Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

 

2006-11-05 07:08:12
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6806|San Diego, CA, USA
I don't really care about WMDs...they have all been shipped to Syria anyhow.  What I care about is that Saddam was just sentenced to death by his own country (first time in history a dictator has been), and it wouldn't had been possible without the war.

Yeah, this second trial of Saddam's will showcase the killing of the Kurds which he did use Mustard Gas...which is a WMD.  The papers showing that he knew how to get started to make a nuke that was resently posted on a United States government website doesn't help his cause either, nor do I care.  I mean look at his neighbor Iran who actually is trying to make nukes...and are well on their way.

Also check the video I posted earlier where they did find WMDs several months back.


Looks to me that if we have another Republican president, we could definiately see a war with Iran in 2009.  And this time we'll have alot more proof.
2006-11-05 11:56:25
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina
It doesn't matter if Iraq had WMD's or not.  We would've attacked them either way.  This isn't really about WMD's.  This is about the military industrial complex.  We invaded Iraq because we have a government run by defense industry special interest groups.  The Bush family is the premier war profiteering family of the U.S.
2006-11-05 12:06:15
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Turquoise wrote:

It doesn't matter if Iraq had WMD's or not.  We would've attacked them either way.  This isn't really about WMD's.  This is about the military industrial complex.  We invaded Iraq because we have a government run by defense industry special interest groups.  The Bush family is the premier war profiteering family of the U.S.
I'm sick of hearing about WMD's and oil. It doesnt matter why we went to war. All that matters is that Saddam is outta power and on his way to hell soon. It surprises that most people fail to realize that. Its about fucking time we went in there and ousted that asshat. Now I realize that the US is the only country with balls ( maybe England too) to do anything about it. About Bush profiting from the war, if you were given the chance to oust one of the worlds most evil tyrants and make a few bucks why wouldnt you do it? I know I would.
2006-11-05 12:10:20
ShellShock.PwN
Member
+31|7045|Barrie Ontario
o so they just got the maual to build one just so they can put it on their shelf to look at for the pictures once in a while.....
2006-11-05 12:24:44
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6663|North Carolina

arabeater wrote:

I'm sick of hearing about WMD's and oil. It doesnt matter why we went to war. All that matters is that Saddam is outta power and on his way to hell soon. It surprises that most people fail to realize that. Its about fucking time we went in there and ousted that asshat. Now I realize that the US is the only country with balls ( maybe England too) to do anything about it. About Bush profiting from the war, if you were given the chance to oust one of the worlds most evil tyrants and make a few bucks why wouldnt you do it? I know I would.
First of all, we helped Saddam rise to power.  We may have taken him out, but he may not have even entered power if it weren't for us.

Second, Bush's family has profitted from war since WW1.  It's basically a family tradition by now.  Some wars are inevitable, like WW1 and WW2, but Iraq was far from that.  When you stand to benefit from increased warfare and you're the president, there is a strong temptation to enter war regardless of whether or not it ultimately benefits your country as a whole.  I don't see how attacking Iraq has benefitted America.  We can argue about whether or not it has benefitted the Iraqi people, but with America, it seems pretty clear.  We're billions deeper in debt, and we've lost 3,000 soldiers.  Another 10,000 soldiers are permanently injured.  Where is the benefit for us?
2006-11-05 12:39:42
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Turquoise wrote:

arabeater wrote:

I'm sick of hearing about WMD's and oil. It doesnt matter why we went to war. All that matters is that Saddam is outta power and on his way to hell soon. It surprises that most people fail to realize that. Its about fucking time we went in there and ousted that asshat. Now I realize that the US is the only country with balls ( maybe England too) to do anything about it. About Bush profiting from the war, if you were given the chance to oust one of the worlds most evil tyrants and make a few bucks why wouldnt you do it? I know I would.
First of all, we helped Saddam rise to power.  We may have taken him out, but he may not have even entered power if it weren't for us.

Second, Bush's family has profitted from war since WW1.  It's basically a family tradition by now.  Some wars are inevitable, like WW1 and WW2, but Iraq was far from that.  When you stand to benefit from increased warfare and you're the president, there is a strong temptation to enter war regardless of whether or not it ultimately benefits your country as a whole.  I don't see how attacking Iraq has benefitted America.  We can argue about whether or not it has benefitted the Iraqi people, but with America, it seems pretty clear.  We're billions deeper in debt, and we've lost 3,000 soldiers.  Another 10,000 soldiers are permanently injured.  Where is the benefit for us?
Ok I can say the same thing about Nazi Germany. How did we benefit from going to war in Europe? We had to go to war with Japan but why with Germany? We lost alot more than 3,000 troops there and spent billions there as well. So what your saying is every war we fight we should benefit from it somehow. Correct? In that case we have numerous contracts to rebuild Iraqs infrastucture worth billions paid for by the sale of oil from the Iraqi government. As far as the 3,000 dead troops I understand what your saying. I have served there and had several friends die and become seriously wounded. The Iraqi people will benefit from the war but as to when is another question. I'm not saying the war in Iraq was a justified war, all i'm saying is that something needed to be done with Saddam and it just so happens that the US did it and we are paying the human toll for it. Is it worth it? In my opinion I say yes, but hey what do I know according to John Kerry i'm just an uneducated drone. LOL!
2006-11-05 13:45:52
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|6980|Eastern PA

arabeater wrote:

Ok I can say the same thing about Nazi Germany. How did we benefit from going to war in Europe? We had to go to war with Japan but why with Germany? We lost alot more than 3,000 troops there and spent billions there as well. So what your saying is every war we fight we should benefit from it somehow. Correct?
Germany and Italy declared war on the US after the US declared war on Japan following Pearl Harbor (four days later infact, on Dec. 11th). Only then did the US declare war.

War had raged in Europe since 1939 (and if you count Japanese action in Asia, since 1931) with no entry of US combat forces.

Last edited by Masques (2006-11-05 13:55:17)

2006-11-05 14:10:24
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Masques wrote:

arabeater wrote:

Ok I can say the same thing about Nazi Germany. How did we benefit from going to war in Europe? We had to go to war with Japan but why with Germany? We lost alot more than 3,000 troops there and spent billions there as well. So what your saying is every war we fight we should benefit from it somehow. Correct?
Germany and Italy declared war on the US after the US declared war on Japan following Pearl Harbor (four days later infact, on Dec. 11th). Only then did the US declare war.

War had raged in Europe since 1939 (and if you count Japanese action in Asia, since 1931) with no entry of US combat forces.
Yes I know that but the question was how did we benefit from going to war in Europe? Just because they declared war on the US doesnt mean that we have to declare war on them. The only reason they declared war on the US was Japan was their ally. Other than that Germany wanted nothing to do with the US. As I stated before the war in Europe had no benefit for the US and yet we still fought in it losing a shit ton of troops and spent alot of money for what? The sake of Europe? How does that benefit the US? It doesnt. Yet we go to war with Iraq and its the same concept and people are asking why we're there? The only thing we gained in Europe was alot foward military bases and a new enemy, communism. I dont call that benefiting from a war.
2006-11-05 14:20:47
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|6980|Eastern PA

arabeater wrote:

Yes I know that but the question was how did we benefit from going to war in Europe? Just because they declared war on the US doesnt mean that we have to declare war on them. The only reason they declared war on the US was Japan was their ally. Other than that Germany wanted nothing to do with the US. As I stated before the war in Europe had no benefit for the US and yet we still fought in it losing a shit ton of troops and spent alot of money for what? The sake of Europe? How does that benefit the US? It doesnt. Yet we go to war with Iraq and its the same concept and people are asking why we're there? The only thing we gained in Europe was alot foward military bases and a new enemy, communism. I dont call that benefiting from a war.
So, just as a hypothetical, if the UK were to declare war on the US and Australia followed suit 4 days later the US wouldn't be under obligation to declare war on Australia?

At the beginning of WWII, the UK was the US's largest trading partner (and subsequently due the lend-lease agreements the largest recipient of military aid) and you don't think profit was a motive?
2006-11-05 14:32:30
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6838|the dank(super) side of Oregon

arabeater wrote:

I'm sick of hearing about WMD's and oil. It doesnt matter why we went to war. All that matters is that Saddam is outta power and on his way to hell soon. It surprises that most people fail to realize that. Its about fucking time we went in there and ousted that asshat. Now I realize that the US is the only country with balls ( maybe England too) to do anything about it. About Bush profiting from the war, if you were given the chance to oust one of the worlds most evil tyrants and make a few bucks why wouldnt you do it? I know I would.
oh yeah, now that Hussein is gone I feel so much safer and I really think the world is a better place for everyone.  Just think, all he had to do was run down to the local Exxon station and pick up a a can of plutonium or uranium and he would have had a small nuclear weapon,  I shiver when I think about it.
2006-11-05 14:34:42
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Masques wrote:

arabeater wrote:

Yes I know that but the question was how did we benefit from going to war in Europe? Just because they declared war on the US doesnt mean that we have to declare war on them. The only reason they declared war on the US was Japan was their ally. Other than that Germany wanted nothing to do with the US. As I stated before the war in Europe had no benefit for the US and yet we still fought in it losing a shit ton of troops and spent alot of money for what? The sake of Europe? How does that benefit the US? It doesnt. Yet we go to war with Iraq and its the same concept and people are asking why we're there? The only thing we gained in Europe was alot foward military bases and a new enemy, communism. I dont call that benefiting from a war.
So, just as a hypothetical, if the UK were to declare war on the US and Australia followed suit 4 days later the US wouldn't be under obligation to declare war on Australia?

At the beginning of WWII, the UK was the US's largest trading partner (and subsequently due the lend-lease agreements the largest recipient of military aid) and you don't think profit was a motive?
No they wouldnt be obligated to until either one of those countries attacked the US in some form of military strike. Look man I see where your coming from but just because a country declares war on the US doesnt mean that the US has to declare war on them. Note where you said at the beginning of WW2 (the US was not involved at the time) the UK was the US's largest trading partner, well it wouldnt have mattered if we were involved in the european campaign or not they still wouldve been our largest trading partner. So there was no need for the US to be involved in Europe, except for the fact that England was our ally. Bottom line is England would have purchased equipment and supplies from the US even if we never set foot in Europe to begin with. Now if England would have been invaded by Germany then that would have been in our interests financially to intervene, but until then we had nothing to gain from the European Theater.
2006-11-05 14:36:33
herrr_smity
Member
+156|6885|space command ur anus
There Are No Wmd In Iraq Is That Soooo Fucking Hard To Get Into Your Head

Last edited by herrr_smity (2006-11-05 14:37:05)

2006-11-05 14:36:56
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Reciprocity wrote:

arabeater wrote:

I'm sick of hearing about WMD's and oil. It doesnt matter why we went to war. All that matters is that Saddam is outta power and on his way to hell soon. It surprises that most people fail to realize that. Its about fucking time we went in there and ousted that asshat. Now I realize that the US is the only country with balls ( maybe England too) to do anything about it. About Bush profiting from the war, if you were given the chance to oust one of the worlds most evil tyrants and make a few bucks why wouldnt you do it? I know I would.
oh yeah, now that Hussein is gone I feel so much safer and I really think the world is a better place for everyone.  Just think, all he had to do was run down to the local Exxon station and pick up a a can of plutonium or uranium and he would have had a small nuclear weapon,  I shiver when I think about it.
*sniffing* I sense a bit of sarcasm in you tone young man. Apparently you havent deployed to that region of the world to understand what being safe is and is not.
2006-11-05 14:38:01
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

herrr_smity wrote:

There Are No Wmd In Iraq Is That Soooo Fucking Hard To Get Into Your Head
Yea thats because they are now in Syria at the moment, awaiting pickup from a potential buyer.
2006-11-05 14:38:29
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6838|the dank(super) side of Oregon

arabeater wrote:

just because a country declares war on the US doesnt mean that the US has to declare war on them
lol, you made my day
2006-11-05 14:40:04
herrr_smity
Member
+156|6885|space command ur anus

arabeater wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

There Are No Wmd In Iraq Is That Soooo Fucking Hard To Get Into Your Head
Yea thats because they are now in Syria at the moment, awaiting pickup from a potential buyer.
i give up.
2006-11-05 14:40:56
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6938|Colorado Springs, CO

Reciprocity wrote:

arabeater wrote:

just because a country declares war on the US doesnt mean that the US has to declare war on them
lol, you made my day
Im glad to hear that. So your saying that if oh lets get crazy here for a sec, Jamaica declared war on the US we have no other option but to declare war on them even if they havent launched any military strikes at the US and vice versa?
2006-11-05 14:41:48
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6838|the dank(super) side of Oregon

arabeater wrote:

*sniffing* I sense a bit of sarcasm in you tone young man. Apparently you havent deployed to that region of the world to understand what being safe is and is not.
being hunted down by sectarian death squads makes me feel safer.  getting caught in crossfire while trying to buy groceries would make me feel safer.  Being assassinated simply because I am the dean of Baghdad University would make me feel safer.
2006-11-05 14:47:03
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6838|the dank(super) side of Oregon

arabeater wrote:

Im glad to hear that. So your saying that if oh lets get crazy here for a sec, Jamaica declared war on the US we have no other option but to declare war on them even if they havent launched any military strikes at the US and vice versa?
careful there sweetie, you're slipping on your own logic.  Jamaica could declare war on the US without committing a violent act, just as we could counter them, and declare war without committing a violent act.  Unless you're suggesting that Jamaica could detonate a small thermoganja devise in the US, declare war, and we would not respond.
2006-11-05 15:08:48
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6726

wreck® wrote:

OMG they found paper ? Definitive proof ..if you don't think paper is a WMD you're obviously a bleeding heart pacifist.
HEY! That paper could be made into spit balls which are biological weapons!
2006-11-05 15:09:38
Naughty_Om
Im Ron Burgundy?
+355|6891|USA
i dont care if he was almost there. what did our pres say? o yea "he has purchased from african nation" wow. until we actually find a bomb. Our pres lied.
2006-11-05 15:16:24
-Whiteroom-
Pineapplewhat
+572|6916|BC, Canada
im sure there are alot of countries out there with more than a faint idea of how to build a nuclear bomb, of course he(sadam) was looking into it..... as spark said, this dosent mean he had any.
2006-11-05 15:36:53
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6839|SE London

This post is pointless. There have been no WMDs in Iraq for the past 10 years at least. Of course Saddam did have WMDs, they were sold to him by a number of countries, primiarly private US companies with government backing. The WMD claim for war was just an excuse - it wasn't why they invaded.

Harmor wrote:

I don't really care about WMDs...they have all been shipped to Syria anyhow.  What I care about is that Saddam was just sentenced to death by his own country (first time in history a dictator has been), and it wouldn't had been possible without the war.
Not so, what about Ceauşescu. What about the dozens of deposed African and South American dictators, I'm sure some of them got executed.
2006-11-05 15:42:22
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6909|USA

Nicholas Langdon wrote:

im sure there are alot of countries out there with more than a faint idea of how to build a nuclear bomb, of course he(sadam) was looking into it..... as spark said, this dosent mean he had any.
did all of you miss the part that said Iraq was about a year awy from having a nuke...Or do you all have selective reading issues??.........Ya can't really be a year away from having a nuke by just reading the fuckin directions on how to build one.
2006-11-05 15:55:44
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|6980|Eastern PA

lowing wrote:

Nicholas Langdon wrote:

im sure there are alot of countries out there with more than a faint idea of how to build a nuclear bomb, of course he(sadam) was looking into it..... as spark said, this dosent mean he had any.
did all of you miss the part that said Iraq was about a year awy from having a nuke...Or do you all have selective reading issues??.........Ya can't really be a year away from having a nuke by just reading the fuckin directions on how to build one.
Earlier in the article it says that the documents were "detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war."

Later it says at the time (ie. the time period to which the documents refer, again, BEFORE Desert Storm) Iraq was close to having a nuke. It was not a year away in 2003 or 2002 or 2001 or 2001 or 2000 or 1995 or 1993, it was close before the first Gulf War (ie. before 1991).

Once again for the learning impaired:
Earlier in the article it says that the documents were "detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war."

Later it says at the time (ie. the time period to which the documents refer, again, BEFORE Desert Storm) Iraq was close to having a nuke. It was not a year away in 2003 or 2002 or 2001 or 2001 or 2000 or 1995 or 1993, it was close before the first Gulf War (ie. before 1991).

Once again from the article:
n September, the Web site began posting the nuclear documents, and some soon raised concerns. On Sept. 12, it posted a document it called “Progress of Iraqi nuclear program circa 1995.” That description is potentially misleading since the research occurred years earlier.

Last edited by Masques (2006-11-05 15:56:39)

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard