UN finally unifies against Iraq

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » November 12, 2002, 8:10 pm

Saddam is a bully. We don't like bullies. We're gonna kick his ass!

Enough Americans approve this course of action to have returned governmental control to Republicans.

I just don't see the conspiracy theory here.

I approve heartily!

(Next dictator, get in line please):evil:

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » November 12, 2002, 11:20 pm

Try taking a look at this article.

http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=19311

Before you make snide remarks about the name of the link, note that this article wasn't written by some fundamentalist raghead. Ignoring the opinionated ramblings, it's interesting to note the facts presented in paragraphs 2, the bottom half of 3, 4, and 5.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 13, 2002, 12:13 am

Metanis wrote:Saddam is a bully. We don't like bullies. We're gonna kick his ass!

Enough Americans approve this course of action to have returned governmental control to Republicans.

Hate to say this dude, but America is a bully, a really big and mean one too. Republicians are the respective "id" behind the bullies facade too.
Just to play devil's advocate, because it is a challenge, lets ponder why they (The Middle East in whole practically) hate us?
Because they are Jealous? Nope.
Because their government has a propoganda machine? Ah HA. They hate us because they have been taught to hate us. Yes, we did some pretty chickenshit things to the middle east, they responded by doing something really chickenshit to us (WTC Event), and now, Bush is trying to do something even less stand up and more chickenshit than them.
Kinda reminds you of a pissing match, doesn't it?
Anywho, onward!
Question: Who has, in present day, a better propoganda machine than even the Nazis?
DING, you are correct! We do!
Has anyone even thought "Why do they hate us so much?" or "Why do we hate them so much?"
Of course not, that would be wise AND productive to reasoning and temperance, something none in America seem to want, no sir.
Conditioned hatred is rarely a ration response, but before you start saying that we do not need fake reasons, we have real reasons after 9.11, then what about before that? In the late 60's my father had a very colorful vocubulary, according to him, including words like "Towel head" and "Sand Nigger". So please do not tell me it was not there before.
Now, why would we want to do this to them?

Bubba Grizz wrote:Who cares if this war is about Oil.

We do. Oil is our life blood.
We do have alternate means of energy, a lot, but each one would obliterate certain aspects of our economy. Better to condition hatred and seize power where the oil is, killing many in the process, than struggling through change.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: 4) Saddam made an agreement to end the Gulf War (one that he was losing in a HUGE way and would have seen him dead) to allow the United Nations to inspect Iraq with no limitations to ensure that all biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons or factories capable of producing them were not present. He has violated this since the very beginning.

Actually, we did (Suprise, American leadership are assholes!). We used the U.N inspections as a cover for C.I.A agents to infiltrate, and a few got caught because the CIA is not what it used to be. Since then, Saddam violated the treaty in a counter response to our activities, which violated the treaty.

I know a lot of you are going to be pissed at this post.
To you I say this. Fuck you.
If I have to choose between willful ignorance (only evil left, IMO) or dasing what you see to be patriotism to the four winds, then bye bye patriotism. Means nothing anyway in a country lead by children, right?

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » November 13, 2002, 12:40 am

I for one am not pissed. I laughed at this post.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 13, 2002, 12:58 am

Please, tell me what amused you so sir

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » November 13, 2002, 1:04 am

Hhmm didnt know about the CIA dudes. Oh and im american, and i know that OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of the middle east hates us. Anyone who can read and doesnt watch tv news all the time and reads other sources of news will know this.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » November 13, 2002, 2:34 am

I

Republicans.

Lucky the US has the balls to do what is right. People will piss and moan and worry as we unseat Saddam, but who the hell cares. No one can stop us and everyone knows that the US is right and the wacked out Islamic Whackos are wrong.

Die Iraq

They are at the very least entertaining.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » November 13, 2002, 11:57 am

Your post makes me very sad, Acies.

Jugata · Post by **Jugata** » November 13, 2002, 12:12 pm

He's right. Sad ain't it?

Vaemas · Post by **Vaemas** » November 13, 2002, 2:15 pm

Sionistic wrote: We have a pretty good distance from Iraq, well more from his missiles. But most, if not all of the other UN countries are in his range. I believe Saddam's range is all the way to england( of course this needs to be verified i'll check into it), kinda funny how england was the one of the first countries to co-op.

Were Saddam actually able to reach England, all of Europe, a large portion of Africa and a major chunk of Asia would be in range. With the embargos in place for the last 11 years, he simply doesn't have the capability of increasing his destructive range by the amount required.

Last I remember, Saddam's primary vehicle of choice for delivering missile attacks was the SCUD. Basically a very outdated descendant of the V-2 with a range between 100 and 180 miles.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... /scud.html

So if we take a look at all major potential targets surrounding Iraq based on range, we have: Iran, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Israel and some portions of former Russian Republics. Even if you expanded the range to 400 miles, you would only add 3 or 4 more countries to the mix.

http://www.abbydev.com/hosted/middle_east.gif

Of all these countries, which ones do you think Saddam's going to launch his missiles towards? Frankly I don't think he's stupid enough to attack any of the Islamic states barring Kuwait (old grudges, also allowing the US to utilize their bases). So Israel is his only other viable option.

Of course, this is all personal speculation so feel free to argue points.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 13, 2002, 7:14 pm

Sorry to make you sad Falla.
I just calls em' as I sees em.
America is a place of Freedom, one I do not take for granted at all.
However, there is a fine line between protecting our civil liberties and using the guise of it for personal advancement.
Like many things, the perfect ideas and ideals of the world fall short due to human beings.
It is a depressing thought, I will grant you that.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » November 14, 2002, 11:19 am

Acies I just saw that your from the East bay area so that explains your post! The nice thing about the good old USA is that you have a opinion and you are allowed to express it as you did. But In America I have a opinion too and my opinion of your post is to ignore it as some bleeding heart liberal who likes to sit around and smoke weed and whine about losing the election again.

KilornCloudwalker · Post by **KilornCloudwalker** » November 14, 2002, 1:31 pm

Acies, bro.. ANY post containing the words 'civil liberties' gets ignored immediately in my book. Gotta agree with Cart on this... it screams bleeding heart liberal and socialism... Your view... you're completely entitled to it. No rights come free. They are earned and paid for in the blood of our people.

You sound very disgruntled and perhaps in your rmind, you have reason to be. Perhaps you'd like to volunteer to go hold Saddam's hand and explain that it was all a big booboo and offer him some of our much needed government funding to rebuild his country since we have wronged him so much and so badly over the years? I am sure Bill Clinton would be free for another speaking engagement... Jimmy Carter can come too!

/sigh

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 14, 2002, 3:49 pm

Acies, I sincerely hope you get your ass kicked this week by someone who lost a father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, husband, or wife in Desert Storm while ousting Saddam from Kuwait after he FORCEFULLY FUCKING INVADED it. Now I know it is probably because the US has been aiding Kuwait to battle against the evil forces of Islam for so many years....whats that you say? Kuwait IS an Islamic country? Well fuck me in the ass and call me Suzie. So the US helped an Islamic country against a lunatic and we are the bad guys? Let me inform you of something you have ignored....the middle east has been at war for 2000 fucking years. The US has been in existence for a little over 200 years. Now explain how we got all this started? Trying to protect a country or two in the region against genocide for the last 50 years is not exactly sticking your nose where it doesn't belong. It is the same damn thing that happened in World War 2, only it got stopped a hell of a lot quicker.

So we sent government agents in to look things over. Well fuck, that is just wrong isn't it? Maybe they UN inspection team lost the number for the fucking Girls Scouts! Maybe this time we can have Aranuil send in a crack Taco Bell team to make sure they aren't stockpiling the secret fucking sauce. Do you really buy that they kicked out the ENTIRE United Nations because they claimed the CIA snuck a couple people onto the team? They sent all these people from 10 different countries and they are upset that 2 of them worked in a government position? Who in the hell are you kidding?

I again say let Israel loose and all will be solved over there. Then we will get you Berkely fucks whining and protesting because we didn't stop them. You assclowns will always find something to protest. Personally i think it is because your own lives are so worthless that you try to find some way to redeem yourself in your own minds. If you think it is so damn wrong of the US to push to get rid of warmongers who attempt to stockpile chemical and biological weapons, then head right on over and help out uncle Saddam. Get the fuck out of the country where people DIED and came home maimed so pussies like you could sit back and complain about how we are such bullies. People gave their lives so you would have the freedom of speech to say such fucked up things. If this was China, you would be in a goddamn prison right now getting your ass kicked blue.

TheCerano · Post by **TheCerano** » November 14, 2002, 4:06 pm

I think we should do what Clinton proposed in 1997, to send in a helicopter full of a bunch of black ninjas sliding down on ropes to scare Sadam to death.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 14, 2002, 4:30 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:So we sent government agents in to look things over. Well fuck, that is just wrong isn't it? Maybe they UN inspection team lost the number for the fucking Girls Scouts! Maybe this time we can have Aranuil send in a crack Taco Bell team to make sure they aren't stockpiling the secret fucking sauce. Do you really buy that they kicked out the ENTIRE United Nations because they claimed the CIA snuck a couple people onto the team? They sent all these people from 10 different countries and they are upset that 2 of them worked in a government position? Who in the hell are you kidding?

Are you on drugs? You had spies in the inspection team.

Try changing your perspective for a minute. You find spies in the inspection team. Are you going to believe that the US fooled the entire UN and slipped these people in or rather after discovering this deceit are you going to be suspicious of the whole program.

You make it sound like discovering that your being spied on is no big deal. The US government doesn't seem to enjoy it very much when China "looks things over" at Los Alamos.

It is possible the inspectors would not have been thrown out if the US government had not cheesed up the process.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » November 14, 2002, 4:52 pm

Well what more is there to spy on when you are there specifically to look at their weapons? I am guessing that the "spy" was just a regular inspector but he had beedy lil weasle eyes that made him look suspicious.
*nod self*

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 14, 2002, 5:02 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/301168.stm

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » November 14, 2002, 5:15 pm

According to Scott Ritter, "the US killed Unscom" - a charge flatly denied by Richard Butler.

See, Butler denied it. So Ritter must be wrong.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 14, 2002, 5:28 pm

Ok...so according to this report we can read the following.

1) After 5 years of not being allowed into certain areas, we sent in some CIA people because we were tired of the agreement not being upheld. This is a direct contradiction to what you have posted yourself....and supports the arguments that Iraq was the one who broke said agreement.

2) We broke the agreements (as did the UK) by inserting government workers into the teams. Did they want Tupperware sales people in there? Again I say, if you have nothing to hide, then it won't matter who comes in. We are not the ones who lost this war. Iraq did. If they did not want to submit to the this, then they could have been turned into a large parking lot for the shiny new Oil-mart.

3) Said intelligence people stopped Iraq from obtaining the very materials they had no need for if they were not producing weapons of mass destruction. And this is something you have against the US intelligence people? Why in the fuck did they need these materials if they have no need for it? If you see me in a store buying a hand towel, lube, porn mags and videos, you better believe I am going to be wacking. If you have doubts that Iraq was going to make some bombs, then you need to see a shrink.

4) Said spies used listening devices and then used information gleaned from it to pick targets. Ummmm...I don't think they were listening for Lawrence Welk with this. I would have to imagine they picked targets based on hard information and were not supposed to be there under agreements made by Iraq.

Again, Iraq lost a war....they had zero rights to tell anyone what they would or would not allow us access to. The first time they disallowed a target to be searched, the forces should have been back pummeling them until Saddam and his entire armed forces were gone. The only god thing to come about is the fact that this time if it comes to war, we will finish off the damned place.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » November 14, 2002, 5:59 pm

Again, Iraq lost a war....they had zero rights

You win and you set the rules... you lose and you suck it up and die. One of America's shortcomings as a nation is our LACK of bloodthirstiness. We whip countries only to turn around and spend $BILLIONS to lend them a hand. This whole issue with Iraq would be moot if we had merely ground Saddamn Insane into sandshit during the Gulf War. Ask Saddamn's victims if he ever offered them a second chance...

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 14, 2002, 6:21 pm

since when is being bloodthirsty an asset?

the spending billions of dollars to rebuild countries is called investment.

not all investments return profits, but some return lesser losses...

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 14, 2002, 6:58 pm

Hi. Iraq submitted to the UN, not the US and Britain. They had no right to sabatage the UN mission.

The largest obstacle with the weapons inspections has always been Iraq's belief that the US was using them for spying. It is quite evident that their suspicions were true.

At one point they refused admittance for the American members of inspection teams only, allowing the rest of the inspection teams to pass. For some odd reason instead of continuing the work without the US members, or better yet fielding full groups of non US members, the inspection teams decided not to bother and returned to base.

I was wrong in stating that Iraq kicked the inspectors out. In fact Richard Butler pulled them out, without permission of the Security Council that he was supposed to be reporting to, the day before the unsanctioned "Operation Desert Fox" bombings. They were then barred from returning.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 14, 2002, 7:04 pm

This guy seems to have a clue...

The standard line is that this is a crisis about Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programmes, caused by Iraqi non-compliance with UN resolutions. Therefore, the argument goes, Iraq will only comply if major military threats are made, and anyway as Saddam has never complied so far, we have to be prepared to go to war to get rid of him.

However, in December 1998, the UN weapons inspectors reported that:
- Iraq's nuclear weapon programme had been eliminated 'efficiently and effectively'
- the elimination of Iraq's chemical weapon and missile capabilities was almost complete
- disarmament work remained in the biological weapon area

- Iraq had still to provide further information in all areas
- Iraq had agreed in principle to long-term monitoring but not to a specific system.

[On the other elements of UN Security Council Resolution 687, Iraq has recognised Kuwait, has returned some but not all Kuwaiti property, has returned some but not all missing persons, is paying compensation though it has denied liability in principle, has not sponsored international terrorism for 10 years according to the CIA but has denied ever sponsoring it and has not fully agreed to servicing all of its external debt]

In other words, far from simply not complying, Iraq had complied with most of what had been asked of it (however grudgingly). It is a fantasy that, as is so often said, Iraq will never comply as long as Saddam is in charge. The UN resolutions allow for partial relaxation of sanctions in reward for partial compliance but this was never offered.

Indeed, before this report was delivered to the Security Council, the US and Britain brought about the withdrawal of UN inspectors and launched their Operation Desert Fox bombing of Iraq without Security Council approval. Iraq has refused to allow the inspectors related to resolution 687 back ever since.

If US policy really was driven by the need to disarm Iraq of WMD then it has been irrational. Their response to incomplete but extensive compliance has been to label it non-compliance, bomb Iraq and call for the overthrow of Iraq's leader. This hardly creates any incentive to comply any further. There has always been a significant thread of US and British opinion who have feared that Iraq will comply because sanctions might then be lifted.

If US policy is rational, then disarmament of Iraq's WMD has not been its priority: instead, the priority, stated all along has been to keep the pressure on for as long as it takes to get rid of Saddam Hussein (as Mil Rai puts it, leadership change, not regime change, which they are actually very frightened of, as indicated by their response to the 1991 uprising: they want rid of him, not the brutal system that runs Iraq). If Iraq had complied fully despite the bombing, maybe the US would have been forced to accept the lifting of the sanctions. That is indeed my guess. But it is also possible that the US would have been able to ensure that Iraq was never declared to be fully in compliance. And it doesn't change the point that US policy makes no sense if it is meant to be aimed at prioritising getting rid of Iraq's WMD. The official US policy objective of overthrowing Saddam represents non-compliance with the very UN resolutions with which Iraq is meant to comply. The leadership change agenda has fundamentally undermined the
arms control agenda.

The dominant framing in coverage is very much a crisis of Iraqi WMD non-compliance. The reality is that the crisis is one of continuing US non-compliance and unwillingness to respond to Iraqi compliance with most of what has been asked of it. To put it bluntly, we are going to war on the basis of lies (some of the people making the argument for war now know what the truth is) and self-deception (some of them believe their own propaganda).

Best wishes

Dr. Eric Herring
Senior Lecturer in International Politics
Department of Politics
University of Bristol
10 Priory Road
Bristol BS8 1TU
England, UK
Office tel. +44-(0)117-928-8582
Mobile tel. +44-(0)7771-966608
Fax +44-(0)117-973-2133
http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Politics
eric.herring@bristol.ac.uk

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 14, 2002, 7:14 pm

omg i emailed him and said STFU gimp!

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » November 14, 2002, 7:21 pm

Forthe,

Inspector = spy. I can't figure out where you got any other impression.

And re-read the document you just posted. Iraq 'almost' complied. They 'almost' provided all the informantion needed for evaluation of their programs.

Iraq had still to provide further information in all areas

Hell, that's the biggest blank check ever written! Where does this guy gets the idea that Iraq is in compliance with the original UN resolution?

Hi. Iraq submitted to the UN, not the US and Britain. They had no right to sabatage the UN mission.

We sent qualified people in to inspect. Frankly, I don't give a fuck if you or Saddam like who they work for, and there was no language in the resolution excluding govenment employees from becoming inspectors. Iraq failed to comply with the resolution by repeatedly denying access to sites all over their country, period.

Arsecn · Post by **Arsecn** » November 14, 2002, 8:39 pm

Kilmol wrote:Maybe this time we can have Aranuil send in a crack Taco Bell team to make sure they aren't stockpiling the secret fucking sauce.

ROFL

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 14, 2002, 11:38 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Acies, I sincerely hope you get your ass kicked this week by someone who lost a father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, husband, or wife in Desert Storm while ousting Saddam from Kuwait after he FORCEFULLY FUCKING INVADED it. Now I know it is probably because the US has been aiding Kuwait to battle against the evil forces of Islam for so many years....whats that you say? Kuwait IS an Islamic country? Well fuck me in the ass and call me Suzie. So the US helped an Islamic country against a lunatic and we are the bad guys? Let me inform you of something you have ignored....the middle east has been at war for 2000 fucking years. The US has been in existence for a little over 200 years. Now explain how we got all this started? Trying to protect a country or two in the region against genocide for the last 50 years is not exactly sticking your nose where it doesn't belong. It is the same damn thing that happened in World War 2, only it got stopped a hell of a lot quicker.

So we sent government agents in to look things over. Well fuck, that is just wrong isn't it? Maybe they UN inspection team lost the number for the fucking Girls Scouts! Maybe this time we can have Aranuil send in a crack Taco Bell team to make sure they aren't stockpiling the secret fucking sauce. Do you really buy that they kicked out the ENTIRE United Nations because they claimed the CIA snuck a couple people onto the team? They sent all these people from 10 different countries and they are upset that 2 of them worked in a government position? Who in the hell are you kidding?

I again say let Israel loose and all will be solved over there. Then we will get you Berkely fucks whining and protesting because we didn't stop them. You assclowns will always find something to protest. Personally i think it is because your own lives are so worthless that you try to find some way to redeem yourself in your own minds. If you think it is so damn wrong of the US to push to get rid of warmongers who attempt to stockpile chemical and biological weapons, then head right on over and help out uncle Saddam. Get the fuck out of the country where people DIED and came home maimed so pussies like you could sit back and complain about how we are such bullies. People gave their lives so you would have the freedom of speech to say such fucked up things. If this was China, you would be in a goddamn prison right now getting your ass kicked blue.

Okay, after rehashing that, I will go down the line. First, I do not know many people who lost someone in Desert Storm, as it was a fairly perfect operation, but if you ever find your way out here, look me up if you ever feel inclined to "punish me".
Genocide, hrm. Well actually, your sir, are an idiot.
It was not about genocide. Kuwait is not Bosnia. Iraq did not invide to kill them, they invaded them to increase there pocket books.
Almost as bad, but still a very realistic spin off of capitalism.
However, Kuwait supplied the U.S., who did not like their future "assets" being placed into Jepordy, so enter the desert shield/storm op.
As to the CIA using their operatives to snoop around, that IS a break in the treaty. Sure, Iraq could have been nice and said "despite what the US did, we will let the UN back in to continue", but hey, Saddam is an asshole.
As to you mentioning Bezerkley, I dislike that place, dislike your association involving me and pot, as I strive to be clean as a whistle to support my art.
People did give their lives for my freedom of speech, and I respect those individuals for it, and I feel bad for people flung into wars to "die" over bullshit issues which could be avoided if we (YOU) were not so concearned about change. I now exersize my right to say these three things:
1)I dislike the idocyncracies in my government at times and I do not like how they twist the word Liberty to coinside with "assets"
2)I love my freedoms, cherish them and hold a place in my heart to those who died to protect that right, not the propganda which you seem so ready to accept with blinders on and..
3)You are a tard. You accept things without questioning them, which makes you a double tard and a coward.
It is not only my right, but my duty as a citizen of the United States of America to question our leaders actions, so please, spare me you "liberal" bull shit, I loved Reagan and supported Clinton, I am an independant.
However, go whack off with your choosen ignorance in the only naturally occurring elephant graveyard on North America, Flordia. It is perhaps the only place left where your views would actually have any bearing anyway.

Kilorn, bro I love you, but I am not going to sit here and say "I am sorry for pointing out our country has done equally fucked up shit, we are just better at covering it up and stupifying our citizens. It was so wrong of me to speak my mind"
Seriously, think dude. You stated that as soon as I mentioned "civil liberities" you lost me...
What is wrong with civil liberites? People died so I can use them, so I guess I will be a good little boy and not point out we can be just as fucked up as the next.
But let me guess, it is okay to leave countries in shambles after we promise aid because we cleared out our threat and re-niged on our promises of a better future of democracy for these people?
You know what, ignorance IS evil. You choose to be ignorant of the fact that we promised to aid these countries that we have stepped into, time and time again, and made war, disrupting their lives and ravashing there homes, that is your choice.
You choose to be ignorant of their deep ingrained since of honor and wonder how dick-holes like Osama Bin'Laden get there support after we knowingly screwed them.
On the same token, maybe Judist might cut the rope from the tree and talk "essencials of turning on those you swear to uphold" with you.

But if might makes right, I guess we are always right. No doubt we are the most powerful nation in this world.
I guess that "With liberty and Justice for all" actually means "Applicable to us only"...

/bigger sigh

((I love this board

))

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » November 15, 2002, 2:27 am

Kilmoll, Cartalas, et al.

You guys are the perfect illustration of how much of the world sees Americans. Antagonizing fatheads. Someone doesn't agree with you and you resort to namecalling. How juvenile!

No one respects a loud-mouth hick holding his nutsack. That is precisely what you look like.

Its too bad that the big mouths affect our country's image.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » November 15, 2002, 10:42 am

Fuck that shit. Being a loudmouth and calling people names does not increase or decrease the validity of any argument. Being an asshole has little to do with being ignorant. What we have here are some ignorant assholes.

I agree that Iraq lost a war and they should have complied completely with the UN resolutions. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that Desert Storm was any sort of altruistic liberation project. That war was about 2 things, oil (which translates into money), and eliminating the biggest threat in the middle east to our red headed step child Israel. That's all.

"and how many legions does the pope have?" -- Joseph Stalin

Might does not make right, but those in power decide what is right, and if they are wrong, in time they will lose their power. Has happened for centuries and will continue to happen. I believe the U.S. culture has a good grasp of what is good or right. Unfortunately, our awesome power seems to be corrupting our government's ability to make good decisions. This I blame on a flawed election system and the endless corruption infesting the government.

There is something to be said about accomplishing tasks peacefully, and using war as an absolute last resort. This idea is lost on Republicans. Waging war is their answer to everything, including domestic problems. What good is having the most powerful military in the world if you can't put it to use, right?

One thing is for sure, the things that Americans fought and died for in the past are not the same things that Americans fight and die for today.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » November 15, 2002, 11:18 am

I agree that Iraq lost a war and they should have complied completely with the UN resolutions. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that Desert Storm was any sort of altruistic liberation project. That war was about 2 things, oil (which translates into money), and eliminating the biggest threat in the middle east to our red headed step child Israel. That's all.

Very true. Sarcastically stated, but very true. We went in because there was a threat to our economy and a state we have promised aid to was under threat.

There is something to be said about accomplishing tasks peacefully, and using war as an absolute last resort. This idea is lost on Republicans. Waging war is their answer to everything, including domestic problems. What good is having the most powerful military in the world if you can't put it to use, right?

/boggle

How many years do you wait, Xyun? How long is long enough to try diplomacy before force is justified. Last I checked we were at 11 and counting since the last time we had to stomp on Saddam to get him to listen.

What is wrong with civil liberites?

How about he fact that they have absolutely nothing to do with the conflict under discussion in this thread?

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » November 15, 2002, 11:52 am

The only justifiable war in my opinion (and the U.N. for that matter) is when a country's national security is threatened by another. Iraq poses no threat whatsoever to the U.S. so force is not justified at all.

Fallanthas please stop talking. I watched CNN today and have already heard everything you have to say.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » November 15, 2002, 12:03 pm

The only justifiable war in my opinion (and the U.N. for that matter) is when a country's national security is threatened by another. Iraq poses no threat whatsoever to the U.S. so force is not justified at all.

It's been proven over the last 60 years that isolationism is a bad idea, Xyun. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 15, 2002, 12:21 pm

If you think for one minute that we went into Kuwait for with oil as the first concern, then you need to attend remedial History 101. Did Vietnam have oil? Did Korea have oil? Did Grenada have oil? Did Poland have oil? Did Somalia have oil? Does Israel have oil? One stinking country in the last 100 years of us protecting the liberties of countries that need help and all of a sudden the big capitalist pig United States is about nothing but serving our own needs. Yeah right. It almost makes me ill to think that some of you need to find something to rally around in protest of the US of A administering human rights aid to countries that need it. You are the same people who sit and cry about the poor starving people around the globe I am willing to bet.

Make up your damn minds.....but don't claim that helping Kuwait was about oil. Come up with some radical new line of thinking.....like maybe we helped a country with limited to no defense against an aggressor who had the number 3 armed force in the world at that time.

Lalanae, I get irate with people who have little respect for the liberties we have in this country. I would prefer to see them deported as to listen to them expressing free speech against the country that allows them to express it. Especially within such proximity to a holiday that we are celebrating the people who served and/or died giving them that right.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » November 15, 2002, 12:37 pm

"Lalanae, I get irate with people who have little respect for the liberties we have in this country. I would prefer to see them deported as to listen to them expressing free speech against the country that allows them to express it. Especially within such proximity to a holiday that we are celebrating the people who served and/or died giving them that right."

Kilmoll while I agree with you 100% on the fact that I hate ppl bashing the country that gives them free speech it is very hard for me to say they cant do it, I mean hell thats what many have fought and died for.

On the Kuwait note who cares if it was about oil or not THEY!!! asked for our help and I guess we were in the right to help seeing 99.9% of the worlds govt's helped too.

The alternative is to close the borders ( Which I think is wrong this country was founded on immigrants).

Have the U.S and GB stop buying oil from the middle east ( Lets see how the world likes the hike in oil prices when the largest consumers of said product stops buying).

People bitch and moan about everything Do we have problems Hell yes we do but so does every other country. Would you rather have free elections and be able to vote for whom you want to, or would you rather be told who to vote for or have a Dictatorship or Monarchy that many countries have.

I think all in all most ppl in all countries have a good heart its a small few that screw it up for everyone. This country gives everyone the right to speak there mind but it also gives everyone the right to use the STFU feature too.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 15, 2002, 1:20 pm

Cartalas wrote:Kilmoll while I agree with you 100% on the fact that I hate ppl bashing the country that gives them free speech it is very hard for me to say they cant do it, I mean hell thats what many have fought and died for.

Typical response. Those that question their goverment, in a country that prides itself on Freedom of Speach, are labeled as unpatriotic. It seems true patriots must have closed minds.

Cartalas wrote:On the Kuwait note who cares if it was about oil or not THEY!!! asked for our help and I guess we were in the right to help seeing 99.9% of the worlds govt's helped too.

Desert Storm was a very just war even with the oil motivation. Iraq had just ended a very expensive war and oil prices were low. Saudia Arabia and Kuwait were blocking any attempts to raise oil prices at that time. I have no doubt that Iraq would have gone after Saudia Arabia after it was done in Kuwait.

But now we have been starving *the people* of Iraq for 10+ years, bombing their infrastructure and walking all over any sense of sovernty they had. Iraq has been penalized more than Germany or Japan was and they have no hope that it will end.

I might even be swayed to see this war as just if the US\British wanted to replace the govenment with a democracy but they have no desire to see that happen. They want to oust Saddam but leave the current power structure intact. What difference will this make? How do we know if the next Saddam will be better or worse?

They abandoned the pro-democratic forces in the uprisings after desert storm and they were slaughtered. Similar to how the abandoned the Afghans, and ignored pleas for help, after they ousted the Russians and let the Taliban take over.

Cartalas wrote:The alternative is to close the borders ( Which I think is wrong this country was founded on immigrants).

huh?

Cartalas wrote:Have the U.S and GB stop buying oil from the middle east ( Lets see how the world likes the hike in oil prices when the largest consumers of said product stops buying).

Yes yes decreases in demand drives prices up!

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » November 15, 2002, 1:30 pm

"Yes yes decreases in demand drives prices up"

Yes in this case it will Think about it OIL is the middle East only source of Income. Turn over anything in your house and see if its Made in Iraq?

These countries thrive on Oil exports

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 15, 2002, 1:55 pm

Before anyone invents\reveals a cheap, clean and renewable energy source I hope they invest in oil stocks then. The price will skyrocket!

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » November 15, 2002, 4:51 pm

Forthe stated:

Iraq has been penalized more than Germany or Japan was and they have no hope that it will end.

Bullshit.

After the end of the second world war both countries were occupied for years after, with portions of their sovereign soil ceded to the Allies for army/air force bases in these countries. Their armed forces were effectively eliminated. Their governments were essentially dismantled and reconstituted as per the will of thier occupiers (yeah I know... the Russians really weren't in charge in East Germany for 50 years...).

Iraq, while sustaining massive damage, has suffered no where near the devastation to their military, infrastructure that Germany and Japan were subjected to. The fact that Saddam remains in power is a testament to the fact that while the UN has tried to influence the government of Iraq, they have NOT allowed occupation of the country and not allowed anyone else to dismantle/replace the government. In fact the reason the economic damage is still being done is because of the Iraqi government and their refusal to cooperate and abide by the rulings of the UN.

I'm sure someone is going to pipe up about the US sending in Spies on the inspection teams, but where else is the UN going to get qualified personnel to conduct these inspections? The local unemployment office???

I don't like the idea of a war. I don't necessarily trust the proponents of it. But I distrust the idea of an Iraq under Saddam with weapons of mass destruction even more. Iraq has proven previously that it is willing to take an agressive stance with its neighbours, be they Iranian, Kurdish or Kuwaiti... trusting in the goodwill of that government, without insurance would be an incredible mistake... and who is going to provide that insurance?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » November 15, 2002, 5:04 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:If you think for one minute that we went into Kuwait for with oil as the first concern, then you need to attend remedial History 101. Did Vietnam have oil? Did Korea have oil? Did Grenada have oil?

Uhh, Viet Nam has vast deposits of oil. Take a look around the world moron. Korea and Grenada were wars fighting the vast spreading disease of communism that was threatening to destroy the world with evilness, because we all know now that communism is evil.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 15, 2002, 10:21 pm

Fallanthas wrote:

What is wrong with civil liberites?

How about he fact that they have absolutely nothing to do with the conflict under discussion in this thread?

Um actually, under the ideals of the United States of America bro, yes they do.
What are civil liberties? Define it.
Now ask yourself "Are Americans the only ones intitled to it?"

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: "Lalanae, I get irate with people who have little respect for the liberties we have in this country. I would prefer to see them deported as to listen to them expressing free speech against the country that allows them to express it. Especially within such proximity to a holiday that we are celebrating the people who served and/or died giving them that right."

Um, you ignoramus, she was not talking about the government, she was talking about you. (despite your ego size, YOU does not equal USA).
Is congress the USA? Is the president? No.
Every citizen is.
I ccan say I love America, I just have problems with the scandals/secrets/idiocy/policies of non-tolerance within our own government, because fags like you dictate you have to be a hard, merciless task master to be strong in this world, instead of well spoken, diplomatic and caring of your people and even those that are not.
I do not know what back water, Jebadiah horse liftin' redneck boon town you grew up in, but this is the 21st century. Premedival stupidity is no longer a fashion statement like it was when you were in 1st grade.
In fact, you know what, please just shut up. You do not care about people, you care only about Americans and it is people like you that dictate the majority of suffering in this world.
If you were born Iraqi, you would hate us because you would be, like you are now, a product of your enviornment, and barely able to hold a cogniscient thought in that very vacant dome of yours.

/flame off

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » November 16, 2002, 4:31 am

Fallanthas wrote: It's been proven over the last 60 years that isolationism is a bad idea, Xyun. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

WTF are you talking about dude? I said war as a last resort, I never said anything about isolationism. Get a fucking clue.

Kilmoll wrote:If you think for one minute that we went into Kuwait for with oil as the first concern, then you need to attend remedial History 101. Did Vietnam have oil? Did Korea have oil? Did Grenada have oil? Did Poland have oil? Did Somalia have oil? Does Israel have oil? One stinking country in the last 100 years of us protecting the liberties of countries that need help and all of a sudden the big capitalist pig United States is about nothing but serving our own needs.

hmmmm..

Xyun wrote:One thing is for sure, the things that Americans fought and died for in the past are not the same things that Americans fight and die for today.

I've got an idea, let's deport every single person that has immigrated to this country!

Kilmoll wrote:I get irate with people who have little respect for the liberties we have in this country. I would prefer to see them deported as to listen to them expressing free speech against the country that allows them to express it.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » November 16, 2002, 8:56 pm

Criticizing the government is an expression of patriotism by an American citizen. That you care enough about it to want to improve it says much more about ones patriotic fiber than blind support ever can.

Furthermore, I've noticed that, with a few exceptions, the Canadians that discuss American politics have some of the most fair, impartial, and accurate arguments that are expressed here.

VeeshanVault

UN finally unifies against Iraq

Who cares?

..

Re: Who cares?

Kilmoll gets it...