BF2S Forums Serious question (the logic of why America invades a country)

RoosterCantrell wrote:

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

Well because Americans are good at this shit (good at killing people) and they do it all the time. This is what my post is about fool.

Edit: They are not good at killing, but good for finding reasons to invade. + they do it a lot.

Yeah, because Saddam was a nice guy and was good to his people.    We did it just for the money.   

Ever notice this is a GLOBAL debate buddy? This situation is COMPLICATED.  But, thanks for you solving it for us all.

I like how SO MANY people act like we good 'ole chukle aw shuks 'mericans pulld  into Bagdad in er dang 'ole pick up truck lisinin to Toby Keeth and just startid blastin shit with er shotguns and doin a bit ah lootin'.

Yes, but my question is what about the African millitary and dictators. They are bad, But nothing is being done about them..
But want to know how it is so complicated, im asking a question here!!

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

Yes, but my question is what about the African millitary and dictators. They are bad, But nothing is being done about them..
But want to know how it is so complicated, im asking a question here!!

It's complicated by lies and  opposing OPINIONS. Governemnt secrets, which some people fail to realise, is important.  The government must maintain a certain amount of confidentiality.  What good would it be if all our enemies knew what we weere doing.  Unfortunately the Bush Administration goes well beyond what is necissary and does so in an illegal manner. Can I prove it? NO!  No I can't because that's very COMPLICATED.

We went in under the idea that they had WMDs.  Which turned up to look pretty BS.  The Bush Family had a vendetta against Saddam.  However, REPEATEDLY Saddam refused weapon Inspecters any access to several locations.   That is suspicious.   He had Chem and Bio weapons in the past manufacturing them would be difficult, but storing them wouln't be.

We don't know FOR SURE what the entire truth of the WMDs and probably never will. 

The Links to Al Qaida never came to light.  However, would Saddam keep a goddamn diary and an official record about aiding an anti american extreme terrorist group. Chances are that was (IF) kept utmost secret.

Keep in mind that the  "The American Government" and "Americans" are two entirely seperate entities.  I Loathe the President and I think his a lying, corperate owned President that pissed all over the constitution and what America stands for. But, even so, I don't go all left leaning and become Anti Republican.

The problem is is that everyone is either on one side or the other.  Alot of people are too close minded and stead fast in thier owned leaning beliefs that they can't find a nice spot in the middle.  It's Bullshit.   Republicans say the Dems are soft and support terrorists. No they don't.  Democrats say the Republicans a war mongoring fascists that want to rule the world.  no they don't.

Pointing fingers and not listening to what others say is getting old and no wants wants to stop it.

Last edited by RoosterCantrell (2007-06-17 08:23:15)

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

dead_rac00n wrote:

They won't invade any other central Africa's country, because they don't have oil. They may have diamonds, but you can't put that in a SUV, so that's useless.

Wow you people are fucking retarded.

Alright, you tell me why America wont invade Africa like they did to Iraq.

Well mostly because its a continent and we can't exactly do that .

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

dead_rac00n wrote:

They won't invade any other central Africa's country, because they don't have oil. They may have diamonds, but you can't put that in a SUV, so that's useless.

Wow you people are fucking retarded.

Alright, you tell me why America wont invade Africa like they did to Iraq.

Did you just ignore my entire post.  You did. And you proved my point in doing so.  Why ask this question when you won't listen to the answer?

Fen321 wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

Alright, you tell me why America wont invade Africa like they did to Iraq.

Because we weren't under the assumption that Africa was developing WMD's. They are two entirely different scenarios. All of your posts have been, at best, child-like jabs at the US. Grow up, kid.

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Stopping a country from developing them that may have terrorist ties or intentions is entirely different than a country that has them but shows no signs of selling to terrorists.

Fen321 wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

namsdrawkcaB wrote:

Alright, you tell me why America wont invade Africa like they did to Iraq.

Because we weren't under the assumption that Africa was developing WMD's. They are two entirely different scenarios. All of your posts have been, at best, child-like jabs at the US. Grow up, kid.

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Well, North Korea did not demonstrate that they had WMD's until after we were bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that you forgot that.



And, as RoosterCantrell implied, they are two entirely different scenarios.

Last edited by Cerpin_Taxt (2007-06-17 08:33:22)

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

Because we weren't under the assumption that Africa was developing WMD's. They are two entirely different scenarios. All of your posts have been, at best, child-like jabs at the US. Grow up, kid.

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Well, North Korea did not demonstrate that they had WMD's until after we were bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that you forgot that.

Didn't demonstrate could you clarify this for me I'm having a hard time understanding what this would mean.

Fen321 wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Well, North Korea did not demonstrate that they had WMD's until after we were bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that you forgot that.

Didn't demonstrate could you clarify this for me I'm having a hard time understanding what this would mean.

North Korea did not detonate a nuclear weapon until 2006.



Do you actually have an argument?

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

Because we weren't under the assumption that Africa was developing WMD's. They are two entirely different scenarios. All of your posts have been, at best, child-like jabs at the US. Grow up, kid.

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Well, North Korea did not demonstrate that they had WMD's until after we were bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that you forgot that.



And, as RoosterCantrell implied, they are two entirely different scenarios.

North Korea has the backing of a sleeping giant. Would not be too prudent in poking the giant unless you care to see the world in flames

CannonFodder11b wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

WMD's, don't forget WMD's

They're there somewhere, we haven't checked underneath the beds.

"If I was a WMD...."

Until they make a better way then joe running around "combing" the desert (insert witty Spaceballs pic "man we aint found shit!")
There is not way to search vast open desert.  I have been saying it many times as a OIF 1.5 vet that  chemical weapons have been found
(Mosul a chem lab was found, and a AHA was blown open and we found 155mm arty rounds with nice nerve agents, there have been a few 155mm round IEDs in the past that contained some nasty bugs that went off on the people emplacing the IED) Saddam was a smart man satelites cannot pick up half of what is in the open deserts, the man used glue and sand to cover some of his buildings in teh desert knowing that in the day the sun would heat up the sand just like it heats up everything else and thermals will not pick up the buildings. 

Hell there was a long range bomber that was barried int eh desert before the war kicked off that a sandstorm uncovered.  Shits out there its just gotta get found somehow.  But then again what the fuck do i know? I'm only receiving intel dumps every mission set we do, im not sitting at home on my fat ass reading some stupid drive by reporters accounts of things.

Oh yeah i remembered seeing pictures of planes in the desert. The thing is, if they knew there were WMD's and was confident enough to invade for it, they should've found them by now. Regardless of how well hidden they are, if you're confident enough to invade for them, you should be able to find them.

Fen321 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

You seem to forget that other countries such as hmmmmmmmmmm NORTH KOREA has WMDs. Why do you suppose we don't invade them?

Iraq has missiles capable of hitting Europe, North Korea has Asians carrying them. Which is more of a threat?

To OP:

US never invaded Africa? What about Somolia... They just pulled out early.

A threat to Europe -- in all honesty -- you actually think Saddam was plotting to launch an offensive attack on Europe. Why? Why? Why? There is no motivation hence no intentions. The problem with that my friend is that immediately the jig is up no intentions = no threat .

North Korea as of late has been testing missiles into the Sea of Japan -- hey we love Japan (hell I know I do) -- so why not the same reaction towards them? ahhh plot thickens can't use some bullshit excuse twice if its not applied the same for all allies.

For Saddam:

He's one mad man, and we know he might be mad enough to launch the nuke

NK:

It probably took them 20 years worth of money just to build one nuke, their economy is shittacular as well. But I do agree that NK Should have been invaded by the south already...

Parker wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

CannonFodder11b wrote:

Until they make a better way then joe running around "combing" the desert (insert witty Spaceballs pic "man we aint found shit!")
There is not way to search vast open desert.  I have been saying it many times as a OIF 1.5 vet that  chemical weapons have been found
(Mosul a chem lab was found, and a AHA was blown open and we found 155mm arty rounds with nice nerve agents, there have been a few 155mm round IEDs in the past that contained some nasty bugs that went off on the people emplacing the IED) Saddam was a smart man satelites cannot pick up half of what is in the open deserts, the man used glue and sand to cover some of his buildings in teh desert knowing that in the day the sun would heat up the sand just like it heats up everything else and thermals will not pick up the buildings. 

Hell there was a long range bomber that was barried int eh desert before the war kicked off that a sandstorm uncovered.  Shits out there its just gotta get found somehow.  But then again what the fuck do i know? I'm only receiving intel dumps every mission set we do, im not sitting at home on my fat ass reading some stupid drive by reporters accounts of things.

Oh yeah i remembered seeing pictures of planes in the desert. The thing is, if they knew there were WMD's and was confident enough to invade for it, they should've found them by now. Regardless of how well hidden they are, if you're confident enough to invade for them, you should be able to find them.

ever been to a desert?

Doesn't matter, you're confident enough to Invade by saying there's WMD's.

That's like me seeing someone with something illegal in their house, i break in and kill the guy but i can't find what i saw. Now who looks like the idiot? "He must've thrown it away" is a stupid mans excuse. He probably did have them, there probably is evidence that he did. But you still can't find them.

Saddam has made us look like fools, now all credibility has been lost and an Iranian invasion on the same pretext will look even more dumb if we find no proof that Iran are building nukes.

We should've just stayed in Afghanistan and invaded Pakistan.

mekstizzle wrote:

Doesn't matter, you're confident enough to Invade by saying there's WMD's.

That's like me seeing someone with something illegal in their house, i break in and kill the guy but i can't find what i saw. Now who looks like the idiot? "He must've thrown it away" is a stupid mans excuse. He probably did have them, there probably is evidence that he did. But you still can't find them.

Saddam has made us look like fools, now all credibility has been lost and an Iranian invasion on the same pretext will look even more dumb if we find no proof that Iran are building nukes.

We should've just stayed in Afghanistan and invaded Pakistan.

That's very true.  That was an incredibly foolish thing to do.  Someone (Some people) needs to be punished for it.   But we need to keep in mind that it was that reason we did invade.

People need to remember we NEVER said "WE NEED OIL" and Boom! it began.

Parker wrote:

you just compared a house and a desert.......i think you might be slightly confused.

That's true too.

Last edited by RoosterCantrell (2007-06-17 09:06:47)