VeeshanVault

miir wrote:In about 6 months, Saddam went from being a powerless nusiance in the middle east for nearly 10 years to 'Public Enemy #1' and the biggest threat to American Homeland Security since the Russians in the cold war... thanks to George W Bush and his spin doctors.

I can happen only in the Middle East Baby.

Hey, this thread is going silly...
I saw your name under 'last post by' but when i clicked it, only mine was showing.

Miir,


Did Bush call Hussein and tell him to invade?


Then I don't see the point of your post.


Hussein caused his own problems, called attention to himself.

Fallanthas wrote:Miir,


Did Bush call Hussein and tell him to invade?


Then I don't see the point of your post.


Hussein caused his own problems, called attention to himself.

Stealth Post

Fallanthas wrote:Miir,


Did Bush call Hussein and tell him to invade?


Then I don't see the point of your post.


Hussein caused his own problems, called attention to himself.

**whoooooooosh**

Where has Saddam been for the past 12 years?

Other than a blurb every few years he has essentially been an invisible powerless pawn in the middle east. He's made no hostile actions towards other countries, his country has been in financial trouble, his military is a shadow of it's former size and power....

Then all of a sudden, last November George W Bush started this massive push in the media to paint Saddam Hussein as a threat to Homeland Security.




I'm not talking about the events leading up to the first gulf war.
That was 12 years ago. Saddam Hussien had not been front page news for nearly 11 years until Oct/Nov 2002.

Do you understand that?


What, in the 12 years following the Gulf War, did Saddam do to bring undue attention on to himself and Iraq? What exactly did Saddam Hussein do that conviced Bush supporters that he was a direct threat to homeland security?

He was still Alive!

It's quite obvious that some of you have not read the report on the REASONS why we're in Iraq right now.

Now granted, if you don't give a shit about what's going on in the world right now, or you're afraid that a logically written, convincing arguement might make you pro-war, please avoid this article at all costs. It is a transcript of Collin Powell's UN Presentation. Printed, it is about 19 pages long, and ever informative about our reasons for taking out Saddam.

<a target="_blank" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... tml">Click Here</a>

Where has Saddam been for the past 12 years?

He's been in breach of multiple UN resolutions for 12 years now. Exactly when do you suggest we do something about it? How much longer do you want us to allow him to build up, when it is inevitable that an invasion is going to be necessary to get him to comply?

The longer we wait, the more he can build. And not just regular weapons. His nuclear program never halted. He's been trying to get the last pieces of a nuclear bomb for a while now. We wait much longer, and he's gonna get it, and then the problem gets worse and worse until we're looking at WW3.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I prefer another Gulf War to another World War.

But Searyx! How can you know for sure?

History? Take a look at the history of the world and the history of Saddam and draw the logical conclusion. Saddam has been trying to stay off of our radar so he could build.

Wow!


Do I need to point out the discussion you stuck your nose into WAS about the first gulf war??


Pay attention.

Fallanthas wrote:And you did it again.


Millie, you cannot argue that other countries, dictators, whatever being worse in any way invalidates the fact that the world will be a better place without Saddam in it.

Once again, I did not miss your point at all. Your point is based on a flawed logic that says "Start with the guys at the top of the list and proceed to the bottom".

The world does not work that way. You deal with what issues you can, when you can. By your logic I should forget about making my car payment and concentrate on retiring my mortgage because I owe more on the house.

Once again, you managed to misread my post. That wasn't what I was saying AT ALL. Please reread, preferably with your Phonics tutor on hand, until you get what I'm trying to say.

Fallanthas wrote:

The 'point' is that if the US was so concerned about liberating oppressed people it would not have started with Iraq, nor would it maintain it's ties with several of it's "allies" who are just as oppressive as Saddam if not more so.

Congrats on saying the SAME FUCKING THING OVER AGAIN!!!


Who says we need to start at any specific point? Once again, you are making an assumption based on flawed logic. There is no list. Think about it.

I'm saying the same fucking thing over again because you failed to understand what I was saying the first time I said it. Are you as stupid as you make yourself out to be? Please tell me you're not. My faith in humanity depends on a "no."

Saddam painted the bullseye on his own forehead by first invading a neighboring country, then thumbing his nose at the United Nations (i.e. the diplomatic community)

Like I told Kooky in another thread, put your GW hate away, it's making you look foolish.

You have an exceedingly narrow worldview sir.

Fallanthas wrote:you are making an assumption based on flawed logic.

ummmm...

I shouldn't of said Israel was an arab country. Stupid me. I meant to say Israel and other Middle East countries.

Millie - You make a good point about trying to be too paternalistic. I didn't think about that angle when I made my comment but would have to agree with yours. We definitely don't need another Israel to protect and defend in the middle east.

This Iraq war is definitely no Vietnam. Vietnam was mostly us defending south vietnam from being taken over. Had we turned it into an offensive war and gone after the north vietnamese infrastructure then we could of had a much better chance of winning.

In Iraq we are on the offensive and rolling pretty fast. I think major fighting will be done in the next few weeks and then it will be mop up duty after that. We may have to deal with a lot of guerrillas and suicide bombers but we haven't really seen that much in Afghanistan so I think that once the people feel safe again from Saddam's death squads then they will be more peaceful.

I think the Iraqi people will be better off without Saddam I just wish we had more of a reason to go in there than Bush wanting more oil.

Deward

One more time for the cheap seats.

THE POINT: This war isn't about liberating the Iraqis. If freeing the Iraqis from oppression really WERE the reason why we're invading Iraq, why aren't we 'liberating' any of the other people with whom we have dealings? Claiming this war is about liberating the Iraqi people is a bullshit spin excuse at worst, and hypocritical at best

Bull


Shit


How many times do I have to say this? There is no list that says we have to deal with problem A before we can look at problem B. WHy is that so hard for you to understand?

You make the changes you can, when you can. That or you sit on your ass judging others for trying to improve things.

You really think Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al. were sitting around last summer and thought "Shit! Those poor oppressed Iraqis! Quick! We must risk the lives of our troops and spend billions of dollars freeing these people who's plight we have ignored for 25 years!".

Do you?

Nope.


I think there are a whole host of reasons for this war. Number one being that the Bush clan wants a protectorate in the Middle East to try and leverage a more democratic way of life. Personally I don't think it will work, but hell, everything else I could throw out has already been tried.


That doesn't change the fact that liberation is going to occur. I am quite Machiavellian enough to accept the outcome, even if I don't care for the motive.

Fallanthas wrote:Nope.


I think there are a whole host of reasons for this war. Number one being that the Bush clan wants a protectorate in the Middle East to try and leverage a more democratic way of life. Personally I don't think it will work, but hell, everything else I could throw out has already been tried.

heh what else has the US tried?

"Gee we tried assassinating their leaders and setting up our own puppet governments, prolonging wars between them by selling both sides weapons, bombing them, firing cruise missiles at them and setting up military bases on their holy lands. Well, we give up because we can't think of any other ways to get them to like us, so let's just invade!"

You done now?


Or did you want to actually, you know, contribute to the subject?


Fucking stalker.

Fallanthas wrote:You done now?


Or did you want to actually, you know, contribute to the subject?


Fucking stalker.

lol nice try fuckhead. I just totally ruined your entire argument and that is the best you can come up with?

CLUE: I AM NOT AS FUCKING STUPID AS YOU AND I DON'T FALL FOR STUPID SHITHEAD TACTICS.

Fucking stalker

I think he's all out of arguments.

lol nice try fuckhead. I just totally ruined your entire argument and that is the best you can come up with?

CLUE: I AM NOT AS FUCKING STUPID AS YOU AND I DON'T FALL FOR STUPID SHITHEAD TACTICS.

Actually, he just kicked your Mangina ass. You added nothing to the subject but a piss poor flame. You are easily one of the dumbest cunts I've ever known.

I await the "NEENERNEENER I CAN'T HEAR YOU HAHAHhAHAhhaha!1!!" response.

Oh how cute. Searyx worked up enough courage and self-esteem to try and flame me again. Too bad he hasn't gotten any better at it.

kyoukan type-R wrote:Oh how cute. Searyx worked up enough courage and self-esteem to try and flame me again. Too bad he hasn't gotten any better at it.

Has he still got that big gay picture in his sig?

Yes he does. Also, the two posts that I've read of his on this thread have been exact copy and pasted of his posts from FoH's boards.

Ohh... Come on you guys can do better than that. You’re being too nice to each other. It’s starting to sound like a lovers quarrel, not a heated debate.

Said it before, say it again.

You have a point, put it in writing and take your lumps.

You want to flame my point, that's cool.

You want to start personal flames, take it back to the playground. I don't have time for your fourth-grade bullshit.


1. You left out billions of dollars and uncoutnrable hours of diplomatic effort expended in the middle east.

2. In your blind hatred, you assumed I was speaking of just the United States.

Try again.

Fallanthas wrote:1. You left out billions of dollars and uncoutnrable hours of diplomatic effort expended in the middle east.

Yeah, to Israel.

way to go moron.

Oh how cute. Searyx worked up enough courage and self-esteem to try and flame me again. Too bad he hasn't gotten any better at it

Wow. I think that one ranks somewhere up there with "You're a poo-poo head", and "You lose because I say so!"

Nice try, cunt trap, but... oh wait, that was a shitty try.

Try again.

Vetiria wrote:Yes he does. Also, the two posts that I've read of his on this thread have been exact copy and pasted of his posts from FoH's boards.

Hey I give him credit I wouldnt want to type that twice.

Wow, nothing changes.


Ever.


Searyx is still a spastic and the pro war morons are still incapable of doing anything other than spreading bile and garbage wherever they go.


GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Yes Kyuo, we have never spent a dime outside Israel.

We don't have diplomats in any other country.

And of course noone else gets our greenbacks.

the pro war morons are still incapable of doing anything other than spreading bile and garbage wherever they go.

You could easily say the same thing about the anti-war morons. Anti-war are heavy on the criticism, but very light on the alternatives.

LOL! What alternatives? Wait 5 years for this to become a NUCLEAR war? I'm sorry, but isolationism just ain't gonna cut it anymore.