Tie Guy Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Very nicely said, Havoc and Admiral. I agree with almost everything you guys said. Bush is NOT committing politcial suicide. 2/3 of the county agrees with him, and last i checked thats enough to get elected. Just check the polls. Now, why do only 3 people here support war and not 2/3? Becuase no one here takes the time to sit down and think about the issues here, several of which have been adressed rather elegantly by Havoc and Admiral. But there's another thing they are missing, and it has to do with the difference between Korea and Iraq. Now, Iraq, it seems, "might" have nuclear weapons. Has it ever occured to you people that that is incredibly more dangerous than someone actually saying that have one? Ok, North Korea. They came out and said they have nuclear weapons and/or are trying to build them. Why? Because they know that we won't attack them as long as they have a shield of nukes to strike at us/our allies with. Therefore, in declaring that they have weapons they are stating that they have no intention of using them as a first strike weapon, which is good. Now, Iraq. Iraq "might" have weapons of mass destruction, but they are trying to hide them. Whatever it is they are trying to hide something, no one can deny that. So, what does that mean? That means Iraq doesn't want us knowing whether they have weapons or not, and that in turn means he wishes to use them. There is only one reason to have nukes/WMDs and not tell anyone, and that is to suprise them, most likely with an attack. I mean, if he wanted a diplomatic bargaining chip, he'd tell us he had the weapons in order that we concede something to make him disarm. If he wanted defense he'd tell us he had them so we wouldn't attack. But he doesn't want either of those, he wants to attack us or one of our allies, and he doesn't want us to know about it. Quite frankly, if Iraq just came out and said they had WMDs and told us where they were then this would be the biggest non-issue. I'm much more concerned about the one nuke i don't know about than the thousands Russia and China have, or the several Korea has. War is a neccessary evil, and i wish we never had to have it. But the fact is we do. A despotic madman like Saddam that might have nuclear weapons must be taken out of power for the world's sake. You all say you want peace and such, but you aren't willing to stand up and fight for the peace you desire. Nothing is gained without sacrifice, least of all peace. Bush is not a moron, and anyone who says he is doens't have a firm enough grip on reality, much less foreign policy issues. Quite frankly i think way to many of you listen to what TV reporters have to say about the issue instead of making your own decisions based on fact and simple logic. IMO of course. BTW, we are going to send bombers and such to pound the heck out of them. But the ground cannot be taken from the air, there have to troops to pick up the pieces and take underground buildings, highly civilian areas, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 I agree with Havoc on this issue. Couldn't have said it any better. We don't know if he has them, nor do we know that he doesn't have them. But I think we DO know that he HAD them. And to ignore the fact that he has/had/will have them and then one day possibly get attacked would lead to a GREAT amount of regret... The mere possibility itself seems to okay what Bush is doing. And like Praetorian said, France, Russia and Germany are allies and are not ruled by so called "mad men." We've heard of some of the things Sadaam has said and it's reason enough to believe that he's 1) power hungry at any cost - i quote "I may be remembered now as a murderer but many years from now i will be remembered as a great man" or something around those lines. 2) "mad" - the fact that he kills so many of his own people and is willing to use "any means" to win this possible war, makes me say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Alright now children, here´s a merry little song: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Man, that wasn't even fun propaganda. I was hoping for an mp3 or at least a Flash file or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Originally posted by Boba Rhett Man, that wasn't even fun propaganda. I was hoping for an mp3 or at least a Flash file or something. There is an MP3 there! Nearly at the top, rigth-click it and choose play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Oh, the buttons are cut off in my browser for some reason. Looking now I can see their bottoms. The guy should probably make it autoplay. Much more fun now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 This really says it all... http://cgi.theforce.net/theforce/image.cgi?Image=/humor/pics/madmag.jpg I personally do not agree with Bush's stance and have gotten into multiple arguements over it...but what can you expect from the most Pro-Democrat area of Arkansas? (stupid country bumpcans voting for Huckleberry) I just think Bush has a problem co-operating with UN. I still havn't seen or heard about any evidence that convicts Osama. Sadaam...unfortunatly...no evidence. He lets inspectors come in (although sometimes with delays, etc because Sadaam is a bastard...I won't argue over that point) and so far we havn't found a shread of real evidence. (yes he gassed his own people a few years back, but we have no evidence that he still has weapons of mass distruction) It annoys the crap out of me that we are going to attack with no evidence shown to the American public...only mentions that he has the capability to make Weapons of Mass Distruction. Until I see or hear that there is real cold hard evidence then I don't think it would be right to enter into a War/Conflict. It just doesn't satisfy me (the american public). It's like going on a 100 mile bike trip with no breakfast or lunch in you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Mmmkay I'd just like to have all you liberals take a look at yourself and condemning this man which your nation voted into office. ( you foreigners don't count obviously) If you had listened to the state of the union you would know why we are going to go in Iraq if he doesn't follow UN sanctions. It's cause he has violated direct UN sanctions for 10 years. If he shows evidence that he has destroyed the chemical and biological weapons that the UN has proven he has and asked him to destroy, then I have no beef agaisnt him. If I see that, then I'll be very happy to sit at home and not go "playing cowboy." The problem with the liberals at this board is that they are politically uneducated*. End of story. If we had one decent liberal at this board I would feel alot better. * The above statement constitutes 0 flaming because it is 100% true, sorry guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jatt13 Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 well, i agree with havoc and admiral. nicely said. this was said sorta far back, but i still need to mention it: Originally posted by CrazyDog: 2) The USA is the only country in the history of humanity which have used nukes for warfare, so don't use the arguement that those countries are run by madmen well, someone had to make the mistake. the US han't used them again, have they? but it was inevitable that they would be used. if it wasn't the US, it wouldve been someone else. you've gotta learn from your mistakes. we developed them first and had no example to the destruction they caused. so we took a step we thought was neccesary to end a war and used them. now every other country knows what will happen, so they don't use them. and the argument still stands. saddam is a madman. now, like havoc put so well in his earlier post, bush knows a TON of stuff the public and media doesn't. how can you sit here and criticize a man for making the decisions he thinks are right with your limited knowledge? if you know everything, and every end that this will come to, and every little incident that will happen, and the number of lives that will be lost, and everything bush knows, then you can criticize him. buti'm not going to even try to judge his actions with what i know. if things turn bad in the end, well, sorry, but then you can say he made bad desicions. he's got the fate of a country at his hands, and he's doing the best he can. i don't even want to try and think about what the stress alone would be like, much less the resistance he's getting from people like you (talking to nti-bush people, of course). so cut him some slack. so far, he's done nothing to make you be angry at him, or to get him impeached. and like tie guy said, he's dealing with one thing at a time. he can't be trying to get saddam and north korea to cooperate at the same time. and i'm more worried about saddam, anyway. tie guy put it very well when he said that you should be more concerened about the country trying to hide something than the country that comes right out and says "hey, we've got nukes!". and frankly, i'm just ready for bush to go and forcefully do something about it, with or without support, if neccesary. if he goes in and attacks or whatever now, if it goes good the world will be grateful that he prevented a tragedy. if it turns out he's wrong, it won't be anyworse than if he'd waited and been attacked or saddam kept refusing everything. but i'm not going to judge him, because i don't know what he does. from my limited viewpoint, i want him to get it over with. but i'm not omnicient, so i'll wait til the end to start making a strong opinion. it's not like mine would matter anyway, seeing as how i can't vote or go to war. but plz, try and cut him some slack. i'd like to see you do a better job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 he's just trying to prevent another holocost from happening. For crying out loud, there is no similarity between Hitler and Saddam!! The good comparison would be Germany directly after WW1. The Versailles treaty limiting Germany is about the same as the No-fly zone mess in Iraq, isn't it? Limiting Iraq and taking some of their rights away.. Holocaust? Come on, he's not even a nazi. WW3? I don't see how the whole world would be thrown into a war if Iraq is invaded or invades someone.. Yes, I think he has nukes. Yes, he's a madman. But hey, does that mean we should eliminate him? "Should we sit idly while he swallows up the Middle East..". Bull argument. He's not even invading anyone right now! He HAS invaded people before, but he got struck back after that and now he's back in Iraq. If HE makes the first move, we'll counter. No countries in the ME will get "swallowed up" just because USA doesn't attack first . Now, why do only 3 people here support war and not 2/3? Becuase no one here takes the time to sit down and think about the issues here, several of which have been adressed rather elegantly by Havoc and Admiral. But there's another thing they are missing, and it has to do with the difference between Korea and Iraq. A small majority of people in the USA are AGAINST the war. Where did you get that 2/3 stuff from? In Europe, an even bigger majority is against the war. And we do sit down and talk about it, rest assured. There's a 5+ pages thread on it a while back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Like someone else said before, even if Iraq has nukes they wouldn't be stupid enough to use them. If u say the Presiden't knows all these things but isn't telling, then it's like kid's games were they say "I bet u can't do this!" "Can too " "Show me!" "No, I'm tired" "U can't do it!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted February 4, 2003 Author Share Posted February 4, 2003 eh, maybe it is just the way Bush is presenting it to us. I don't know but still. I agree about the political suicide, that Bush isn't doing this to get popularity or anything like that - and if we had voted Gore into office....somehow I don't see things being any better. I am just torn. I want Saddam out as much as the next guy but I don't know if we should go at it alone or if the timing is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 I definitely don't think we should go into it alone. If other countries are getting cold feet, it's because they are using they're heads. Fighting against an army that will throw itself on top of plastic explosive is very dangerous. Plus you have to take into consideration the aspects of war. In the Navy I knew several people on my ship that suffered from "Gulf War" syndrome. Alot of careers and lives were destroyed from that. With all war, you have to deal with issues like this. If we win or not, there will still be loss. Besides, you remove Saddam, that's fine and dandy, but in a country as violent and war torn as that, you will just have another Saddam type guy down the road even worse than he is. War is inevitable, but I don't think it should be rushed, and Bush needs to chill out until we exhaust every last possible resolution there is first. And to turn down any assistance is insane. If your gonna go after Saddam, you need to take out Bin Ladden, and all them other psycho nut jobs as well. That would definitely lead us into World War III, which is becomeing a very possible reality at this point. And with that, where do you draw the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 don't you all just love this time period? in 50 years we'll look back and be like: 'Man, i wish i could be there again..' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Originally posted by Artoo If we had one decent liberal at this board I would feel alot better. * The above statement constitutes 0 flaming because it is 100% true, sorry guys. *Coughs loudly* I take offense As a clear minority here, I expect to be treated with SOME measure of respect from all you right wingers. Clinton bash all you want, I don't care, but if you start getting personal *Points above*, that hurts, especially since I, personally, never get personal with you people. Lets just keep this as a debate aight? And I don't expect an apology from you Artoo, as a dirty liberal I don't deserve one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 I motion this thread be "yoinked™" to the Galactic Senate Forums. Also a reminder that flaming of any kind is prohibited regardless of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted February 4, 2003 Author Share Posted February 4, 2003 The reason I started this here is because you guys don't go over there! And also ...there are a ton of these Iraqi War threads over there...I wanted to see what you guys would think...you guys don't post a ton of quotes and quotes and turn it into a religous debate about such and such maybe i'm just being tired, cranky and pregnant. If you do yoink the thread to there...please edit out this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Who quickly do you forget when one of our planes had to do an emergancy landing in China. And the Chinese wouldn't release the crew or the plan? People then clamored for a military response. What did Bush do? He used diplomacy. Oh, do you mean the spyplane that was in direct violation of Chinese air space? Also: If there was any justice in this world then the US would have been hauled before the Nürnberg processes for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So don't go ahead claiming moral high ground. And Hussein: He HATES Al Qaeda. And the feeling is mutual. AQ, ye see, veiw him as a heretic for converting to Islam only to use it politically (they want religion to dictate politics, not be used to support them, which is even more insane). But Blix and his team is actually getting tired of the Iraqi... I would too. Anyway, I don't think that we should go to war unless there is proof that Hussein hides bio- or chemweapons. And besides, any reasonably well-equipped school lab and a few clicks on the WWW can construct a bio-weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 the real thing we should fear is that Hussein WANTS us to attack him so he has a reason to launch a nuke or chemical weapons, etc. He probably has a deadman switch. =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted February 4, 2003 Author Share Posted February 4, 2003 i'm afraid of that too. He isn't pushing the big button now...I think they should exhaust every effort they can before putting our country and our soldiers in jeopardy. There is a lot on the line and this is a war I woulnd't want to loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Originally posted by STTCT The reason I started this here is because you guys don't go over there! And also ...there are a ton of these Iraqi War threads over there...I wanted to see what you guys would think...you guys don't post a ton of quotes and quotes and turn it into a religous debate about such and such maybe i'm just being tired, cranky and pregnant. If you do yoink the thread to there...please edit out this post. I'm cool with it being here, but like most threads that involve any thing at all about politics, it has become a political debate, and debates belong in the Senate. The reason for the Senate was to seperate debates frome hopeless flaming. Poeple who visit the Senate, know what the difference is as opposed to people in the other forums. They can jump into a debate and post their opinions accordingly, that way all the people who dont handle debates, can simply stay out of those forums. We have a mod there with a watchful eye, who can tell the difference. No hard feelings ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swphreak Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 WW3? I don't see how the whole world would be thrown into a war if Iraq is invaded or invades someone.. I said if we started launching nukes and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Originally posted by Darth Groovy We have a mod there with a watchful eye, who can tell the difference. No hard feelings ok? Watchful, yes, but I run it in a fairly hardline laissez-faire kind of way. Meaning, the people who start spewing insults are usually the first to leave on their own accord. If they have to resort to such means in order to get their point across, it means their point is too weak to be backed up by any semblance of logic. Their arguments will be ripped apart, and if they still insist on insulting, they'll be gently told to leave. Ignoring that, I'll edit all their posts to make them look like the idiots they rightly are. None of this has actually happened yet, I might add. Which is no doubt a good sign. BTW (once again), you're all more than welcome in the Senate. I'm thinking you'll provide a fresh change from the more or less stagnant debates going on there. The forum is your option to air your views on abortion, Bush, cloning, evolution and religion without fearing getting your thread locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Groovy, our Senate forum is a completely different thing from what the jkii one is used for. Unless you were meaning move this to the jkii senate forum. That won't be happening. We keep our debates in off-topic still. Maybe we'll end up changing what our senate forum is used for in the future though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praetorian Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Well, I would love to continue debating this, but I don't have near the time to keep up with this thread, between a full time job and school. I can't convince you, and you can't convince me, so I'm going to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.