further.

Zombrex

Pakistan has the bomb, and they are far more likely to use it againt India ... why isn't America invading them??

Thanx 4 The Fish

Because Pakistan was nice to America in the [glow=5]War against terror[/glow] If they had of caused them any trouble, GWB would have already invaded them, saying that they were harbouring Al Qaeda guys or somesuch.

Venom

daveg get a grip man. You cant base any opinion on what was said on SKY news ffs.

Iraq has the potential to build a working nuclear bomb within a year, a leading think tank has warned.

Ireland along with many other countries has the potential to build a nuclear bomb. Just because we could do a thing dosent mean we deserve to get stomped on by the USA tho.

The Iraqi government would need to import nuclear material from abroad, but once that has been achieved there is nothing to stop Saddam Hussein developing nuclear missiles

Considering they cant get medical supplies or food or even standard weapons into the country I somehow doubt they can get their hands on the parts needed for a nuke.

Now seeing as this peice was on SKY, and this John Chipman has not been heard of before, what makes his opinion any more valid that some wino on the street. This is just the usual propaganda so the idiot in the street will feel its right in what the USA and Britian are doing. Even the top weapons inspectors from the UN have stated that Iraq just dosent have the level of MDW's that they are being made out to have.

The USA set up Saddam and when he got pissed off taking orders from them they set him up as the boogie man. They did the same thing with Noriagea. Iraq has done nothing to deserve being invaded in the sence that most of the governments in that area, are exactly the same as Iraq but tag the line with the US.

When Bush needs a new boogie man after they take out Saddam I wonder what country will get picked?

netwhizkid

Yes,
i totally back an attack on Iraq, saddam is building nukes, he is no threat to Ireland but he is to our Neighbours England if he nuked them we'd be affected too, so take him out sooner rather than later,

Regards netwhizkid

Venom

Where's Castor Troy to ban these Trolls when needed?

Bring back Castor Troy I say.

amp

What's this? Use a troll to catch a troll?

I don't see any trolls in this thread. Amazingly stupid and innaccurate statements yes, trolls no.

Sing it with me now:

Baaaackkkk Onnnnn Toooopic!

Venom

Dont get cócky little fellow

mike65

Better to attack now than leave Saddam enough time and space to devolope his nukes, as once he's shown his got one that'll be it.

Game Over.

He could never be challanged which would mean threatening his oil producing neighbours so Iraq
would become the dominant supplier whether we liked it or not. As in buy "my oil or I nuke Kuwait/Isreal/Iran"

You might regard that as utterly mad but then thats exactly the sort of thing Saddam would do.

Many who supposedly are against the US/UK view, secretly would like to see him gone while many others
fear what would happen if Iraq became democratic and open. Saudi/Egypt/Sudan/Iran and others fear freedom
of thier ppls. Meanwhile the Russians and French don't want Saddam out as he owes them billions of dollars
in contracts going back years.

A few examples...

http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2002/07/5-NOT/not-110702.asp
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/990820/1999082007.html
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/980703/1998070350.html
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/1999/msg00786.html

Mike.

mayhem#

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1984459.stm

'nuff said...

entropi

I am against this war for some reasons, mainly coz bush is such a bleeding muppet jus trying to do wht DADDY couldn't do, which is oust Saddam......

Another is coz he cant get "DustBinLaden" dead or alive almost a year later and is totally p*ss*d now.

And my last one.... bush snr+jnr are both dumb mofo's who only believe in war and i aint liked them EVER anyway.

daveg

Venum in reply to your comments:

My comment was not based on the sky news report but more on the assessment from the International Institute for Strategic Studies which is what the sky news report was based on.

Ireland along with many other countries has the potential to build a nuclear bomb. Just because we could do a thing dosent mean we deserve to get stomped on by the USA tho.

What a ridiculous comment. Does Ireland have any motive or will to build a nuclear bomb - no. Does Iraq - yes.

Considering they cant get medical supplies or food or even standard weapons into the country I somehow doubt they can get their hands on the parts needed for a nuke.

I'm pretty sure Sadam would get his hands on some plutonium/uranium from China/Russia (on the black market). And do we think he would use such a weapon - yes I think so. He has already used chemical weapons on his own people so why wouldn't he use a nuclear weapon against another country.

Venom

What a ridiculous comment. Does Ireland have any motive or will to build a nuclear bomb - no. Does Iraq - yes.

You missed the whole point. Its not a case of would we its a case of COULD we. Just as that bullshít report said that Saddam COULD build nuclear weapons IF he got the parts needed. There is a big difference between COULD and is ready to nuke the crap out of another country. Have any of the people who wrote this report even been to Iraq themselves to see what sort of weapons Iraq has?

I'm pretty sure Sadam would get his hands on some plutonium/uranium from China/Russia (on the black market).

You know this for sure? Can you back up your statement with proof? Wanna share you evidence with the rest of us?


I'll be the first to admit that Saddam is an evil bastard and deserves to get taken down but what about all the civilian's that tend to get killed during these American liberation wars? And who the fúck gave the US the right to police the planet? They have caused most of the hassle in the first place by setting these Dictators up. They pissed of various countries by meddling in affairs just to suit there own ends and now have to deal with the fact that even there so called allies in the middle east hate them yet now they are using this as a excuse to protect there way of life.

daveg

Venom would you prefer to leave it until Sadam had built a Nuclear device. My point here is not that I agree with the US policy. I don't. But I think that Sadam is a real threat to our planet and I personally believe he is close to developing Nuclear weapons and that he would use them. Also I do not have evidence that Sadam would get his hands on some plutonium/uranium from China/Russia (on the black market) :rolleyes: FFS do you have evidence that he doesn't ? I'm taking this point as it seems to be the general concensis.

I'll be the first to admit that Saddam is an evil bastard and deserves to get taken down but what about all the civilian's that tend to get killed during these American liberation wars?

I totally agree.. but what can you do. If you dont take Saddam out of power he could develop and use a nuclear bomb and kill millions.

Venom

The problem that I and alot of other people have with the whole Invasion Iraq gig is that its one country who is deceiding the fate of another and their lapdog allies in Britian will just go along with it.

If some other middle eastern country wanted to put Saddam out of business, as he is like right on there door step, I would have no problem. But who the fúck is America to deceide what a country can and can not do. Saddam hasnt bothered anyonein the last 10 years ffs. Also considering how bad other governments are to their people and neighbours, will the states be going after them as well?

popinfresh

If they really wanted to prevent Saddam from making nukes they should at least have encouraged the return of weapons inspectors. But they didn't. They just declared war. They have no evidence he's making nukes. The fact that war was their first option, (even though return of weapons inspectors is just as effictive and a cheaper solution) shows that this "nuclear threat" just a cover-up story they're using as an excuse to get to Iraq's oil. It is all about oil.. There are governments all over the world worse than Iraq. But America chose to stand up to Iraq because oil was concerned. The sanctions on Iraq were to control oil prices. And now it suits america to return to Iraq's oil. Since they are not on friendly terms with Saddam, they are going to get rid of him. Why do you think they "liberated" Afghanistan. Now that they have Afghanistan, which ironically is said to have a lot of untapped oil, they seem to have lost interest in Osamma Bin Laaden. This hints that they used Osamma as an excuse to get to the Afghan oil. Basically what America is really saying to opposers of the US (that have oil)is give us you're oil, or we'll make you look evil and make you hated. Then we'll look like heros if we bomb you (keeping in mind that the Taliban are not Al quaida).

pro_gnostic_8

First sentence of your post:-

Originally posted by popinfresh
If they really wanted to prevent Saddam from making nukes they should at least have encouraged the return of weapons inspectors.

My understanding of the issue was that the UN has been ENCOURAGING the return of weapons inspectors for the last 4 years.

popinfresh

My understanding of the issue was that the UN has been ENCOURAGING the return of weapons inspectors for the last 4 years.

I'm talking about the US, not the UN. Whilemost countries are trying to get the weapons inspectors back in, the USA seems to be starting a war, without even trying to negociate alternatives. Why would they spend billions on a war, unless they are going to gain financially (Iraq's oil)

pro_gnostic_8

Originally posted by popinfresh
I'm talking about the US, not the UN. Whilemost countries are trying to get the weapons inspectors back in, the USA seems to be starting a war, without even trying to negociate alternatives.

And I'm talking about the U.S. too........ the UN is inclusive of the US. Your statement "While most countries are trying to get the weapons inspectors back in" is in error........ ALL member states of the UN have been trying to achieve this (by the fact that it was a UN general resolution).

yankinlk

where are all the intelligent posters gone too? this whole thread is filled with trolls. None of the usual chaps around???